Person who was untruthful or dishonest or profligate had no place in discharging the noble task of law making and administering the affairs of State in government office-Muhammad Siddique Baloch v Jehangir Khan Tareen PLD 2016 Supreme Court 97
A thorough scrutiny of legislators' declarations by any competent person can lead to the disqualification of a majority of them for making misrepresentations under oath as most of them cannot justify their standard of living vis-à-vis disclosure of meagre salary income from the State as their only source of income. Unfortunately, however, all agencies such as National Accountability Bureau (NAB), Federal Investigation Agency (FIA), Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) and Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) have failed to discharge their duties, especially that of investigating the financial affairs of legislators.
Shockingly, a vast majority of public officeholders are negligent, lax and blasé about their tax obligations. This list, lamentably, includes the Prime Minister of the country and heads of major political parties. In the wake of disclosures through the Panama Papers, holding of many properties abroad through offshore companies by our politicians, directly or through offspring, have surfaced. None of these politicians has ever mentioned any interest outside Pakistan in any property or business. Who will investigate this matter? NAB, FBR, FIA and State Bank of Pakistan (SBP) have already expressed inability to proceed in the matter. In this backdrop, the recent decision of ECP to scrutinise the assets/liabilities/income/expenditure declarations of legislators, with the help of NAB, SBP, FIA and FBR, is just another announcement. Critics say that all these dysfunctional institutions are captive in the hands of the corrupt and mighty and ECP lacks any effective and comprehensive legal and procedural framework for accountability of the elected representatives.
The most glaring example of FBR's inefficiency is perpetual inaction against the Prime Minister who, as per documents submitted to ECP, is a late filer of wealth statements for Tax Years, 2010, 2011 & 2012. On 09-10-2012, at the time of filing return of income for Tax Year 2012, automation system warned Mian Nawaz Sharif [NTN 0667649]: "Your income 12,407,488 is equal and greater than 500,000, therefore you must file your wealth statement". He ignored this warning and filed wealth statement on 22-03-2013 (just 9 days before filing of nomination papers). For Tax years 2010 and 2011, he received the same warning on 30-10-2010 and 21-11-2011, respectively, but filed wealth statements after a lapse of many months. Till to date no action is taken for this violation of law that attracts penalty under section 182(1) of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001. The same is the case with the Punjab Revenue Board where he filed returns for agricultural income for years 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13 after a lapse of 30, 18 and 6 months respectively. Will ECP scrutinise declarations of the Prime Minister from this perspective?
The above incontrovertible facts, in fact own admission of the Prime Minister in nomination papers filed on 31-03-2013 seemingly confirm wilful default in discharging admitted tax liabilities in time, both under the federal and provincial tax codes. It is inexcusable that till today no action has been taken by tax authorities. Despite violations of Articles 62 and 63 of the Constitution and section 12 of Representation of the People Act, 1976, [Sharifs' taxes, Business Recorder, May 20, 2016], he has been ruling since June 5, 2013. This confirms that our democratic (sic) system lacks accountability of those who enjoy money power that has crippled all institutions.
How will ECP scrutinise the assets/liabilities/expenses of the ruling family when it allowed Nawaz Sharif and Shahbaz Sharif to contest election in 2013 despite the fact that it received information from SBP that at that point of time loan of Rs 4.9 billion was outstanding against companies in which they had material interest? They borrowed money from nine banks during 1994-95 [Loan default: NAB shares data on Sharif graft references, Express Tribune, April 5, 2013] and did not return the same till the date of filing of nomination papers for election 2013 on the plea that NAB confiscated their properties which, according to them, were worth more than the amount of the loans. The question was not that of worth of properties but whether money was due or not at the time of contesting the elections. Even otherwise, they got all assets back in 2011 (see order of Lahore High Court reported as PLD 2012 Lahore 515).
Law does not permit any loan defaulter (where payment is due for any reason) to contest the election unless payment is made. Admittedly, the Sharif family "paid Rs 5.22 billion by December 2014 under the head of all loans, mark-up, cost of fund and other charges payable by Ittefaq Foundries and a consortium of banks has issued clearance certificates in this regard", revealed by Shahbaz Sharif in a press conference held in Lahore on July 8, 2015 as "a representative of the Sharif family" [Sharifs say all loans are settled by December 2014, Dawn, July 9, 2015]. Thus, as loan defaulters they were not eligible to contest election in 2013.
It is just a myth that SBP, SECP, FBR, NAB or FIA or any other department will help ECP in scrutinising declarations of the legislators. FBR has been sleeping over the case of Hudabiya Paper Mills Limited that stopped filing income tax returns after the order of a court to avoid disclosing how loan was repaid or a part written off. Every company under section 114 of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 is bound to file tax returns.
Hudabiya Paper Mills filed writ [PLD 2012 Lahore 515] in 2010 for return of their properties confiscated by NAB, but income tax returns were neither filed nor enforced by FBR as evident from Tax Directories of 2013, 2014 and 2015. SECP also did not ask the company to file annual statements. How did company obtain loan outside Pakistan and what properties were pledged? What documents were submitted to SBP, FBR and SECP at the time of taking loan and how was money sent abroad to settle the matter to avoid the sale of Mayfair properties attached by the Court? These questions remain unanswered. The petitioners, neither in petitions nor during the hearing, requested the Supreme Court to order NAB, FIA and FBR to produce the record of this company to ascertain the facts.
The reality of accountability and transparency in Pakistan of affairs of its rulers, the rich and mighty is bitter and painful. People rightly complain that laws are only for the weak and the system as a whole is now captive in the hands of the unscrupulous businessmen-turn-rulers. These privileged members of society have proved time and again that they are above law and impervious from any kind of accountability. (The writers, lawyers and partners in Huzaima, Ikram & Ijaz, are Adjunct Faculty at Lahore University of Management Sciences (LUMS). The views expressed in this article are not necessarily those of the newspaper)