Islamabad: The National Accountability Bureau (NAB), Pakistan’s top anti-graft watchdog, will challenge acquittal of the country’s media mogul, Editor-in-Chief and owner of the Jang/Geo media group Mir Shakil-ur-Rehman and two others.
The NAB legal team has contended that the “Accountability Court did not apply judicial mind in the case”.
The NAB will file the petition in the high court this month challenging Mir Shakil’s acquittal.
An accountability court of Lahore had on Monday acquitted the Jang group editor-in-chief and Lahore Development Authority’s (LDA) former Director General (DG) Humayun Faiz Rasool and Director of Land Development department Mian Bashir Ahmad in the case.
According to the NAB’s draft, the accountability court is yet to examine “important prosecution witnesses”.
NAB case was not merely based on violation of exemption policy, rather it was ‘grant and rendition’ of undue benefit to accused Mir Shakil by other accused persons/public office holders at the cost of state exchequer by misusing their authority for the personal benefit of Mir Shakil, the NAB draft says.
A case cannot be decided on merit unless prosecution is afforded an equal opportunity to present its point of view before the court through examination of witnesses and record, says the NAB legal team in the proposed draft.
“The court, actually, did not apply judicial mind and fell in error. The NAB case was not relating to the payment of reserve price instead of market price. Public utility like allotment of roads can be termed as an abuse of power, like can anyone wish to buy Mall Road by offering competitive market price of road?,” it further says.
‘Beneficiary not abettor’
The NAB’s draft contends that the court made a factual mistake by assuming Mir Shakil-ur-Rehman as abettor. As a matter of fact, he is the beneficiary in the case. He was the illegal beneficiary in the case whereas the court has omitted this fact in its judgment, it says.
The draft further says the court did not appreciate the entire record placed before it.
“As per record attached with the reference, the Price Assessment Committee (PAC) was headed /convened by the additional director general and four directors of various departments of LDA. Moreover, there is no legal hindrance on the constitution of PAC on the directions of NAB. Thus, the observation of the court is against the facts,” the draft says.
According to the draft, NAB filed the reference against the accused persons on their involvement in the offence.
No active role against other LDA officers was found during the investigation, says the draft adding, hence no other DG/director was arraigned as accused.
