Impending amendments to NAB law: Govt, opposition to hunt for common ground as talks start

ISLAMABAD: Consultations have been launched by the government and opposition parties to find a common ground by marrying four sets of proposed amendments to the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) law in order to do away with its excessively harsh provisions.

The first package of amendments comes from the government, which includes the recent changes in the National Accountability Ordinance (NAO), 1999, through a presidential ordinance. Apparently, the opposition will not oppose it if its proposals are also opted for.

The second set of changes are the recommendations made by the Supreme Court while third package has been suggested by the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) and other opposition parties. The fourth set of modifications has been sponsored by Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) leader and former Law Minister Farooq H Naek.

“The representatives of the government and opposition are meeting on Tuesday to discuss all the packages of amendments,” senior Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) leader and former Speaker Sardar Ayaz Sadiq told The News.

“Given the track record of the other side, I don’t have much hope in the success of the current dialogue process. The government shows too much enthusiasm at the very outset but as talks become serious, it backs off. Several months back, we had held a number of rounds of negotiations but in vain, and the entire process was abruptly abandoned. However, the current apparent feeling in the government is that now it is its turn to be made accountable by NAB as the opposition has been subjected to whatever had been premeditated, therefore, it is opportune time to amend the NAO.”

Federal Ministers Pervaiz Khattak Dr Farogh Naseem and Azam Swati will represent the government in the parleys while the opposition delegation will consist of Ayaz Sadiq, Rana Sanaullah, Javed Abbasi and Khawaja Asif and two Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) leaders.

Federal Minister Fawad Chaudhry has expressed the hope that the two sides will reach an agreement during the current talks on the changes in the NAB law as both want improvements.

The Supreme Court had recommended that accountability courts be given powers to grant bail to the NAB accused to reduce unnecessary burden on high courts; the trial period of thirty days be rationalised and the plea bargain provision be changed.

Naek’s package of amendments, incorporated in a bill, was approved by the Senate sometime back. It says the concept of plea bargain and voluntary return be made in line with modern jurisprudence of superior courts. It should be carried out through court and a person availing it would not contest election but would not be jailed.

“Powers of arrest be taken away from the NAB chairman/officials, who will not authorise detention at all, let alone for 90 days. There is no need of custodial investigation as the probe can be carried out and a person can be questioned in the NAB office without being detained overnight. Custodial investigation is against freedom and right of life of a person.”

The bill also stated that people be presumed innocent until proven guilty in cases of illegal gratification which is the cardinal principle of criminal jurisdiction and doctrine that a person is innocent until proven guilty; only those public office holders will be prosecuted who have assets which are the outcome of corruption and corrupt practices and not otherwise.

A person will only be answerable to questions posed with reference to specific allegations against him, the bill said.

There will be no fishing expedition or roving inquiry and asking questions which are violative of Article 13(b) of the Constitution that stipulates that no one can be forced to make statement against his own self.

The NAB chairman will not be authorised to declare any place a sub-jail as this is the job of the provincial government. According to the bill, the courts will be strengthened by giving them more power of supervision over the NAB chairman on plea bargain and receiving investigation reports, which is the basis for filing of a reference. There would be no prosecution without due process of law.

“No NAB official, in any capacity, will make any statement in public or to the media regarding persons involved in any inquiry or investigation conducted by it until a reference has been filed against them. Its violation will be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year but shall not be less than one month and with a fine of Rs100,000. It has been proposed to protect the dignity of person through a restriction on NAB officials from issuing statements.”

The bill said that that NAB cases be given the same treatment as others under the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) and that the accused accorded an opportunity to cross-examine the approver at the time his statement is being recorded.

The other opposition parties recommend that there should not be a special remand period for the NAB accused, and it should be normal as is available in other criminal cases. They say the ninety-day remand period is nothing but torture of the accused persons.

They also demanded that concentration of all powers in the NAB chairman should be dispensed with and instead a committee should be constituted to exercise this authority to ensure transparency.