The Senate unanimously passed a bill allowing the government to confiscate benami properties. Interestingly the government had proposed to make the bill enforceable from a date of its choosing while Opposition Leader in the Senate Aitzaz Ahsan insisted on making it enforceable at once. In a break from tradition, the three Federally Administrated Tribal Areas representatives voted with Ahsan that led to a majority of 18 in favour of the bill being implemented at once, to 16 opposed to it. The bill would now be sent back to the National Assembly with all the amendments for a passage where the government has a clear majority. One would urge the government to accept this particular amendment immediately as any further delay in its implementation would simply allow those engaged in benami transactions more time to find alternative ways to park their ill-gotten wealth.

The objective of benami transactions is to evade taxes; it necessitates purchasing property in someone else’s name because if the individual purchases it in his/her own name the obvious mismatch between assets and resources would alert the audit branch of the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) prompting investigations and seizure of bank accounts and, after the bill is passed from the assembly with the Senate amendments, seizure of property as well. Sceptics warn that given massive capital flight from Pakistan (reflected by the purchase of 6,106 properties costing 2.178 billion dollars in 2016 only in Dubai – a figure released by the Dubai Land Department showing a 5.43 percent rise from the previous year) – the benami transactions bill, if implemented appropriately and across the board, would go a long way in ensuring that tax evaders are duly brought to book.

The key words however are an appropriate across-the-board implementation. It is however unfortunate that in Pakistan there is a tendency for the ruling party to use such laws only against those members of the opposition who are vehement in their criticism of the ruling elite, prompting vehement denials and claims of political victimization. Pakistan has signed many international conventions/treaties relating to money laundering, tax evasion and child labour laws and passed such laws in parliament but, disturbingly, implementation remains severely compromised due to lack of resources while other laws, like the anti-money laundering law, are simply used as pawns in the political power game. In the event that an influential ruling party member is implicated in violation of anti-corruption and anti-money laundering laws investigation by state institutions against that individual are delayed for long periods of time or simply not initiated in some cases. It is this aspect of implementation of our laws that needs an urgent revisit and one can only hope that a system of appointments on merit rather than in towing the incumbent government’s line be implemented.

In this connection, it is relevant to note that the apex court passed a judgment in 2013 in favour of a petition filed by the then member of the opposition Khawaja Asif on flawed appointments by the PPP-led coalition government. The verdict directed the government to set up a three-member commission comprising individuals of integrity with the responsibility of appointing heads of statutory, autonomous, semi-autonomous and regulatory bodies on merit alone. While Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif did set up such a board soon after he came to power yet when the board members refused to rubberstamp the names recommended by members of the cabinet he disregarded their suggestion which accounts for their resignations. Ironically, it was the PML-N government that went back to court and in 2014 a 10-page judgment authored by Justice Ijaz Ahmed Chaudhry held that it was the exclusive preserve of the federal government to appoint, on merit, the heads of statutory, autonomous, semi-autonomous and regulatory authorities under the relevant acts/ordinances.

To conclude, at present the performance of some of those appointed by the federal government is poor as reflected in several entities’ balance sheets and one would hope that the Prime Minister revisits his earlier support for a three-man commission of men of integrity to make appointments based on merit of heads of statutory, autonomous, semi-autonomous and regulatory bodies.