Why armed forces were kept out of NAB law, asks SC

[ghazi52]

,.,.

Why armed forces were kept out of NAB law, asks SC​

Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah asks why Imran Khan didn't object to exclusion of military from NAB's jurisdiction

Hasnaat Malik
October 19, 2022

Supreme Court of Pakistan. PHOTO: AFP

---

ISLAMABAD: Supreme Court judge Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah on Monday wondered why former prime minister Imran Khan while challenging amendments in National Accountability Bureau (NAB) law didn't object to exclusion of armed forces from NAB jurisdiction as they held the ‘biggest businesses’ in the country.

"You could have said that NAB law is discriminatory in nature," he remarked as a three-judge bench of the apex court led by Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial resumed the hearing against recent amendments to National Accountability Ordinance (NAO).

Counsel for former premier Imran, Khawaja Haris said that army officers who are associated with any business entity are not exempted from NAB jurisdiction.

Justice Shah also questioned why the NAB law did not apply to judges. Raising questions on the maintainability of the petition, he again asked Imran’s counsel how the apex court could design the law, adding that it is parliament's job to discuss what kind of law on accountability should be framed. "Tomorrow someone may approach the Supreme Court for holding death sentence in the offence of assets beyond," he added.

Justice Shah also questioned whether accountability only meant the existence of NAB law. "An impression is being given that there would be no accountability after these amendments," he added.

However, Justice Ijazul Ahsan noted that the offence of misuse of authority is only mentioned in NAB law.

Khawaja Haris responded by saying that offences related to misuse of authority and assets beyond means could not be tried after these amendments.

He said that under the new law, the NAB should first establish that the accused person in exercise of misuse of authority got financial gains.

However, the PTI counsel supported the NAB law amendments to limit the duration of remand as well as including the bail provision to the accused in the law.

The hearing of the case was adjourned till Monday.

Why armed forces were kept out of NAB law, asks SC | The Express Tribune

Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah asks why Imran Khan didn't object to exclusion of military from NAB's jurisdiction

tribune.com.pk

 

[ghazi52]

,..,

Supreme Court puzzled by forces’ exclusion from NAB ambit​

Nasir Iqbal
October 20, 2022

ISLAMABAD: Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah of the Supreme Court on Wednesday wondered why Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan never objected to the exclusion of the armed forces from the ambit of the National Accountability Ordinance (NAO), when some of the country’s largest business entities were run by them.

“Why have the armed forces been excluded from NAO when they were running the largest businesses and when the largest balance sheets are of the armed forces?” Justice Shah observed, also asking why the petitioner never objected to it on grounds of discrimination.

Justice Shah is one of the members of the three-judge Supreme Court bench that had taken up a challenge by the former prime minister to recent amendments made to the accountability law.

When a serving army officer is running a business, he is liable to be prosecuted under the accountability laws (in case of any wrongdoing), Justice Shah observed.

However, senior counsel Khawaja Haris Ahmed, on behalf of petitioner Mr Khan, cited Section 5(n)(iv) of the amended NAO to suggest there was no exception granted under the law to the army officers holding or who had held a post in any public corporation, bank, financial institution or other organisation established, controlled or administered by or under the federal government or a provincial government, or a person who was a civilian employee of the armed forces.

Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial, who was heading the bench, highlighted the need for a balance between the fundamental rights of a citizen and the public interest, adding that he was looking at certain cases and realised that society suffered when an individual or accused was relieved of corruption charges.

But the court needed to understand how it had become difficult for the prosecution under the changed accountability law to prosecute those accused of committing corrupt practices and how it would lead to people’s suffering by breaching their rights, the CJP observed.

Without naming anyone, CJP Bandial also cited a case wherein one of the accused had been acquitted of all the charges, but the pecuniary benefits were drawn through benamidars that were inherited properties. Therefore, the court was asking for identification of solid flaws in the law, he observed.

The counsel argued that the huge sums of money spent on conducting inquiries and preparing corruption references against the accused belonged to the people and should not go to waste.

“Can the Supreme Court sustain this unreasonable law where less than Rs500 million will go out of the domain of NAO but if the matter concerns Rs500m or more, it will be very difficult to prove?” he asked.

“So we should strike down a law for unreasonableness?” Justice Shah observed.

He said the wrong impression was being created that after making a wrong decision, the decision maker would go home without being challenged and that the NAO was the only law that dealt with corruption matters. The offender might not fall into the NAB’s net, but he could be caught in some other net, he emphasised.

Published in Dawn, October 20th, 2022