The country’s top court has lambasted the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) for selective accountability and discrimination and said this behavior of the country’s top graft buster is counterproductive and harming the nation’s anti-graft initiative.
A three-judge bench, headed by Justice Mushir Alam, made this observation on Wednesday while hearing the bail application of Islamabad’s Rawat Union Council former secretary Javed Akhtar Chaudhry, who is accused of misappropriating Rs60m and illegal hiring.
During the hearing, the accused's counsel Shah Khawar told the bench that Chaudhry has been in jail for the last 14 months but still NAB has not yet submitted his charge-sheet in the accountability court.
NAB counsel said the accused was using various tactics to delay his indictment.
Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, a member of the bench, noted that the court has observed that accused often delay the process of framing of charges. He also noted that there was no need for the counsel of an accused to be present in the court during indictment.
The accused's lawyer said there were four other accused in the case but NAB had singled out his client and the other accused were still free. “The Supreme Court should take suo motu action against this discriminatory behavior of NAB,” he demanded.
Justice Ahmed asked the NAB lawyer why NAB had not arrested the other accused.
The NAB special prosecutor said the other accused are assistant commissioners and include women. He said these officers – who were appointed after passing the Central Superior Services (CSS) exam – were on their first postings when the scandal emerged.
Expressing anger over NAB's failure to arrest all the accused, Justice Ahmed said: "Aren't those CSS officers accused or those who do CSS are above the law? The anti-corruption campaign is failing because of this attitude of NAB. Can this attitude eradicate corruption from the country?”
Justice Alam said there are various decisions of the Supreme Court regarding misconduct of NAB and more decisions will be pronounced in future in this regard.
NAB counsel told the court that the accused had filed a plea bargain application on which NAB chairman had to take a decision. “If the court orders, we will decide the application within a month,” he said.
Justice Yahya Khan Afridi, the third member of the bench, asked why NAB needs a court order to do its job. Justice Ahmed said NAB should not underestimate the powers of the Supreme Court. “At least I am not happy with the discriminatory attitude of NAB,” he said.
The lawyer for the accused said the accused had come under pressure when applied for a plea bargain. The court should grant bail to the accused. The issue of plea bargain should not be confused with this application, he said.
However, the court directed NAB to take a decision on the plea bargain application within a month and adjourned hearing.
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