Amendment to NAB ordinance aimed at improving the performance of NAB, says Shahzad Akbar. SCREENGRAB
Amid a rising crescendo of criticism over the NAB law tweak, the government’s point-man on accountability on Sunday to gave a scathing rejoinder to the opposition while seeking to allay public fears that the accountability process might stop.
He claimed that the recently promulgated National Accountability (Amendment) Ordinance, 2019 would ensure nobody is treated unfairly and also let the anti-graft watchdog investigate mega corruption scandal more effectively.
“This ordinance will eventually go to parliament,” Special Assistant to the Prime Minister on Accountability Shahzad Akbar said at a news conference. “An ordinance has a life, a minimum of four months and a maximum of eight months,” he added.
“If the opposition parties find any flaws in the ordinance, they can present their suggestions in parliament.”
The PM’s aide said it was necessary to restore people’s confidence in the state institutions. “It was important to make principled decisions to introduce positive changes in these institutions,” he said, adding that any rule because of which someone was made to wrongly suffer needed to be removed.
Akbar noted that the National Accountability Ordinance, 1999 was a stringent law and it was need of the hour back at the time when it had been introduced given the rampant corruption in society. “But further clarification is required as time moves on. The law must be made clear so that nobody is subjected to unfair treatment,” he added.
Explaining the reasons for amending the NAB law, Akbar said it was necessary to introduce the clause concerning “misuse of authority”.
He said a person could not be punished for making a wrong decision, which was not taken for any personal interest and to benefit some other individual.
“NAB cannot deal with the cases of procedural errors of bureaucrats until there is any link to corruption,” he added. “No action can be taken against any government official on the basis of giving an advice.”
NAB’s primary task, the PM’s aide said, was to eliminate the menace of corruption instead of improving institutions. “The procedural lapses [of bureaucrats] do not fall in NAB’s domain.”
Akbar said a clause had been introduced, whereby if a holder of public office or a minister was charged with misuse if authority, it would be examined whether or not they derived any monetary benefit from their decision.
The PM’s aide explained that another amendment had been introduced to draw a distinction between issues related to taxation and corruption.
“There were many cases of institutions overriding their jurisdictions,” he added. “For this reason we have decided that matter of taxation will solely be dealt by the Federal Board of Revenue.”
Elaborating further, Akbar said Section 4(2) of the amendment draft stated that the law would not apply to the matters concerning federal and provincial taxation and levies.
Besides, he added, Section 4(2) B outlined that the law would not be applicable to any person who was not a holder of public office, had no relation with a public office holder and did not have any means of "using authority".
He noted that cases in which government officers had used their authority for kickbacks already fell within the scope of NAB.
The PM’s aide clarified that in cases of assets beyond known sources of income, a government officer could be probed by NAB. A common man would be investigated by the FBR.
However, he added that there were three exceptions in the case of a common man. If a businessman deceives the general public, i.e. a modarba scam, the case will fall within NAB's jurisdiction.
A case will also fall within the NAB’s domain if there is criminal breach of trust by an ordinary person i.e. if they do not return money kept with them for safekeeping.
The third exception in case of a common man is breach of trust in the capacity of a professional i.e. a trader, lawyer, banker or agent. They will be investigated by NAB for defrauding the public at large.
Speaking about a clause about "defence of good faith" in Section 36 of the new law, Akbar said if a person who faced a NAB case was later cleared of the charges, they would not be able to file a case against the officers of the anti-graft watchdog for being subjected to injustice.
"If they [NAB officers] had evidence and went ahead with the case, they had no ill will,” he added.
Taking on Twitter, Special Assistant to the Prime Minister on Information and Broadcasting Dr Firdous Ashiq Awan fired a broadside at the opposition for rejecting the amendments to the accountability law.
She said it is disappointing to see PML-N spokespersons playing politics over changes to the NAB law, which they criticised on a daily basis.
“Prime Minister Imran Khan is not afraid of accountability. Even top court has declared him honest and trustworthy. Even his biggest political rivals have been unable to provide any evidence of corruption against him,” she added, referring to the allegations that the premier had amended the NAB law to benefit himself and his aides. “The prime minister’s fight against corruption is still under way with full force.” She said that NAB was supposed to investigate cases of mega corruption and the amendments to the accountability law would allow it to carry out its actual role more effectively.
The PM’s aide explained that government officer, who had benefitted from procedural errors or departmental flaws or amassed wealth by misusing authority would face inquiries.
“The ordinance will ensure that honest government officers will be able to make decisions for the welfare of the people and perform their duties without any fear,” she said.
“This will improve governance, strengthen the economy and create a favourable environment for business.”
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