Opposition awaiting govt package of amends in NAO, other laws

ISLAMABAD: The Opposition parties are waiting for the proposed package of amendments in the National Accountability Ordinance (NAO) and other laws from the government, which it committed to deliver to them some two weeks back.

“In the last meeting of the representatives of the government and Opposition parties, the official side promised, as demanded by us, to give us a comprehensive package of changes in the NAO and some other statutes, but there is total silence from them,” a key negotiator of the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) and former Speaker Sardar Ayaz Sadiq, who attended all the five meetings held so far, told The News when contacted.

The two sides are deliberating upon new legislation that both parties prefer. The government wants certain fresh laws as well as changes in the existing ones.

Meanwhile, the government is keen to raise the number of judges in the Islamabad High Court (IHC) from six to nine by amending the concerned act but the Opposition parties desire to get for scrutiny all the new laws and amendments, which the other side wish to bring, so that they give their response.

Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar said early last month that the number of judges in IHC should be raised and the matter has been referred to the government. Ayaz Sadiq said that the government wants to directly move in the Parliament the amendment bill, seeking increase in the number of IHC judges, to get it passed unanimously but the Opposition parties stress that it should be referred to the committee for consideration first.

He said that the government also wants to introduce only those amendments in the NAO and IHC Act, which have been recommended by the Supreme Court. “However, we have our own concerns, and the apprehensions expressed by the legal community about the NAO, which need to be addressed,” the former speaker said.

At least three changes have been suggested in the NAO by two benches of the Supreme Court, which the government is eager to insert to avoid any disapproval from the highest judicial forum.

Legal experts say the Parliament and government have no option but to enact the amendments suggested by the apex court. The Supreme Court has given one month to the government to do appropriate legislation with regard to the powers of the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) chairman, allowing voluntary return (VR) to a person involved in corruption.

A three-judge bench, headed by Justice Sheikh Azmat Saeed, has heard a case for interpretation of Section 25-A of the NAO, which empowers the NAB chairman to accept VR from an accused, who is even permitted to continue his job without departmental proceedings. If the appropriate amendment is not done by February, the court will give its ruling and it has jurisdiction to strike down any law, violating the Constitution, the panel said.

Justice Azmat Saeed said a crime cannot end through an administrative order and cannot be abolished on approval of VR. He said that the NAB writes letters to the accused persons regarding VRs after initiating inquiries.

In mid-November, another bench headed by Justice Asif Saeed Khosa suggested in its judgment that in the changed scenario, the legislature may, if so advised, consider amending the NAO appropriately so as to enable an accused person to apply for bail before the relevant accountability court in the first instance.

Justice Khosa wrote that the intention behind introduction of Section 9(b) of the NAO, which ousts the jurisdiction of the superior courts regarding grant of bail, already stood neutralised due to opening of the door for bail through exercise of constitutional jurisdiction of a high court.

Resultantly, he noted, the entire burden was being shouldered by the high courts, which was an unnecessary drain on their precious time. He said that the high courts and the Supreme Court had always felt difficulty in adjusting the requirements of “without lawful authority” and “of no legal effect” relevant to a writ of certiorari [Article 199(1)(a)(ii) of the Constitution] with the requirements of bail provided in Section 497 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Another amendment recommended by Justice Khosa related to revision of the unrealistic timeframe [thirty days] for conclusion of a trial as specified in Section 16(a). It has never happened that an accountability court decided a reference within thirty days.

The Opposition parties have emphasised that the physical remand period of ninety days should be reduced, and the government seems inclined to bring it down to fourteen days. The Opposition parties also proposed that the absolute authority of the NAB chairman, which is not available to the head of any agency in Pakistan, should be diluted. “We have suggested that a three-member committee comprising the NAB chief, and the directors general of finance and law should take decisions instead of one man. It will make the NAB affairs transparent and shun arbitrariness and whimsical conclusions,” Ayaz Sadiq said.

He said another recommendation of the Opposition is that the office of the prosecutor general should be separated and be made independent and autonomous to take decisions instead of bowing to what the NAB chairman commands. At present, he said, the NAB chief is the sole authority.