SC summons 23-year record of NAB references

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Tuesday directed the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) to preserve the references returned by the accountability courts as they may be revived or could be referred to other courts and ordered submitting anti-graft body’s records from 1999 to June 2022.

A three-member bench of the apex court headed by Chief Justice Umer Ata Bandial and comprising Justice Ijazul Ahsen and Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah heard the petition of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf (PTI) challenging the amendments made in the National Accountability Ordinance (NAO) 1999.

Chief Justice Umer Ata Bandial asked the Additional Prosecutor National Accountability Bureau (NAB) about the status of references filed by the anti-graft body which were returned by the accountability courts after the amendments made in NAO 1999. The Additional Prosecutor General NAB submitted that a committee has been constituted for examining all these references. 

He submitted that he was collecting all the material and organizing them in proper form. “You should have copies of all these references as these may be revived or go to other courts”, the Chief Justice told the Additional Prosecutor NAB. “Preserve it physically and digitally so that it may not be displaced therefore ensure safe storage of such material”, the Chief Justice directed the NAB Additional Prosecutor. The court further directed the NAB official to report on a regular basis about the references returned by the accountability courts that are no more triable in such courts.

Makhdom Ali Khan, learned counsel for the Federal Government submitted before the court that the court may direct the NAB to also provide the record about the fate of those references filed by it from 1999 to June 2022 and whether any conviction has been awarded by the trial courts or high courts. At this, the court directed the NAB to provide the record.

During the course of the hearing, Chief Justice Umer Ata Bandial observed that it has long been debated in the newspapers that there are certain persons including the business community who should not be prosecuted under the NAB law. The chief justice observed that while the business community may have been discouraged by certain laws but added regulations are sometimes fruitful for balanced competition. Khwaja Haris, counsel for PTI replied that regulations are feared by those who were not honest and cannot believe in fair competition. Khwaja Haris submitted that Rs 8.6 billion, were recovered as a result of the Rental Power Plants Project reference, by the Supreme Court and that hefty amount went to the public exchequer and benefited the public at large. The apex court had held this public money is property of masses hence it should be deposited in the national kitty”, Khwaja Haris submitted adding that after the amendments, made in the NAO 1999, any undue benefit given to the third party or not related to the accused does not constitute any offence of misuse of authority.

The Chief Justice observed that we are searching for a touchstone to balancing it”, the CJP remarked but added that it should be debated in the Parliament. “But how we could make a threshold and interfere in the affairs of Parliament”, Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah asked the learned counsel while questioning the maintainability of the petition.” Tomorrow, if a person comes and says that his fundamental rights have been infringed upon hence the apex court should ask the NAB to inquire into the theft of Rs 10 corruption”, Justice Mansoor Ali Shah asked the counsel. At least this process should come to an end at one stage”, Justice Shah observed adding how the apex court could determine and design the kind of NAB law. Let’s for a moment if we say that the amendments under challenge were against the fundamental rights and if we strike them down, then the question arises as to how the old one will come and be revived”, Justice Mansoor Ali Shah asked the learned counsel. Khwaja Haris replied that an ordinary person could come to your lordship for relief.

Justice Ijazul Ahsen another member of the bench observed that maybe amendments were needed in NAB law but the question before the court is as to who needs these amendments. It is being assumed that a selected class needs those,” Justice Ahsen remarked. Later, the court adjourned the hearing for today (Wednesday) while Khwaja Haris, counsel for PTI will continue his arguments.