CORRUPTION in the public and private sectors has caused great damage by undermining the socio-political and economic fabric of society. History bears testimony to the fact that societies riddled with corruption implode and eventually slip into oblivion.

Despite the best efforts of successive governments in our country to control corruption it has permeated every aspect of public life.

The National Accountability Bureau, established by the last government as an apex white-collar crime investigation agency of the country, is an example of such efforts. Although many people would disagree, the establishment of NAB was one of the good acts of the Musharraf regime. Given the circumstances under which the organisation was established when corruption and cronyism reigned supreme, this action of Gen Musharraf gained widespread appreciation.

The present government has decided to disband NAB and repeal the National Accountability Ordinance, 1999. The federal minister for parliamentary affairs Babar Awan introduced the Holders of Public Offices Accountability Bill in April 2009 to replace the 1999 ordinance. The setting up of an enforcement agency by the name of the Accountability Commission is being considered. NAB has been discounted as a tool used by Gen Musharraf to have gained support of politicians. The NAO, 1999 has been labelled a “draconian law”.

NAB's objective was to cleanse society of corruption and conduct accountability of the looters of the national exchequer and the bigwigs involved along with those involved in plunder, embezzlement, abuse of power and defrauding people. In less than nine years, NAB did valuable work to restore looted money and provide relief to the victims of the excesses of government officials and private enterprises. Major public scams successfully investigated by NAB include those by Alliance Motors, Mehran City (a fake housing scheme) and Double Shah where thousands of people were affected.

The organisation has completed hundreds of investigations resulting in successful prosecution and the recovery of Rs225bn, including Rs116bn from loan defaulters. The money spent on establishing this organisation was a mere Rs4.5bn which means that it returned over Rs50 to the state for every rupee given to it by the government. This is an unprecedented performance by an investigation agency.

Irrespective of the social status or political posturing of the accused, NAB filed hundreds of references against some 1,400 government servants, 400 businessmen, 117 politicians, 21 ex-army officers (on civilian appointments) and 1,058 others including bankers and those involved in public scams, financial institutions, etc.

The Holders of Public Offices Accountability Bill only applies to the holders of political offices i.e. ex-presidents, prime ministers, governors, chief ministers and parliamentarians and has excluded all serving/retired bureaucrats, retired army officers and members of the judiciary who could be tried under Section 9 of NAO, 1999 by NAB. It has no provision for recovery of outstanding amounts from those persons who have committed default in repaying banks, financial institutions and public and private agencies.

The new bill is in violation of the ratification of the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) which obligates the ratifying country to have one apex national anti-corruption agency to conduct the accountability of both public and private sectors. While signing this protocol, Pakistan pledged total commitment to undertaking major anti-corruption initiatives. Abolition of NAB or reduction in its role and capacity will be viewed with concern at the international level as it is the nominated focal agency to coordinate with and ensure compliance of all such international protocols.

The new bill does not cover investigating cases in which government officials receive kickbacks for awarding contracts, an exercise prevalent in government institutions. This was, however, covered in Section 33(b) of NAO, 1999. The bill does not even cover inquiry/investigation or prosecution of 'associates', 'benamidar' and 'wilful default'. Hence the new bill is limited in scope.

The abolition of NAB would mean transferring its functions to other agencies such as the FIA and provincial anti-corruption agencies. The FIA already has a wide range of responsibilities and in any case its performance over the years especially with regard to its functions which had been transferred to NAB in 2004 show that the FIA has largely been lacking in performance. The prosecution ratio of NAB is 67 per cent whereas the FIA and provincial anti-corruption agencies are lagging behind with 28 per cent and 10 per cent respectively. Furthermore, provincial agencies have a limited mandate and are subject to direct political control.

It is worth mentioning that NAB's actions were at a point influenced by Gen Musharraf when he was trying to consolidate power by manoeuvring the actions of the organisation at whim. Now that the army is back in the barracks and Musharraf is no longer in power civilian officers have taken over command of the organisation. Exploitation of NAB by a dictator for political gain has become a thing of the past. Its performance during the last three years must be seen in the context of political victimisation by a dictator. However, the organisation did not have political biases in the recent past.

The general trend in foreign countries is to place accountability agencies under the direct supervision of the prime minister/chief executive (Singapore and Malaysia), the president (in the case of the Abu Dhabi Accountability Authority of the UAE), parliament (India), the attorney general (UK and New Zealand) or the justice ministry (Hong Kong, Argentina and Denmark). This shows that while overseeing agencies by the government are necessary, a restrictive or intrusive mandate should be discouraged.

The writer is a former investigation officer of NAB, Sindh.

asmper@hotmail.com