The New Nation - Internet Edition

IT needs understanding among concerned quarters that the proposed Truth and Accountability Commission (TAC) would not be creating two different standards within the same legal system - one for those who would come under it and those who won't and be required to face the ordinary processes of the law. But the reality is that offenders would be required to be punished or to pay penalties under both systems. The ones who would confess their corruption before the TAC would not go free. They would be spared imprisonment but would have to pay fines proportionate to their corruption and their ill-gotten wealth would be forfeited to the state treasury.

The TAC is also seen as arising out of a practical need of easing the pressures on the traditional legal system in force. Cases from the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) and the special committee dealing with serious crimes, have swelled the number of corruption cases stressing severely the capacities of the courts to deal with them in time. The costs and other burdens on the government have also gone up. Cost, time and energy of the government can be saved from voluntary disclosures by the offenders.

More significantly, some offenders who have been otherwise making a positive contribution to the country's economy by operating big business houses but who remain now in jail, would be in a position to be free and go on discharging their beneficial role in the economy. As it is, some major business and industrial conglomerates have been experiencing substantial curtailment of their activities following the internment of their owners and the economy also suffered. TAC can help change the situation for the better. The TAC will not be something inconsistent with the prevailing legal system but only a pragmatic addition allowing for plea bargain that is practiced in western countries.