A Supreme Court bench hearing petitions against the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) questioned the chairman of the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) on Wednesday about alleged laundered money lying frozen in a Swiss bank and the amount spent by the state on the case, but was disappointed by the answers.

'Not a single confidence-inspiring answer has been given,' Justice Mohammad Sair Ali, a member of the 17-judge bench, observed. He said that the replies given by NAB Chairman Nawid Ahsan lacked credibility.

The court ordered Mr Ahsan to furnish by Thursday complete information about the status of $60 million allegedly laundered in the SGS case but lying dormant in the Swiss bank, status of the government's claim on the money and the names of claimants.

If the government was not the claimant then where would the money go, why were the case documents picked up from a lawyer's office in Geneva and kept in Pakistan's high commission in London, who ordered the shifting of the papers and whether proceedings before the Swiss court and attorney general were terminated at the behest of NAB, the judges asked.

The court continued to seek answers from NAB despite an assurance given by acting Attorney General Shah Khawar that all facts regarding the cases pending before the Swiss magistrate and attorney general would be provided.

'It appears that the court is widening the scope of the hearing, rather than focussing on the controversial amnesty law, by opening the entire gambit of cases pending even in foreign lands having no effect of the NRO,' a constitutional expert told Dawn.

The references were prepared by the Ehtesab Bureau headed by Saifur Rehman in the 1990s and proceedings were initiated before the Swiss attorney general and magistrate on the basis of a letter written by former attorney general Chaudhry Farooq, Mr Khawar said.

He said there were 25 claimants of the money in the Swiss bank. After the promulgation of the NRO, the NAB prosecutor general and former attorney general Malik Qayyum went to Geneva to request the closure of the case, he said.

The request was not accepted by the Swiss attorney general who said he would deal with the case in accordance with the local law, he said.
The NAB chairman told the court that the government had sought mutual legal assistance through the former attorney general and when the cases were withdrawn, it was also done through Mr Qayyum.

He conceded that the NAB had not pursued the matter of the money lying with the Swiss bank.

NAB Prosecutor General Dr Danishwar informed the court that after meeting him the Swiss attorney general had made a statement before the press that he would not prosecute the cases.

'What is the hitch in conceding that NAB withdrew the case pending with Swiss authorities,' Justice Javed Iqbal asked and recalled that there was some conviction in the money laundering case.

'You have to show that the interest of the people was served in dealing with the Swiss cases as an indecent haste was shown,' he observed.

He asked NAB to submit details of trips to Geneva by officials of the bureau and the Federal Investigation Agency on the pretext of pursuing the case.

The court also asked why was the record of the money laundering case shifted to London from Geneva when there were several Pakistani missions in Switzerland, including in Bern.

The NAB chairman said the missions in Geneva did not enjoy the facility of sending articles through a diplomatic bag.

He said the prosecutor general was sent to recover the documents under his supervision and Pakistan's high commission in the United Kingdom was informed about the move.

He said the documents were NAB's property and would certainly reach Islamabad. 'It appears to me as a James Bond-like action,' Justice Sair said in a lighter vein.

The acting attorney general quipped that the impression had been created by a section of the media.

He complained that the electronic media was not honouring the court's restraining observation about discussion on the matter.

The chief justice again asked the electronic media to restrain from discussing the sub judice matter in accordance with norms. Otherwise, the court would be compelled to issue orders in black and white, he said.

Justice Raja Fayyaz observed that NAB had also not given details about cases pending in Madrid and England. He said the bureau had become just ministerial staff of the government and nothing more.

Justice Jawwad S. Khawaja asked why did NAB start work only after the court had taken cognizance of the matter.

'We are not after the blood of anyone but only interested in ensuring that the money should come back if it belongs to the people,' the chief justice said.

The day's proceedings also provided a moment of introspection when during arguments by senior counsel Abdul Hafeez Pirzada, Justice Tassuduq Jillani asked why do the rulers always commit the same mistakes in the art of governance.

'For how long we will continue standing here as day in and day out we are committing the same mistakes and errors,' the chief justice observed, adding: 'When will we mend our ways.'

'Had we adhered to the Constitution, we would not be hearing from the Transparency International that we were a corrupt country and ranked 42nd in their index,' he said.

Advocate Pirzada said the remedy lay in accepting mistakes. He stressed the need for a new beginning with a clean slate and regretted that the country was fragmenting and the enemy was from within.

'This nation deserves better because we are good people and have always excelled in foreign countries,' he said.

He said the textile industry of England had been revived by immigrants from here. 'Nothing is wrong with the people. The only problem is that we have not strengthened institutions and educated the people.'

Justice Khalilur Rehman Ramday said it was painful to see that 'as individuals we are always busy securing benefits for ourselves. We need reconciliation with ourselves by improving norms, morality and values instead of making money. Where will we go with all this money. Look what happened to the Shah of Iran and President Marcos of the Philippines. We have shown the way to the nation by offering sacrifices over the past two years but we cannot build the nation and it has to build itself.

'When the nation and the people are on the right path then success is the only answer and all of us sitting here is the example.'

He also observed in a satirical way that he wished the NRO could speak to lament that no one who had taken benefit of it was coming forward to defend it.

The acting attorney general also presented a summary sent to former president Pervez Musharraf before the promulgation of the NRO.

Sindh Advocate General Yusuf Leghari presented a voluminous list of cases withdrawn by a review board under the NRO, but the court asked him to file it again in a proper manner.