How can legislation nullify conviction, asks SC

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Thursday questioned how a court conviction could be nullified by a piece of legislation.

The petition of Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) challenging the coalition government’s amendments to the National Accountability Ordinance (NAO) 1999 was heard by a three-member bench of the Supreme Court, which was led by Chief Justice Umer Ata Bandial and included Justices Ijazul Ahsen and Syed Mansoor Ali Shah.

Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaaf counsel Khwaja Haris argued before the court. During the course of hearing, Justice Ijazul Ahsen questioned how a conviction handed down by a court could be overturned by law.

Justice Ahsen noted that even the president may commute a sentence, but the offence would still be upheld, saying that if corruption is short of Rs500 million, the case comes to an end. “It seems with the amendments made to the NAB law, corruption of Rs499 million is fine but wrong over and above it,” Justice Ijazul Ahsen remarked.

The judge’s comments came after PTI counsel Khwaja Haris claimed that due to changes made to the NAB law, both the crime and sentence had been abolished.

Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, another member of the bench, said as to how the crime was sustained when the plea bargain, which was the basis of the crime, was abolished.

“When the crime of a killer is pardoned after reconciliation with the heirs of diseased, then why not an accused of corruption?” the judge remarked, adding that when this facility is available in a crime like murder, then why not in other offences.

The chief justice said that mutual reconciliation could not be applied to every crime. Justice Mansoor Ali Shah said that the crime must be remanded back to the trial court. “Is it possible that a person who is charged with theft and later on hands over the stolen property can claim a pardon?” Justice Ijazul Ahsen asked.

Khwaja Haris submitted that under the NAB law, an accused was proceeded against for not depositing the installments of a plea bargain under the Land Revenue Act, but under the new law, the case will now be remanded back to the trial court and the court, on the basis of new law, could suspend the case as well.

At this stage, Justice Mansoor Ali Shah said that an accused, as per previous law, could approach the court at any stage and submit that he was forced to plea bargain. Khwaja Haris further submitted that under the amendments, proper arrangements had been made for protecting the accused involved in corruption.

In this respect, the learned counsel submitted that along with the cabinet members, the special assistants had also been provided immunity, adding that the amendments could also be applicable to foreign assets.

Chief Justice Bandial asked the learned counsel as to whether benefiting from the amnesty scheme, an ordinary person could also come on the NAB radar. Whether the business class would also be punished for doing business, the CJP asked, adding that we are in such a society where the business class has to palm the grease of people concerned everywhere.

Khwaja Haris replied that any person who extends help to public office holders in money laundering process would come on the NAB radar. Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah asked if the instant amendments were not made in the light of the court’s decisions.

Khwaja Haris replied that the amendments were made with a wrong interpretation of the court’s verdicts. During the hearing, the chief justice questioned the NAB’s additional prosecutor about the number of cases returned to the anti-graft body by accountability courts following the amendments to the NAB law.

NAB’s additional prosecutor Mumtaz Yousaf informed the court that some 219 cases had been returned by the accountability courts, adding that maybe the volume of cases has reached 280. He further informed the court that all the cases were being returned to the NAB, adding a committee will look into these cases.

Khwaja Haris further submitted that under the new amendments, fake accounts matter had also been wiped out from the NAB jurisdiction, adding that people had managed to deposit laundered money in the accounts of Falooda Walas and got amnesty and accepted as benamidaar.

The counsel said that now, under the new amendments, these people could not be interrogated in this regard.

Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, however, observed that these people were not exempted and, according to the law, their cases would be sent to the respective courts and, if anything was found wrong, criminal cases would be filed against them as well.

Chief Justice Umer Ata Bandial said that, as per media reports, these amendments were initiated by the previous government, adding credit goes to the law minister for drafting the amendments.

At this, Makhdom Ali Khan, counsel for the federal government, came to the rostrum and submitted that the previous government must be credited also, which was part of this process and made amendments, but now it had challenged in the apex court.

Earlier, the NAB submitted a report to the court with details pertaining to the cases filed from 2000 to 2021 regarding plea bargains and voluntary return. According to the report, the anti-graft body had collected Rs65 billion through plea bargaining and Rs92 billion through voluntary return during the period. Meanwhile, the court adjourned the hearing until next Monday.