ISLAMABAD: The National Accountability Bureau (NAB) is ready to take up cases of vote selling and horse trading allegedly committed by 20 Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) MPAs from Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

One of the senior-most officials in the bureau told Dawn on condition of anonymity: “It is a ‘fit case’ of corruption that comes under NAB’s purview.”

At a recent press conference, PTI Chairman Imran Khan accused 20 party MPAs of selling their votes in favour of two PPP-backed candidates who won the Senate elections from the KP Assembly despite having only six MPAs in the assembly against requirement of 10 votes for one seat.

PTI chairman will have to provide credible evidence along with accusations against party MPAs, experts say

Mr Khan had given the MPAs 15 days to reply to show-cause notices explaining why they supported the PPP candidates, warning that their cases would otherwise be sent to NAB.

After his statement, questions arose as to whether NAB could deal with cases regarding the selling of votes, as opposed to any other anti-graft organisation or the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP).

Almost all the political parties accused each other of horse trading after the Senate elections.

The senior NAB official said that the case is fit to be investigated by NAB. “In fact, the MPAs exposed by Imran Khan fall under the definition of public office holder, and thus come under the purview of the National Accountability Ordinance (NAO) 1999,” he added.

When contacted, the NAB spokesperson did not give a clear response from the bureau on the matter, saying: “NAB will look into the issue, whether it can take up the case, whenever it will be formally referred to NAB.”

He added that the bureau would thoroughly review the actual charges levelled by Mr Khan against his own party’s MPAs.

Under the National Accountability Ordinance, a holder of public office is defined as: “A person who is, or has been, the Chief Minister, Speaker Provincial Assembly, Deputy Speaker Provincial Assembly, Provincial Minister, Advisor to the Chief Minister, Special Assistant to the Chief Minister, Provincial Parliamentary Secretary, Member of the Provincial Assembly, Advocate General including Additional Advocate General and Assistant Advocate General, Political Secretary, 5** Consultant to the Chief Minister and who holds or has held a post or office with the rank or status of a Provincial Minister.”

The MPAs in question have held individual and joint press conferences, as well as using other forums, to reject Mr Khan’s allegations and proclaim their innocence. They believe that Mr Khan accused them of selling their votes in the Senate elections without evidence, and they therefore had the right to move the courts and other relevant forums – such as the ECP – to remove the stigma associated with their political careers.

The NAB official said NAB could deal with any white collar crime committed by a public office holder or any other individual who deceived or cheated the public at large.

He said Mr Khan would have to provide NAB with credible evidence against his MPAs for the investigation.

However, the official added that NAB has not investigated any such case against a legislator in the past. If sent by the PTI chairman, this case would be the first regarding horse trading or selling loyalties to another party by accepting monetary benefit.

NAB has become proactive since its new chairman, retired Justice Javed Iqbal, assumed charge of the office last October. These days, a record number of corruption cases against politicians and bureaucrats are being registered and investigated.

According to for NAB prosecutor general Irfan Qadir, the bureau could entertain Mr Khan’s complaint under section 9 of the NAO.

He said that if it has been proved that the accused individuals gained monetary benefit, and this was reflected in their bank accounts, they would be liable to face penalties.

Another legal expert on the NAO, advocate Amjad Iqbal Qureshi said NAB could deal with the MPAs cases, but Mr Khan would have to provide credible evidence along with his complaint or NAB would not proceed with an investigation.

“Although MPAs fall in the definition of public office holder, simply a complaint will not be adequate for any action against them. It is the duty of the complainant to provide evidence against them,” he said.

Published in Dawn, April 27th, 2018