NLC financial scandal: Defence ministry stonewalls PAC on inquiry report

Lahore Corps Command accused of obstructing auditors’ investigation into land fraud.


Shahbaz Rana June 12, 2011

ISLAMABAD:


Despite raising tough questions about financial impropriety by military officials and institutions, the powerful parliamentary public accounts committee (PAC) seems to be unable to take action against the men accused of causing a Rs1.8 billion loss to the state-owned, military-operated National Logistics Cell (NLC).


Testifying before the committee on Saturday, Defence Secretary Syed Athar Ali, a retired lieutenant general, avoided answering questions about the status of an inquiry report commissioned by Army Chief Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani last November. Gen Kayani had ordered that the inquiry be completed within a month.

Ali stayed silent when Yasmeen Rehman, a member of the National Assembly from the PPP, asked him about the status of the report. He later said that “the military is conducting the inquiry and has called the retired generals who were responsible for the NLC during the scam period of 2004 to 2008.”

Two inquiry committees constituted by the PAC have already determined that five people – three retired generals and two civil servants – were responsible for illegally borrowing Rs4.3 billion from commercial banks and investing the money on the Karachi Stock Exchange, causing a loss of Rs1.8 billion to NLC, which had to be paid for by the national exchequer.

Land-grabbing and illegal commercial activity

Members of the PAC spoke out against the government’s decision to allow the NLC, legally the military’s transportation arm, to conduct commercial operations. At the committee hearing, the NLC was described as a “land-grabber”, which had illegally occupied over 200 acres of government land for commercial purposes.

The defence secretary said that the NLC board, headed by Finance Minister Abdul Hafeez Shaikh, had allowed the NLC to continue its commercial activities, though its business interests would be separated from its strategic function of managing military logistics. The PAC asked the government to restrict the NLC to only its strategic role.

Obstruction of investigation

The committee also censured the military for attempting to create hurdles in its investigation into the alleged illegal occupation of 200 acres of land by the military. Government auditors complained that the command of the Army’s IV Corps, based in Lahore, had refused to allow them to inspect government land being used for commercial purposes.

“Creating hurdles in the audit amounts to hindering the work of the public accounts committee, which is a serious offence,” said Rehman, the acting chairperson of the committee. If the Lahore Corps Command refused to cooperate in the future, warned the committee, the corps commander would be summoned before Parliament.

The defence secretary was then ordered to transfer all officers responsible for obstructing the government’s investigation.

The Auditor General of Pakistan has raised objections over the use of 805,119 square yards land for commercial purposes. The government’s financial watchdog has worked out that the Army owes Rs120.8 billion in rent over the past several years on those properties, which it is legally required to deposit in the federal consolidated fund. The Army has contested both the amount as well as the charges against it.



Published in The Express Tribune, June 12th, 2011.

COMMENTS (2)

Ishrat Salim | 12 years ago | Reply As long as our civilian govt remain weak...on what moral ground can our civilian govt summon the military personal...?? but HATS-OFF to PAC to muster the courage to take this scared cow by its horn...they need our support....
Khalid Rahim | 12 years ago | Reply What lesson could our Ministry of Defense and top Military Brass take from similar events in India? How their Generals reacted to the Civil Court orders and how Justice was imparted by the law of the country.
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ