PHOTO: FILE
The new law offers more protection to public office-holders or government officials while at the same time excludes several financial sectors from the purview of the anti-corruption watchdog.
Under the ordinance, the government mandates the NAB chairman to submit a report on complaints against the bureau to the federal government. Earlier, the NAB chief used to submit such a report to the president.
Law ministry sends NAB Amendment Ordinance 2019 proposal to PM
It says that upon the promulgation of the ordinance, inquiries and investigations shall stand transferred to the respective authorities or departments which administer the relevant laws of taxation, levies or imposts in question.
Trials shall stand transferred from the relevant accountability courts to the criminal courts which deal with offences under the respective laws pertaining to taxation, levies, or imposts in question.
With regard to procedural lapses in any government project or scheme, it says no action under the ordinance shall be taken against any holder of public office unless it is shown that the holder of public office has materially benefitted by gaining any asset or monetary benefit which is disproportionate to his known sources of income, or where such material benefit cannot be reasonably accounted for, and there is evidence to corroborate the acquiring of such material benefit.
Importantly, it reads, no action under the ordinance shall be taken against any holder of public office in any matter pertaining to the rendition of any advice, opinion or report, unless it is shown that the holder of public office has materially benefitted by gaining any asset or monetary benefit which is disproportionate to his known sources of income, or where such material benefit cannot be reasonably accounted for.
Surprisingly, the ordinance states that the valuation of immovable properties, for the purposes of assessing as to whether a holder of public office has assets disproportionate to his known sources of income, shall be reckoned either according to the applicable rate prescribed by the district collector or the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR), whichever is higher. “No evidence contrary to the latter shall be admissible,” it adds.
NAB probes Rs280m scam in GCU foreign faculty programme
It also states that an act done in good faith and in discharge of duties and performance of official function shall not, unless there is corroborative evidence of accumulation of any monetary benefit or asset which is disproportionate to the know sources of income or which can’t be reasonably accounted for.
The ordinance makes it mandatory for NAB to obtain approval of a scrutiny committee, comprising NAB chairman, cabinet secretary, SECP chairman, FBR chief, and a law ministry representative, before acting against any government official.
It further states that NAB would not seize property of government officials without the orders of the court. If the national graft-buster cannot complete an investigation against a suspect within three months, the accused would be entitled to bail, it added.
The proposed amendment text suggested that NAB should now only be able to proceed in corruption cases worth Rs500 million or more. Earlier, the minimum limit was Rs50 million.
The NAB jurisdiction over matters relating to tax, stock exchange and IPOs has been curtailed. The FBR, SECP and building control authorities would be the sole authorities mandated to act on all such matters.
Undeterred by politician’s threat: NAB
Under the ordinance, NAB officials have been barred from giving statements to the media on an inquiry or investigation before the filing of formal reference.
NRO-Plus in the offing?
The amendments in the NAB law are likely to set off new political controversies, since they especially focus on curtailing NAB’s powers with regards to public office holders facing allegations of misuse of authority or procedural laps in government’s scheme and projects.
“NAB is virtually over after the [amendment to the] ordinance,” said Ashfaq Yousuf Tola, a member of the Tax Reforms Implementation Commission. He said the NAB ordinance and an ordinary law are poles apart. In the ordinary law, according to Tola, investigators have to prove the case while in the NAB law, it is vice versa.
“The way NAB’s powers have been curtailed, people say it’s another NRO, but in my opinion, it’s ‘NRO-Plus’,” said Tola while speaking in Express News show, The Review.
NRO, or National Reconciliation Ordinance, was a controversial law introduced by former military ruler Pervez Musharraf in Oct 2007 to drop hundreds of cases against politicians.
Who will benefit the most?
Political analysts believe the PTI government would benefit the most from the amended NAB law as several ministers are facing inquiries, especially in the cases involving Peshawar’s Bus Rapid Transport and Malam Jabba sports resort. It might also give relief to Prime Minister Imran Khan in a case involving alleged misuse of a government helicopter.
Some observers say the amendment to the NAB law might also benefit senior bureaucrats of the PML-N era, especially Fawad Hassan Fawad and Ahad Cheema who are facing cases of financial corruption and misuse of authority.
“It was long overdue,” said Irfan Qadir, a former attorney general for Pakistan. “Cases had been filed against bureaucrats over their decisions or inadvertent errors,” he said.
“It has long been argued that cases should only be made against bureaucrats if they have committed corruption while making decisions,” he added. “I think the amendments [to NAB law] are necessary and should have introduced long time ago.”
Ministers’ opinion
Earlier on Friday, the Ministry of Law and Justice had sent the NAB (Amendment) Ordinance 2019 proposal to the Prime Minister’s Office. The ordinance was later circulated to ministers for their opinion and subsequent return to the Cabinet Division.
“If a minister does not communicate his/her opinion by that time, it shall be assumed that he/she accepts the recommendations contained in the summary,” the official document stated.
The summary for the cabinet noted that NAB was established under the National Accountability Ordinance, 1999, with an aim to curb corruption in Pakistan. Currently, NAB is dealing with a large number of inquiries and investigation in addition to handling mega corruption cases, it stated. Moreover, under the existing regime a number of inquiries have been initiated against the holders of public office and government servants on account of procedural lapses where no actual corruption is involved. “This has enhanced NAB’s burden and has also affected working of the federal government,” it read.
The summery stated NAB has also assumed a parallel jurisdiction and is inquiring into matters pertaining to taxation, imposition of levies, etc, and therefore interfering within the domain of taxation regulatory bodies. “It is, therefore, felt necessary to define through the subject amendments the operational domain of NAB,” it read.
As neither the Senate nor the National Assembly is in session, the cabinet was requested to approve the NAB (Amendment) Ordinance, 2019, which was already approved by the minister for law & justice.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ