The National Accountability Bureau (NAB) submitted before the Supreme Court of Pakistan (SC) a modified report on 150 mega corruption case. Earlier on July 7, NAB officials had submitted a list before the SC as per the court’s directives. The list includes cases against high profile figures, including incumbent Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, Chief Minister Punjab Shahbaz Sharif, former president, ex-premiers, ministers and top bureaucrats. However once again a two-member bench of the Supreme Court has asked NAB for a full record of all the cases it has handled so that it can determine if these were properly dealt with. The problem is that many of these cases have remained wrapped in secrecy and it is uncertain how much success the Supreme Court will have in getting to the bottom of them. A NAB official told the court that the cases it handled were on their website. But it seems extremely unlikely that less savoury aspects of these cases have been made public in this manner. The problem is that the vast majority of cases taken to NAB – some say over 75 percent – are settled outside courts mainly through plea bargain. The plea bargain system essentially enables the influential and the wealthy to get away. Beyond this it seems to have little justification. In other nations, including the US, the plea bargain is sometimes used to offer the offender a lighter sentence in exchange for providing information on other criminals. This is not the purpose we have utilised it for. As the court pointed out, in one case a senior NAB official was restored to his post after being accused of corruption worth millions by paying back only a minuscule percentage of this. NAB then seems to have been designed to keep corruption alive rather than to stamp it out. The large number of officials sent to NAB on deputation was also identified by the court as a major problem. Many of these officials lack investigation experience and are thus less likely to uncover and prove convictions to the satisfaction of the court. How much the courts can achieve in this situation is unclear. But it is obvious that given our culture of corruption at all levels some method of fair accountability has to be put in place to clear it up. Over the years NAB has not succeeded in doing this. In fact persons accused of wrongdoing attempt to have their cases transferred to NAB – confident they will be able to get away. We need a much better run system of accountability and every piece of knowledge that the court can get about the working of NAB and the agreements reached by it could be very useful in correcting the system.
pk.shafaqna.com
