Supreme Court seeks NAB’s view on changes to NAO

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court (SC) Thursday sought the stance of National Accountability Bureau (NAB) as to whether it supported the recent amendments, made by the incumbent government to the National Accountability Ordinance (NAO) 1999.

A three-member bench, headed by Chief Justice Umer Ata Bandial, and comprising Justice Ijazul Ahsen and Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, heard the petition, filed by Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan, challenging the amendments made by the government to the NAO-1999.

The court sought written reply from the anti-graft body on the request of Makhdoom Ali Khan, counsel for the federal government.

The court also directed the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) to submit a comprehensive report, stating the volume of pending investigations in the cases as well as stating its worth.

Khawaja Haris, counsel for PTI Chairman Imran Khan, while continuing his arguments, submitted before the court that in the past the apex court had, on many occasions, issued directions for making legislations.

The counsel recalled that the apex court had also given time to the Parliament for making legislation on the appointment of Chief of the Army Staff (COAS).

“In some of the decisions, the apex court had also provided the Parliament, the relevant draft of the legislation as well,” the counsel submitted.

Kh Haris submitted that in the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) case, only those cases were re-opened which were closed under the Ordinance.

The counsel for the PTI chairman questioned as to how cases of the accused persons, who were convicted by the courts, could be closed down under the amendments made by the incumbent government to NAB law. Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah asked the learned counsel as to whether he had concluded his arguments, to which the counsel replied that still he needed two days to conclude.

Meanwhile, the court adjourned the hearing until next Monday, Dec 11, 2022, directing the counsel to conclude his arguments.