The unanimous decision of the five-judge Supreme Court bench has sent packing prime minister of the country in the famous Panama Papers case.
The court ordered immediate disqualification of Nawaz Sharif for failing to declare his undrawn salary as chief executive officer of a firm set up by his son in his nomination papers for the 2013 elections.
The court also ordered the National Accountability Court to refer corruption references against Sharif, his heir-apparent Maryam Nawaz Sharif, his sons, his son-in-law as well finance minister Ishaq Dar, who is also related to Sharif family, for trial to an accountability court.
Sharif’s PML-N party, as expected, has expressed disappointment at the judgment while its opponents hailed the decision hoping that it would set off a genuine accountability process in the country.
The judgment has also triggered a heated debate among with the legal community of the country with some praising it as a best possible decision while others finding flaws and lacunas in it.
Irrespective of the political and legal implications of the judgment, one wonders whether this could help tame the monster of corruption which has spread its tentacles in almost all aspects of our national life.
Corruption has been highlighted as one of the main reasons for the poor state of country’s economy in the past many decades.
According to some estimates, Pakistan incurs losses worth 12 billion rupees daily because of corrupt practices. Tax evasion by our ruling elite constitutes the major part of these losses.
A cursory look at the Parliamentarians Tax Directory released by the finance ministry last week showed tax paid by most of our wealthy parliamentarians does not match their lifestyles.
For example, former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, who heads undoubtedly one of the richest families of the country, paid paltry 2.52 million rupees in taxes in the last financial year.
His brother and likely successor as prime minister, Shahbaz Sharif, paid taxes worth 9.53 million rupees.
Same is the case for many other well-to-do parliamentarians.
And if properly probed, it is not just politicians but majority of influential figures from our powerful ruling elite would be found to be living beyond their known means of income.
It is because of this reason that our foreign friends and donor countries of late have been telling us they could no longer tax their own people to feed us.
In 2010, when Pakistan was hit by one of the biggest calamity of its history in the shape of massive monsoon floods, the then U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told Pakistan it needed to do itself to recover itself from the devastation and should not solely rely on aid from her country or Europe.
“The international community can only do as much,” the former U.S. presidential candidate said in a blunt statement.
"It is absolutely unacceptable for those with means in Pakistan not to be doing their fair share to help their own people while the taxpayers in Europe, the United States and other contributing countries are all chipping in to do our part."
Same warnings came from our other friends but unfortunately no tangible measures have been taken to rectify the wrongdoings.
A million dollars question is how a credible process of accountability could be put in place in the country to stem this damning rot.
Pakistanis in general believe in quick-fix solutions and that’s why many of them argue that the recent Supreme Court verdict could set in motion a credible accountability process which would help catch big fish.
But if history of Pakistan is any guide then many accountability processes launched with much pomp and show ended up without a whimper.
The first government of Benazir Bhutto was dismissed by President Ghulam Ishaq Khan in 1990 on charges of corruption and a promise was made that a genuine accountability process would be launched but it later turned out to be a vilification and victimization campaign.
In 1993, Nawaz Sharif government was also dismissed on the same grounds which were though later restored by the Supreme Court but it had to send packing because of irreconcilable differences between the president and prime minister.
Former military ruler, General Pervez Musharraf, also promised to cleanse the national polity of corruption but he himself struck political deals with those he had accused of being corrupt. Moreover, his aides cobbled together a political base for him with politicians with careers tainted with corruption.
Pakistani politicians, to some extent, are justified to complain that they have always been singled out for accountability in the country which ultimately ended up in their victimization but they should also be blamed for failing to take concrete measures to establish a genuine accountability process in the country.
The dismal performance of the institutions meant to tackle corruption like NAB, Federal Investigation Agency has forced the people to look towards other institutions for justice and accountability.
The Transparency International while releasing its Corruption Index for 2016, maintained that when traditional politicians fail to tackle corruption, people grow cynical.
“Increasingly, people are turning to populist leaders who promise to break the cycle of corruption and privilege.”
Yet, it says, this is likely to exacerbate – rather than resolve – the tensions that fed the populist surge in the first place.
The ineffectiveness of the NAB in tackling the corruption was highlighted during the court of Panama Papers case hearing when the NAB chairman refused to re-open the Huddaibiya Paper Mills case involving Sharif family despite prodding from the court.
The court mentioned the stubbornness of the chairman NAB in its judgment on April 20 and that’s why in its latest judgment it ensured that he has no role to play in investigations when the corruption cases are referred to the accountability court for trial.
We should keep in mind that scourge of corruption could not be tackled through miracles or quick fixes but through a credible accountability process.
This process could not be made effective unless the institutions and departments meant to tackle corruption are made powerful and independent of any kind of influence from any other authority.
Though many genuine questions are being raised with regard to the accountability of Nawaz Sharif and family but the former prime minister should also share the blame that no serious and genuine step was taken under his government to set up a trustworthy accountability process.
For political reasons he may tout the judges remarks that no misuse of public funds or corrupt practice is established against him but he should also take responsibility for failing to address concerns over growing corruption.
Interestingly, Imran Khan, who takes the credit of taking his anti-corruption case against Sharifs to its logical end, too has failed to mount a genuine accountability process in Khyber Pukhtunkhuwa where his party is in power.
Irrespective of the legal questions being raised on the Supreme Court judgment on petitions relating to the Panama Papers revelations, it would be interesting to see whether it would make a new history for Pakistan or would it be repeat of the old one.
The writer is a senior journalist based in Islamabad
