NAB has no option but to file references against Sharifs: ex-official

ISLAMABAD: The mere findings of the Panama Joint Investigation Team (JIT) can’t be the basis of filing a reference against deposed prime minister Nawaz Sharif or any member of his family unless the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) conducts its own probe under the law governing it and concludes that a case is called for, a former top prosecutor said.

“What maximum the NAB can do is to treat the JIT report as the material or a piece of evidence in its own inquiry to be conducted by its own Investigation Officer (IO) under the National Accountability Ordinance (NAO), 1999,” former NAB Deputy Prosecutor General Raja Amir Abbas, who served in this position for five years, said while answering questions from The News.

He stressed that a reference to be submitted in an accountability court has to be prepared under the NAO, meeting all the processes and requirements mandated by it. “The IO has to attach with the reference the final report with his signatures.”

Amir Abbas said all the departments from where the JIT got the material and even the members of the team will be summoned in the accountability court for cross-examination if and when required about what has been written or attributed to them in the report.

“This is a conflict,” he said when asked what will happen if the NAB concludes in its investigation that no reference on a particular matter can be made because it doesn’t have sufficient proof to back up the charge, while the July 28 Supreme Court judgment has ordered that the NAB “shall within six weeks from the date of this judgment prepare and file the references before the accountability court.

Amir Abbas, who is representing different high-profile accused in accountability courts in the NAB references, said that regardless of the investigation to be carried out by the NAB and whether or not it gets satisfactory evidence to support a reference, it has no option but to file these references due to the apex court order.

However, he said the respondents can file an application for quashment of such references. Additionally, he said, the IO can also withdraw the case from the accountability court on the ground that the NAB can’t pursue it for having no material to rely on.

Section 18 of the NAO says that if a complaint is inquired into and investigated by the NAB and it is concluded that it was prima facie frivolous or has been filed with intent to malign or defame any person, the NAB chairman or his deputy or any officer duly authorised by the NAB chief may refer the matter to the court, and if the complainant is found guilty he shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine or with both.

By filing the reference, Amir Abbas said, the apex court order will be satisfied. The judgment also ordered that the accountability court shall proceed with and decide the references within a period of six months from the date of their filing. He said that if the NAB submits a reference in the accountability court as per the court verdict despite having no enough evidence to support it, it may file a supplementary reference later.

Amir Abbas said that if the NAB could not “prepare and file” the reference within six months as directed by the Supreme Court for not having completed its investigations, it will inform the monitoring and supervising judge about the progress it has made.

The judge, he explained, will not only “monitor” but also “supervise” the implementation of the verdict in letter and spirit and oversee the proceedings conducted by the NAB and the accountability court.

To another question, Amir Abbas said, the NAB has powers to arrest the ousted prime minister or anybody else any time during investigation, but there are instances when it has not done so in the case of former prime ministers Yusuf Raza Gilani and Raja Pervez Ashraf during investigations for its own reasons. They are facing references in accountability courts. He opined that generally accountability courts did not order the NAB to arrest any accused. He said when he recently went to court to get pre-arrest bails of the commissioner and deputy commissioner of Quetta, a few NAB vehicles were waiting outside for the rejection of the plea so that they could immediately arrest the accused.

The former prosecutor said that the NAO empowers the NAB chairman and its directors general, given this authority by him, to order the arrest of any accused.

Under section 18 of the NAO, the NAB Chairman and such members, officers or servants of the agency shall have and exercise, for the purposes of an inquiry or investigation the power to arrest any person, and for that purpose may cause the attendance of any person, and when and if the assistance of any agency, police officer or any other official or agency, as the case may be, is sought by the NAB such official or agency shall render such assistance provided that no person shall be arrested without the permission of the NAB chief or any NAB officer duly authorized by him.

Section 24 says the NAB chairman shall have the power, at any stage of the inquiry or investigation under the NAO, to direct that the accused, if not already arrested, shall be arrested.

The NAO further says where the holder of a public office or any other person accused of an offence is arrested by the NAB, the NAB shall, as soon as may be, inform him of the grounds and substance on the basis of which he has been arrested and produce him before the accountability court within a period of twenty-four hours of arrest excluding the time necessary for the journey from the place of arrest to the court and such person shall, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, be liable to be detained in the NAB custody for the purpose of inquiry and investigation for a period not exceeding ninety days and the court may remand an accused person to custody not exceeding fifteen days at a time and for every subsequent remand it shall record reasons.