NAB

The News, April 11, 2006
Lauding NAB for what?
Farhatullah Babar

"President lauds NAB", reads the heading of the news story last week in The News when the Chairman National Accountability Bureau presented the bureau's annual report to General Musharraf.

The annual report has identified judicial weaknesses, power abuse, incompetence of political leaders and betrayal of public trust as some of the major causes of corruption in the country. There can no caveat with it.

But the report should have also admitted that when NAB is forced to delay or stop investigations it is a betrayal of public trust that undermines its image and promotes corruption. Institutions are also like individuals. When possessing great strengths they approach their failings with frankness, hope and courage. The reputation of the present chairman is not that of a dim person. One therefore expected some bold confessions in the report, but alas.

Look up the report and you will find it bereft of courage and candour that comes only with inner strength. Consider.

In reply to a senate question on December 5, 2003 NAB named fourteen uniformed officers working in civil departments that also included one Ex-Lieutenant General as being 'under investigation for accumulating assets beyond means'. "Investigations are still continuing", the senate was informed early this year as the accused roams free. Clearly some invisible hands are behind the go slow. It must have found mention in the report.

In reply to a question asked on December 2, 2004 it transpired that cases of corruption, misuse of authority and accumulating assets beyond known means had been filed against nine sitting Members of Parliament.

. All of them were NAB's prey until they joined the King's Party, and were not only let off the hook but also rewarded with ministerial jobs. NAB may claim that it is not to blame for rewarding the turncoats with cabinet positions but it must have warned that such a brazen assault on it is a betrayal of trust that promoted corruption. It failed.

Last year the then Chairman NAB was asked to appear before the Senate Committee on privileges for wrongly claiming Senator Syed Mushahid Hussain who had been investigated for 'misuse of authority'. The chairman refused. And just last month the present chairman was asked to appear before the National Assembly Committee that is examining the bill to create the post of a deputy chairman. He too did not appear forcing the committee to adjourn. Are these inspiring examples of accountability within NAB itself?

Similarly NAB informed the senate on February 15, 2005 that it has paid 390 million rupees as fee to the lawyers during the last five years besides incurring expenses on the boarding and lodging of NAB officers.

Every ministry, on being asked, is required to lay before the parliament how much it had paid in legal fees and to whom but NAB withholds it as 'privileged information'. Is this an example of transparency that NAB says is a major cause of corruption?

Last year the nation was shaken when the defence minister disclosed in the national assembly that the Khoski Sugar Mill of the Fauji Foundation had been sold to a bidder that was neither the highest nor had originally bid for it. It was also claimed that that investigation had been undertaken. The Fauji Foundation however alleged foul play and through newspaper ads rejected any investigations.

The Defence Committee of Senate took up the matter and summoned the Chairman Fauji Foundation, himself a former Chairman of NAB to appear. He refused. In a volt face the defence minister who had earlier promised investigations defended the refusal to appear by wrongly claiming that the Foundation was a private concern. A reference promptly filed in NAB on June 9, 2005 is gathering dust. Are we to believe that it is the 'incompetence of political leaders'?

Military organisations have prided themselves in neutrality and being above board. They claim not to yield under temptation or back down under pressure. NAB is essentially a military outfit. It has always been headed by military officers and manned mostly by serving and retired uniformed officers. Practically it is under the Army Chief as it reports to General Musharraf to whom it also presents it annual reports. At the time of the 17th Amendment the NAB Ordinance was given special protection so that even the parliament cannot amend the NAB law without the prior approval of the army chief also sitting in the presidency.

Last month it launched investigation into the doubling of sugar prices in a few months.

The Sugar Mills Association has admitted that most of the sugar mills had brought into the market only between 11 to 33 per cent of their total stock by February 28. Who else is withholding stocks if not for price manipulation; a most corrupt practice? But when given the hands off call NAB beat such a hasty retreat that it hardly inspired public trust in this military outfit. Was the retreat due to weaknesses in the judicial system?

To spite Benazir Bhutto, NAB a few days ago accused a foreign based company Petroline in which she was said to be a shareholder by paying 2 million dollars in 'commissions' to Saddam's regime in the oil for food programme. It quoted the Independent Inquiry Commission of the UN for the accusation. But it kept quiet on the three companies named in the same report that bought oil worth 500 million dollars for the government of Pakistan and paid over 4 million dollars in surcharge that NAB says is commission. Who has betrayed the public trust that NAB rightly laments lies at the root of corruption?

While receiving the report General Musharraf is reported to have also remarked, unwittingly though, that NAB would be overhauled.

Overhaul, yes; but laud it, no. What is there to laud NAB for?

The writer is a former member of the Senate
Email: drkhshan@isb.comsats.net.pk