Dr Kaiser Bengali challenges forming of 10th NFC in high court

Economist Dr Kaiser Bengali on Thursday filed a petition in the Sindh High Court (SHC) to challenge the forming of the 10th National Finance Commission (NFC).

Dr Bengali, who had been a member of three previous NFCs and had represented Sindh and Balochistan, claimed that the forming of the 10th NFC was in stark violation of Article 160 of the constitution because no direct or effective consultation had taken place in the appointment of its members.

The economist said that the terms of reference (ToR) mentioned in the impugned notification of the forming of the NFC were beyond the scope of Article 160 because issues such as public debt, rationalisation of subsidies and losses of state-owned corporations fell within the domain of other constitutional forums such as the Council of Common Interests and the National Economic Council.

He said that certain ToR dealt with budgetary issues, which were within the scope of separate articles of the constitution that did not fall within the domain of the NFC.

Issues pertaining to the allocation of resources for Azad Jammu & Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan as well as the expenditures for security fall within the domain of the federal government and parliament, and have no bearing on the NFC’s proceedings, he added.

Dr Bengali pointed out the dangers of attempting any rollback of the 7th NFC Award under the 10th NFC, saying that if the principle of the provinces picking up the tab for the federal government’s expenditures was established, the provinces might demand collecting all the taxes themselves and reimbursing the Centre’s expenditures.

He said that in such an event, the federal structure would roll on its head and the stage might be set for creating a de facto confederation.

He requested the high court to declare the notification of the forming of the NFC as well as the appointment of additional members as unlawful.

He also questioned some ToRs in the impugned notification, including those in clauses 3(d), 3(e), 3(f), 3(g) and 3(h), saying that they should be declared as being beyond the scope of Article 160 of the constitution.

The economist asked the court to declare that the prime minster’s finance & revenue adviser does not retain the authority to convene or chair the 10th NFC proceedings, and to direct the federal government to reconstitute the commission strictly in accordance with Article 160.