ISLAMABAD: The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) is seeking to expand its power, as its existing strength is insufficient to handle matters involving mega-corruption and take action against those who have embezzled public funds.

In a meeting on Wednesday, the PAC admitted its weakness during a briefing of Employees Old-Age Benefit Institution (EOBI) chairman Sualeh Farooqui, when a lawmaker asked Auditor General of Pakistan (AGP) Rana Assad Amin why the EOBI’s case was not reported to the PAC in 2012, when the irregularities were being committed.

The AGP told the PAC that auditors had raised audit objections in their 2012, 2013 and 2014 reports, but the PAC did not take up the reports in a timely manner.

At existing strength, PAC incapable of handling mega-corruption cases, acting against embezzlers

The AGP also pointed out a flaw in the existing audit mechanism, saying under its laws the audit office has to submit audit reports of all ministries to the president by the end of every year. The president then forwards these reports to parliament, after which they come to the PAC for discussion.

He said this procedure takes months, and since the PAC is already clearing an existing backlog, the committee cannot take up these reports in a timely fashion.

“I have also proposed amendments to the Auditor General of Pakistan Ordinance, which would enable the audit authorities to send certain audit reports to the president without waiting until the year’s end,” he said.

The committee would subsequently take up these matters immediately. Under the existing system, audit reports are tabled before the PAC after a gap of three to four years.

“But, for this practice it is necessary that the PAC clear its backlog,” the AGP added.

Despite being the apex accountability forum in the country – superior to forums such as the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) and the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) – the PAC, practically, cannot take action against any official accused of embezzling billions of rupees, PAC chairman Mr Shah said.

“The only thing we can do is scold the delinquent officials. At most, the committee can send them to jail for three months,” he added.

Criticising consecutive stay orders on nearly all matters related to important audit paras, which restrain the committee from proceeding against corrupt officials and private parties, Mr Shah said the committee becomes helpless when a civil judge issued a stay order in a matter being discussed by the PAC.

The PAC has, on a number of occasions, deferred discussions on audit paras after being told the matter in question was sub judice. Recently, the committee stopped debating a case regarding the status of an industrial plot after it was informed that the officials responsible had obtained a stay order from the court.

He said there should be a distinction between the PAC’s domain and that of the civil courts, and legislation was needed to stop overstepping into the other’s jurisdiction.

Mr Shah suggested that the committee have its own secretariat, workforce and related staff to deal with urgent cases.

He claimed that the committee has recovered Rs119 billion in the last three years, with a staff of 30 individuals. He said the recovered sum should have been much higher had the committee been provided adequate resources.

“The PAC will meet the speaker to discuss the establishment of its secretariat and amending the PAC terms of reference,” he said.

Civil society activists have also called for the empowerment of otherwise “cosmetic” parliamentary committees for effective executive oversight.

Free and Fair Election Network (Fafen) representative Mudassir Rizvi told Dawn that while it claims to be a supreme institution, the parliament is no such things. Subsequently, parliamentary committees like the PAC are also toothless, but take cosmetic measures to pretend they are powerful bodies.

He said in the United States parliamentary committees pass binding directions and the executive implements them. In Pakistan, the PAC – or any other parliamentary committee – cannot issue directions, but sends recommendations to the relevant quarters which are not binding.

He said committees are also dominant in India. A parliamentary panel can summon a minister in certain cases, which is why the executive takes their recommendations seriously.

He said parliamentary committees need to be strengthened and empowered to deal with matters of public interest with full authority.

Published in Dawn, September 1st, 2016