The New Nation - Internet Edition

ACCORDING to media reports, the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) chairman has said that any compromise of the newly formed Truth and Accountability Commission (TAC) with big corruption would not be acceptable to them. His reported comment came within a day after the TAC started functioning. However, the ACC chairman has expressed the hope that both the commissions would be able to work with understanding. The Truth and Accountability Commission has been formed for a period of five months with the aim of curbing corruption and reducing the massive load of corruption cases through quick disposal of the same.

Graft suspects may avoid imprisonment through voluntary confession of corruption and surrender of ill-gotten wealth. Those persons will be barred for a period of less than five years from holding any public office. The law clearly defines the jurisdiction of the TAC. It is obliged to discharge its duties according to the law and, as such, there is no scope of compromise. Then why does the question of compromise arise? If this is the stand of the ACC then what purpose TAC would serve.

This is an expression of incoherence of different government agencies. Such contradiction will not serve the good intention of the government to allow corrupt people back to normal life. These types of contradictions were also noticed in a few other cases. The government gave an opportunity of whitening undeclared money through payment of tax and penalties. But the whole thing took a frustrating turn when chairman of the National Board of Revenues reportedly hesitated to give legal recognition to such wealth. Some months back, the ACC was also reported to have asked NBR to disclose the names of such taxpayers. Contradictory stands of the agencies of the government are completely undesirable.