Welcome amendments to NAB law vanish

ISLAMABAD: The exclusion of bureaucrats, public officeholders, taxation matters and procedural lapses, entailing no corruption, from the purview of the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) will become extinct on Friday, as the amendments to the law made through a presidential ordinance have not been approved by Parliament.

The legal cover was provided to the actions of civil servants and public officeholders (politicians) done in good faith and in discharge of duties and performance of official functions if their decisions did not bring to them any monetary gain, swelling their assets disproportionate to their known sources of income.

The National Accountability (Second Amendment) Ordinance, 2019, promulgated in end-December having the usual 120-day constitutional life, was primarilymeant to infuse confidence in the bureaucrats and encourage them to take decisions and to not sit on files, affecting the government business.

Prime Minister Imran Khan reached this conclusion after publicly stating more than once that the civil servants were not taking decision due to NAB’s fear. The government wanted to get the ordinance extended by the National Assembly to another 120 days before its expiry. Subsequently, it was set to pass it in the Lower House of Parliament where it has majority and planned to prevail upon the opposition to clear it in the Senate.

The opposition parties were not opposed to this idea. Since Parliament is not being summoned due to the Covid-19 pandemic, the ordinance is lapsing, blowing away the exemption provided to the bureaucrats and public officeholders.

There is a consensus between the ruling coalition and opposition parties to hold a physical session of Parliament instead of virtual sitting. However, neither the National Assembly nor the Senate has so far been summoned.

The ordinance states that currently the NAB is dealing with a large number of inquiries and investigations in addition to handling mega corruption cases. Under the existing regime, a number of inquiries have been initiated against the public officeholders and government servants on account of procedural lapses where no actual corruption is involved. This has enhanced NAB’s burden and has also affected working of the federal government.

The NAB, while assuming parallel jurisdiction, is also inquiring into matters pertaining to taxation, imposition of levies etc., and therefore interfering within the domain of taxation regulatory bodies.

According to the ordinance, an act done in good faith and in discharge of duties and performance of official function will not constitute an office unless there is corroborative evidence of accumulation of any monetary benefit or asset which is disproportionate to the known sources of income or which cannot be reasonably accounted for.

It said that the National Accountability Ordinance (NAO), 1999 will not apply to the persons and transactions including matters pertaining to federal or provincial taxation, levies or imposts, and all such inquiries and investigations pending with the NAB and trials in courts stand transferred to the respective authorities or departments which administer the relevant laws.

The amendment said that with regard to procedural lapses in any government project or scheme, no action will be taken against any public officeholder unless it is shown that he has materially benefited by gaining any asset or monetary benefit which is disproportionate to his known sources of income, or where such material benefit cannot be reasonably accounted for, there is evidence to corroborate the acquiring or such material benefit; and with regard to any matter pertaining to the rendition of any advice, opinion or report, no action under the NAO will be taken against any public officeholder unless it is shown that he has materially benefited by gaining any asset or monetary benefit which is disproportionate to his known sources of income or where such material benefit can’t be reasonably accounted for, there is evidence to corroborate such material benefit.

The valuation of immovable properties for the purposes of assessing as to whether a public officeholder has assets disproportionate to his known sources of income will be reckoned either according to the applicable rate prescribed by the district collector or the Federal Board of Revenue, whichever is higher. No evidence contrary to the latter will be admissible.

The amendment was also intended to save the businessmen from the NAB in specified matters. However, it has not yet benefited the public officeholders or bureaucrats being tried for irregularities and procedural lapses involving no corruption.

A number of pleas have been submitted to the accountability courts by accused for dismissal of references on the force of this amendment.