n July 3, the government amended the accountability laws through an ordinance promulgated by the acting president. The new ordinance amended six sections of the National Accountability Ordinance.

Taking over power in 1999, Gen Pervez Musharraf had promised to eradicate corruption and hold accountable all those accused of corruption. On November 16, 1999, the National Accountability Ordinance was promulgated with retrospective effect (from 1985).

The main purpose of the ordinance was to recover the proceeds of corruption and assets misappropriated by holders of public offices. The ordinance also established a National Accountability Bureau for the eradication of corruption.

Section 4 of the ordinance provides that the law is applicable to all holders of public office. A private citizen can also be prosecuted under the said ordinance if he cannot account for the wealth which considered beyond their means.

Article 16(a) of the law provides for expeditious disposal of cases (within one month, hearing on a day-to-day basis). Under Section 9(a), various kinds of corruption have been mentioned and explained. The accused is not to be released on bail under Section 9(b).

Accountability courts were authorised to keep the accused in custody for a period not exceeding 90 days. A person could not be confined for more than 14 days at a time with the sole object of recovering the misappropriated assets.

The bureau was also responsible for prosecuting cases of corruption and financial crime in the country.

During 2022 and 2023, the law was amended several times, thereby reducing the powers of the NAB.

The latest amendments empower the NAB chairman to transfer graft cases less than Rs 500 million to the relevant agency, department or authority and close a pending enquiry or investigation. As a result, many pending cases, including those against some high profile accused have been transferred.

The applicability of Section 4 has also been curtailed. The power and jurisdiction of the National Accountability Bureau and the Accountability Courts has also been limited.

The power to appoint the NAB chairman has been delegated to the federal government by amending Section 5(F) and Section 6 of the Ordinance. The appointment process has become more complicated and time-consuming.

The NAB chairman can be removed through a reference to the Supreme Judicial Council.

Through the latest amendment, Section 9(7) has been omitted. This section had made any direction, policy or SRO or action for undue concession in tax matters or other laws benefiting a holder of public office, a relative or associate punishable.

Under the new amendment, civil and commercial disputes, and investment schemes between private parties have been placed outside the domain of the NAB. Section 9(b) give the trial court the powered and jurisdiction to grant bail to the accused.

The 30-day period for the decision of cases under Section 16(a) has been extended to one year.

Section 23 has been omitted from the ordinance. It had prohibited transfer of property by an accused person to another person during the trial and investigation.

Under Section 26(a), an accomplice in an accountability crime shall be disqualified from the date of termination of trial for 10 years from contesting election, appointment or representation in a public or government sector. Before this amendment, there was no such restriction or disqualification for an accomplice.

The period of appeal against a judgment of the accountability court has been extended from 10 days to 30 days by amending Section 32 of the ordinance. The appellate court has been empowered to suspend the sentence of the accused person during the appeal period.

The writer is an advocate of the Supreme Court (LLM Constitutional Law) based in Peshawar.  ziaurrahmantajik123@gmail.com