SC seeks govt explanation over legality of plea bargain, voluntary return

KHUDAYAR MOHLA

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court has asked the federal government to submit its response over the legality of National Accountability Bureaus plea bargain (PB) and voluntary return (VR) schemes.

Resuming the hearing of a suo motu action taken to examine the vires of Section 25(a) of the NAB Ordinance 1999, a two-member bench led by Justice Amir Hani Muslim observed that voluntary return of the embezzled money by public servants under the provisions of the NAB Ordinance is increasing corruption.

Terming the VR under the NAB law wrong, a Justice Azmat Saeed Sheikh remarked whether the NAB has become only a department of recoveries, adding under which provision of the special law, the government officials are allowed to remain in services after they enter into VR scheme.

Justice Sheikh was of the view that in fact entering into VR is meant to accept the crime of an offender, saying one year ago they had stated that the NAB law of VR was not right.

A person commits fraud of Rs250 is sent to jail under Anti-Corruption Act, but if a person commits corruption of Rs250 million then he gets off scot-free after entering into VR, Justice Sheikh observed.

Responding to the courts query, Attorney General for Pakistan Ashtar Ausaf submitted that the issue of VR is in the Senate; to which Justice Amir Hani Muslim said, let the Senate and the National Assembly do their job.

However, Justice Muslim observed that people have reservations on plea bargain, adding that he has asked the AGP to submit governments repose over the legality of VR and plea bargain, to which the AGP sought one weeks time.

Justice Muslim said that in some cases the VR is worse than the plea bargain. He questioned whether the laws of NAB, FIA and Anti-Corruption are same.

Justice Sheikh said the purpose of the VR was something else but the NAB used to write letters to the accused to enter into the VR, saying it would be better if the NAB should give advertisements in newspapers that the accused should enter into VRs.

Justice Muslim said the executives are not authorised to exercise powers of the court; however, Prosecutor General NAB Waqas Qadeer Dar submitted that the NAB did not make the VR law itself, whereas the NAB is exercising power under the provision of the National Accountability Ordinance 1999.

He further said when the NAB officials have arrested a big shot in Balochistan (Finance Secretary Mushtaq Raisani); an uproar was created by the media and it was reported that Rs40 billion were recovered from his residence. According to Dar, the entire budget of Balochistan is less than Rs40 billion, saying in many cases the NAB entered into VRs upon the orders of courts. Later, the case was adjourned for two weeks.