The “Ethics Retreat”
In keeping with the requirements of good governance, National Accountability Bureau (NAB) recently organized a unique event, an “Ethics Retreat” for the members of the Federal Cabinet. The informal Seminar cum Workshop for the principal leaders of the government was attended by the President, the Prime Minister and their close aides. Chairman National Accountability Bureau (NAB) Lt Gen Munir Hafeez must be congratulated for bringing home to the leaders of this country how transparency has an inherent inter-action with good governance. The many successes NAB has achieved in bringing accountability into governance in Pakistan is certainly a matter of pride for Pervez Musharraf. Accountability has been institutionalized, while corruption at the highest level has not been eradicated it is not that rampant (and/or blatant) as it once was. For recovering quite some sums of illegally acquired wealth, NAB has not only to be commended but eulogized. The idea of a “Retreat” for Cabinet members was excellent, this modern corporate practice for informal education of the managerial elite is in vogue in all big multi-nationals (MNCs) as well as leading corporate entities of the western world.
While NAB will be Pervez Musharraf’s lasting legacy, he must take into account that major issues that sully NAB’s otherwise pristine reputation, viz (1) selective accountability (2) plea bargaining and (3) the failure to target corruption among the Armed Forces hierarchy and superior judges.
Selective accountability leads to the charge that NAB is used for political purpose. As much as the President may deny it, regretfully NAB has been used very ruthlessly not only pre-elections 2002 but also post-elections to ensure a Parliamentary majority for the Establishment party. I am also afraid that the “plea bargaining” concept undercuts NAB’s credibility. Why should there be difference between “blue-collar” crime and “white-collar” crime, particularly when “white-collar” criminals get away with much more? This gives the criminal an available “window of opportunity” to exploit by removing the psychological “Sword of Damocles” of incarceration. By returning a part of their ill-gotten looted millions they can live comfortably (and respectably) thereafter on the balance. Is that morally correct for anyone to accept? More importantly it also leaves a grey area where those who are negotiating the “plea bargain” with “white collar” criminals, become susceptible to either bribes or favours. NAB should conduct an exercise to enquire how many of their former senior personnel are “living beyond their known means of income.” Most of them will probably get a clean bill of health, and more power to them, what is the conclusion if there are three or four guilty individuals?
NAB must target the guilty among the Armed Forces and the superior judiciary. In fact a “Retreat” on the question of “ethics” should be a must, separately for the superior judiciary and the senior military hierarchy. The Armed Forces has an effective in-built system for combating corruption but it does not cater effectively for those on deputation with civilian entities or for areas like Defence Housing Authorities (DHAs). One must note with great satisfaction that at the request of Lt Gen Shahid Aziz Comd 4 Corps at Lahore, the Vice Chief of Army Staff Gen Ahsan Salim Hayat has suspended the entire DHA Lahore management hierarchy for enquiry into possible corruption. To their credit neither Ahsan nor Shahid have ever been “mentioned in real-estate dispatches”. Only they can target the corrupt without fear of exposure whose courage of conviction has not been compromised. The only way to stop the mostly unfounded rumours about corruption swirling around the senior military hierarchy because of the known shenanigans of a corrupt handful is to sound a public “retreat” on the wrongdoers. One is hopeful that the enquiry will not become a whitewash and will reach its logical conclusion.
Why question the credibility of the judicial system and/or blame the judges alone? They can only render judgment on the (mostly false) evidence brought before them. Not only for NAB but for the whole judicial system it is extremely important to, viz (1) give exemplary punishment to those who gave false witness, i.e. commit perjury and (2) give exemplary punishment to those appointed to conduct enquires who are engaged in cover-ups. Perjury of every kind must be targeted with the same punishment viz (1) as those who would have suffered from their falsehood or (2) have escaped punishment because of their falsehood.
The President, PM and the Cabinet members (or anyone in a seat of power) do not have to go into any “Retreat” to ask themselves, “Is my conscience clear that anyone i.e. relatives, friends, associates, etc, who have access to me, is not benefiting in any manner (particularly financial) from the powers (and/or perception thereof) of the office that I am occupying?”. When the senior leadership of the country can ensure that the “insiders” are not taking advantage of their position of influence, if only by “names-dropping”, accountability will cease being rhetoric alone, and what is being preached at the “Ethics Retreat” will be put into practice.
Did you enjoy this post? Why not leave a comment below and continue the conversation, or subscribe to my feed and get articles like this delivered automatically to your feed reader.
Comments
No comments yet.
Leave a comment