Overzealous accountability

Exactly a month after the Islamabad High Court (IHC) granted him bail in the LNG terminal reference case, an accountability court issued non-bailable arrest warrants for former prime minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi in a fresh case. This time, the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) filed a reference against Abbasi and petroleum secretary under him, Arshad Mirza, for allegedly making illegal appointments of director and deputy managing director (finance) of the Pakistan State Oil, in violation of rules and regulations. NAB also stated that while hearing a case in July 2018, the Supreme Court had ordered it to probe both appointments. Admitting the reference, the accountability court directed a NAB investigation officer to arrest and produce all accused, the appointers and the appointees, before it on April 10. As was expected, Abbasi appeared before the court and received pre-arrest bail.
Abbasi was first arrested by NAB last July along with the former finance minister, Miftah Ismail, in the LNG corruption reference. During seven months of incarceration, its investigators are said to have failed to find evidence against them that could stand in a court of law. In fact, NAB prosecutor had to face considerable embarrassment before the IHC for investigation officers' lack of understanding of technical issues involved in the case.
Is allegation of illegal appointments such a grave offence that should invite non-bailable arrest warrants? At a time when this country along with the rest of the world is focused on saving lives and economies from the onslaught of coronavirus, the anti-graft watchdog needs to realize it is not business as usual. A few days ago, the interior ministry issued orders for the release of prisoners involved in minor or bailable offences so as to protect prisoners, as far as possible, from Covid-19 infection. That means something. Chairman NAB should set his case origination priorities in line with the current emergency situation. Only those involved in most serious and urgent cases should be held to account and put behind bars, others can wait. Reviving old cases concerning prominent opposition leaders can easily lend validity to common complaints that they are being unfairly targeted at the behest of the government. NAB must act, and seen to be acting, as an independent organisation free of any extraneous influence.