PAC quizzes NAB chief over recoveries

National Accountability Bureau (NAB) Chairman Justice (retd) Javed Iqbal on Tuesday assured the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) that he would go home if he failed to satisfy the committee about the appropriation of accounts and the progress report on the recoveries made by the bureau since its inception in an in-camera briefing slated to be held on January 6, 2022.

The NAB chairman’s statement came after the accountability arm of parliament quizzed him over unauthorised excess expenditure while suggesting to get it regularised from the National Assembly in the upcoming mini-budget session as otherwise, the amount was recoverable on NAB.

During his much-talked-about appearance before the highest accountability forum of parliament, the NAB chairman categorically said that there shouldn’t be any doubt that parliament was the supreme institution, adding that he was "not a king who can’t appear before the PAC”.

At the outset, Tanveer, while addressing the NAB chairman, said that he took a long time to appear before the PAC, saying the forum only wanted to discuss issues that mattered and not the ones that are being discussed in the media or other forums.

“You tell the media about your performance but not the PAC,” Tanveer said, reminding the NAB chief that he was answerable as well as accountable to the biggest parliamentary platform.

"Appearing before the PAC would enhance your respect," he said before allowing the NAB chief to speak.

The NAB chairman told the PAC that there shouldn’t be any doubt that parliament is the supreme institution, adding that he, being the ex-CJ, has written about the supremacy of parliament in different judgments as well.

“I couldn’t come earlier before the PAC due to some valid reasons but my absence doesn’t mean that I am a Mughal king and can’t appear before the committee,” the NAB chairman said, saying NAB doesn’t believe that it isn’t answerable to parliament.

He quipped that the first time is always difficult but once one crosses the line then it becomes easier.

Surprisingly, Tuesday was an equally tough day for the auditors as the PAC chairman noted that they recommended NAB’s settlement of grant knowing that Finance Division didn’t support the request of supplementary grant and it can’t now be settled without getting approval from the assembly.

Read Govt finalising draft for NAB chairman’s appointment

“Audit has never recommended settling paras for any division and ministry except NAB,” PAC Chairman Rana Tanveer wondered, asking excess money taken through supplementary grant could now only be settled if the same was approved in the mini-budget.

Calling the unauthorized supplementary grants a serious issue, the PAC chairman grilled the auditors asking how did audit accept NAB’s request.

“This is audit’s irregularity,” PML-N’s Rohale Asghar incorporated.

PPP’s Sherry Rehman and Hina Rabbani Khar were also of the view that it was less of NAB’s matter and more of the audit as the audit recommended regularizing something without giving any reasons, especially, when the finance ministry turned down NAB’s request.

If not regularized by the national assembly then the amount is recoverable, Tanveer asked the representative of the finance ministry, who replied in affirmative.

During the meeting, PTI’s Noor Alam Khan asked the NAB chairman why sometimes it feels like there was only one culprit in the country and that is a politician. The PTI lawmaker further asked the NAB chairman how many cases were registered against politicians, judges, military officials and bureaucrats in the country and if NAB officials declare their assets before joining NAB. Khan added that there should be across the board accountability not just of the politicians, saying NAB should also go against the bureaucrats and military officials.

In response, NAB Chairman said that the questions asked were not on the agenda but I could answer all these questions if he was called some other time. Tanveer intervened by saying that the NAB chairman could submit replies in writing but then he suggested that another session could be called for answering all these questions.

Noor while revealing that he withdraws Rs168,000 asked the NAB chairman if any other institution increase salaries the way NAB increased salaries, asking how much salaries from grade 16 to 21 officers of NAB were drawing.

The NAB chief, however, replied that dozens of institutions had increased salaries, adding that “It seems you can’t reach to them”. He added that NAB officials’ salaries were increased after 18 years.

Read more FIA to ‘investigate NAB’ in Broadsheet scandal

Commenting that “I don’t want to see such things in the headlines tomorrow”, the NAB chairman told the PAC members that they have the right to condemn NAB. Tanveer, however, said that neither PAC members were condemning nor accusing him of anything.

On recoveries, Tanveer told the NAB chairman that PAC wanted details of looted money and default money because the default was not corruption. He said the bureau should also tell PAC about how much money was recovered from housing societies and given back to people. He lauded NAB’s work in this area.

Iqbal replied that he would give everything in writing as billions of rupees were given back to people. In addition, Iqbal drew lawmakers’ attention towards making laws as fines imposed by courts takes roughly 15 years to finally settle down, revealing that NAB writes down the amount in its books right when they are imposed at the first round of litigation.

While explaining about the indirect recovery and plea bargains, Iqbal said that NAB has given money back to provincial governments as well, adding he could explain things in detail if the PAC chairman gave him a chance to speak in his chamber. “I will tell you how difficult it is to complete tasks at hand,” Iqbal said, adding recovery was not always in the shape of currency notes.

Tanveer proposed that the NAB chairman should be given a chance to explain things in an in-camera briefing. To this, no one objected. NAB chairman only requested PAC to give questions in writing, saying he would “explain things in such details that they won’t need to ask any more questions”.

The in-camera meeting would be held on January 6.