NAB rebuts news about closure of cases in Sindh

ISLAMABAD: The National Accountability Bureau (NAB) rebutted news about closure of cases in Sindh and said that the news is absolutely baseless and based on half-truths that did not help in portraying true picture about excellent performance of NAB in Sindh.

NAB, in its statement on Saturday, said that it was attributed in media that all the cases against politicians, particularly, those belonging to a certain political party have been closed by the Bureau in Sindh which is not correct. NAB says:

1. MNA Faryal Talpur: It was attributed in media that no allegation could have been proved by NAB against Faryal Talpur; therefore, the cases against her have been closed by it. The fact is that NAB has never instituted any case against Faryal Talpur; whereas, an inquiry was initiated in 17.1.2016 against her husband on the basis of a complaint on the allegations of accumulation of assets beyond known sources of income, proceedings of which were carried out under National Accountability Ordinance, 1999, in which records regarding his wealth were collected and along with recording of statements of individuals acquainted with the facts, defence of Mir Munawar Ali Talpur was also recorded.

The findings of the inquiry could not reveal the charges which went through the scrutiny of the highest forum ie the Executive Board, and the case was closed on 21.12.2016 on the basis of the fact that no incriminating evidence could come on record. Mir Munawar Ali Talpur was found to be in possession of assets made through his known sources of income.

2. Sohail Muzaffar aka Tappi: It was attributed in media that case of accumulation of assets beyond known sources of income against Sohail Muzaffar aka Tappi was closed by NAB. The fact is that no case against this individual was ever initiated. However, on the basis of oral accounts revealed in a case related to allotment of lands in Karachi, on his alleged role of influencing the government functionaries, he was included in the inquiry proceedings and notice was issued to him.

3. Sohail Anwer Siyal: It was attributed in the media that cases against him were closed by NAB, which is incorrect information. The fact is that the complaint against him on the allegations of accumulation of assets beyond known sources of income is under process.

4. Jam Khan Shoro: It was attributed in media that cases against him were closed by NAB and that he was not included in the inquiry proceedings subsequent to bureau’s raids on local govt department. It may be clarified that no case has ever been initiated against him. A complaint was received against him regarding usurpation of land in Hyderabad for which preliminary probe is underway to ascertain whether a formal inquiry on his role in it can be initiated. With regard to the cases against the local govt department, any official or office holder shall be proceeded as and when solid evidence comes on record.

5. Zia Ahmed Lanjar: It was attributed in media that cases against him have been closed by NAB. However, the fact is that the inquiry against him on the allegations of accumulation of assets beyond known sources of income and money laundering was initiated by NAB Sukkur, which was completed on the basis of preliminary incriminating evidence and thorough legal scrutiny and is under consideration for conversion in investigation for filing of reference.

6. Mukesh Kumar Chawla: It was attributed in media that cases against him were also closed by NAB, which is incorrect information. However, as a matter of fact and record, no case has ever been instituted against him, nor has any substantive complaint against him ever received.

7. Pir Mazharul Haq: It was attributed in media that case of illegal appointments was closed against him, that included 13,000 appointments involving loss to the national exchequer of Rs05 billion. However, the fact is that case of illegal appointments in the Education Department made during tenure of his office in which he was included in inquiry proceedings involved appointments made only in Karachi. Such appointments allegedly were around 2,600; whereas, no evidence was on record whether those alleged appointees were ever working. Also, there was no evidence that such attempt of offence was made by the alleged minister. Whereas, illegal appointments, in the Education Department, made in other districts of Sindh, were thoroughly inquired and investigated, followed by filing 5 references in the competent court which are under trial.

The references include districts Mirpurkhas, Matiari, Tando Muhammad Khan, Jamshoro and Hyderabad (filed by NAB, Karachi). Those appointments, as per the evidence, were made by the respective district recruitments committees and appointing authorities who have been sent up for trial.

8. Ikram Dharejo and Mahar Brothers of Ghotki: It was attributed in media that cases against them were closed by NAB, Sindh, which is incorrect information. No cases were instituted against them ever in NAB.

9. Manzoor Qadir Kaka: There are 7 cases (5 inquiries, 2 investigations) under process against him on various allegations involving illegal allotments of amenity plots, illegal consolidations of lands, illegal appointments in SBCA and illegal approvals of building plans. However, the references will be filed after complete process of legal scrutiny. Therefore, presenting an incorrect picture regarding cases against the accused does not confirm to the facts as narrated above.

NAB hereby spells it out in categorical and clear terms that cases are initiated on the basis of complaints and in order to prevent the alleged from an unnecessary ordeal of proceedings followed by various complaints, a preliminary probe is undertaken to ascertain the veracity of contents of complaint and genuineness of complainants during complaint scrutiny and verification. The concept of combined investigation teams (CITs), thorough appreciation of prosecutable solid evidence under legal scrutiny at multiple tiers, due process of law, affording of full opportunity of defence to the alleged and decisions by way of consultative mechanism under high powered Boards are just few instances of transparency in process of initiation and completion of investigative cases, which sometimes consumes more time than usual in sending up cases for trial.

NAB files references on the basis of cases sufficiently made out on irrefutable solid evidence as per the standards and principles set out by NAB Law, CrPC and Evidence Act, and not on the basis of assumptions, presumptions or consideration of reputation of the alleged. This undoubtedly rules out the attribution to NAB of initiation and disposals of cases on political grounds or any other considerations as NAB Chairman Justice (R) Javed Iqbal not only believes but also implemented “Accountability for All” policy across the board due to which NAB sun is shining across the country.

It was ascribed in media that august state institutions and public has been dismissive of NAB’s performance which is absolutely baseless. As a matter of record, NAB’s performance has been appreciated by national and international institutions like Pildat, Transparency international and World Economic Forum. Today conviction rate of NAB’s cases is the highest (77%) amongst other investigating agencies and more than Rs290 billion recoveries made by NAB and all were deposited in national exchequer which is a record achievement. Also, due to proactive anti-corruption strategy of NAB, the number of complaints lodged by general public has been increasing manifold from the previous year which is reflective of growing confidence reposed by public in NAB.