Ordaining a law
The state’s top prosecution arm is under the scanner. The government has once again promulgated an ordinance to address the lacunas that had crept in an earlier decree, and it pertains to the terms, conditions and tenure of the anti-graft watchdog chief. Thus, in less than a month’s time, three edicts on the same count inevitably hint at confusion at the helm of affairs. It shouldn’t have been handled through extra-constitutional measures as the parliament was in session. The latest accountability ordinance has amended the procedure to remove the National Accountability Bureau chief, and delegated the powers to the president. Earlier, the prerogative was with the Supreme Judicial Council. This move is interpreted by critics as an attempt to usurp the powers of the judiciary, undermine the parliament and bring it under the direct purview of the prime minister.
The trajectory of developments suggests that the government itself is not sure how to handle this delicate issue. Last month, the government opted for extending the tenure of the sitting NAB chief through an ordinance, and asked him to continue till his successor is named. This was intended to avoid a constitutional provision of consulting with the leader of the opposition over the NAB chief’s nomination. The second ordinance by empowering the president to remove the NAB chief left behind another unsureness on whether he will act on the advice of the prime minister or at his own discretion. Thus came the third piece of law to put in clarity. Ironically, it is a person-specific ordinance, which thoroughly empowers the executive.
The ordinance has also incorporated measures stating that all proceedings, inquiries, investigations, references or trials under the Anti-Money Laundering Act 2010 will be dealt with in accordance with the new ordinance. It is a master-stroke to uphold the status quo in the bizarre prosecution, which is heading nowhere. The accountability process in Pakistan has always been up for debate, as institutions and officials handling it were seen to be compromised. Legislating through presidential decrees will make it more controversial. The minimum that needs to be done is to ensure functionality of constitutional bodies, and not to interfere at whims and wishes.
Published in The Express Tribune, November 3rd, 2021.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.