NAB leaves the PML-N leadership in a dilemma

Will Nawaz’s outburst harm his own party?

A few months ago, the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) submitted a report to the Supreme Court containing 150 names involved in mega corruption. The list contained names of some important personalities, including the Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and the chief minister of Punjab, Shehbaz Sharif. Reportedly, an investigation is also under way against the finance minister – a close relative of the Sharif family – for misusing his authority. Moreover, a number of other prominent ministers from the ruling party are also being investigated for their alleged involvement in large scale corruption scandals.

The prime minister has blatantly warned NAB’s chairman that if he didn’t take any corrective measures, “the government will initiate necessary legal action.” Apparently, NAB is bent on not making any exceptions this time: its unfettered investigation reports have created concerns among various powerful political circles, including the PML-N.

Many in the PML-N believe that someone behind the scenes is pulling all the strings. To some extent, from an absolute non-existence, NAB’s unconstrained prosecutions all across the board cannot be called a coincidence: strings are being pulled, but perhaps for the right reasons.

NAB has also been prosecuting some high profile former military officials for alleged corruption. Last week, the name of General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani also surfaced in connection with a massive land scam. Reportedly, officials from the Defence Housing Authority (DHA) have requested NAB to investigate whether General Kayani was involved in irregularities related to DHA Valley.

Many believe that the chief of army staff has told NAB’s chairman that no one will create hurdles in the way of his agency’s investigations given they are across the board and fair. By brining the former military chief into the NAB’s jurisdiction, the army chief wants to send a clear message: there will be no exceptions this time whether it’s the military leadership or civilian.

The PML-N government is facing a dilemma now: one the one hand it has the constitutional authority and necessary mandate to constrain the Bureau’s powers but how will it reflect on the party’s image is an altogether different question.

During the first two and a half years of its government, generally, the PML-N has contained corruption to a great extent but there are still cases which can taint the party’s image if the prosecution were to take its due course, which the prime minister doesn’t want to see happening. The government seems in control and focused on delivering as much as it can in order to prepare smooth ground for the next general elections. Therefore, the prime minster doesn’t want to leave any loopholes as far as the next elections are concerned – one can expect the opposition parties, particularly PTI, to scribble around such issues.

Moreover, there are also reports that the NAB chairman is not allowing the PML-N government to interfere in the Bureau’s affairs, which has created further suspicions that the agency has formed some sort of unofficial liaison with the establishment. The government is reportedly mulling an ordinance to curtail the powers of NAB’s chairman. Any such constitutional amendment will make the chairman liable to the prime minister.

But the question is will the government bring such an amendment? Is it wise to do so? At the moment, the NAB chairman is constitutionally independent in administrative affairs and is not accountable to the prime minister or anyone else. Any such amendment will automatically reflect negatively on the government. Or perhaps it will further establish the government’s credentials as corrupt and as the one which is surely complicit in corruption.

The PPP, which has been facing the heat of NAB’s action, is also likely to support any move which curtails the Bureau’s powers. PPP has even proposed that NAB should be disbanded and a parliamentary commission should be formed to prosecute corruption cases. In a way it means giving politicians power to decide themselves whether they want to prosecute themselves or not.

Perhaps the prime minister’s stern warning was only meant to pre-empt NAB from taking any action against the government. Any such constitutional amendment at this point by the government will only damage the party’s standing. After the prime minister’s warning, Chaudhry Nisar, during a press conference, said that the government had no plan to clip the powers of NAB. And he further went on to say that there was need to support the “anti-graft body under the present circumstances.” Many have also predicted that the prime minister may sack NAB’s chairman but any such move may initiate some serious crisis in the country. Former President General Pervez Musharraf’s sacking of the then Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry is a one such example.

If the prime minister wants to establish his legacy as a statesman, he should allow and rather facilitate the accountability bureau’s investigations, be it against his own party. Moreover, supporting such investigations would only strengthen the democratic institutions in Pakistan and restore the civilian leadership’s lost credibility.