ISLAMABAD - A report submitted by the scrutiny committee to the Supreme Court regarding illegal appointments in the National Accountability Bureau is conspicuously silent on the show-cause notice issued to NAB Director-General Rawalpindi Irfan Naeem Mangi, who was also a member of the Panama Joint Investigation Team.

The name of Mangi was among those officials who had been served show-cause notices by the scrutiny committee probing the illegal appointments, induction of deputationists and absorptions on top slots in violation of rules and regulations.

The show-cause notices had been served to the NAB officials in compliance with the top court’s March 31, 2017, verdict in a suo moto action case.

Establishment Secretary Maroof Afzal, the committee chairman, has submitted an interim report, a copy available with The Nation, mentioning the cases of 22 officials from grade-17 to grade-21.

The report carries brief summaries of the show cause notices, replies of the officers and findings of the committee in each case of initial appointments and promotions, except for Mangi, who was also served notice last month to appear before the committee.

The Supreme Court larger bench, which heard the Panama Papers case, in its July 28 verdict had directed that “their (members of JIT) tenure of service shall be safeguarded and protected and no adverse actions of any nature including transfer and posting shall be taken against them without informing the monitoring judge of this court nominated by the chief justice of Pakistan.”

Sources in the top court confirmed that so far the monitoring judge, Justice Ijazul Ahsan, has not been approached by the scrutiny committee, seeking permission to probe the case of Mangi. It is believed that Mangi had traced deposed prime minister Nawaz Sharif’s Iqama and documents pertaining to his receivable salary, which led to his disqualification.

The report briefly discusses the cases, show-cause notices, replies and hearings by the committee and the rejoinder of four DGs, Zahir Shah, Brig (retd) Farooq Naser Awan, Muhammad Altaf Bawani and Hasnain Ahmed.

It also discusses the cases of 15 directors and additional directors of grade-20 including Attique ur Rehman, Mirza Sultan Muhammad Saleem, Farman Ullah, Fayyaz Ahmed Qureshi, Masood Alam,Mirza Muhammad Irfan Baig, Nauman Aslam, Shahzad Saleem, Raza Khan,Abdulah Hafeez Khan, Mujahid Akbar Baloch, SM Hasnain, Adul Hafeez Siddique, Zafar Iqbal, Ghulam Farooq.

Similarly, the report also discusses the cases of two officers of grade-19, Mubashar Gulzar and Lt-Col (retd) Tariq Mehmood Bhatti and one officer of grade-17 Muhammad Shoaib.

 “The committee is of the view that the selection committee at the time of consideration of his initial appointment did not examine the particular issue in depth so as to evaluate whether or not the experience of the officer in the relevant field justifies his appointment in the light of advertisement/NAB MAQs-2002. However, the committee now recommends that NAB may subject to confirmation of the contents of his experience certificate(s) from his previous employer(s) which he has submitted afresh in compliance with the directions may consider his retention as Additional Director (BS-19) in 2004 and Director General (BS-21) in 2013 in NAB,” the committee stated in its findings regarding Zahir Shah.

Similarly, regarding the case of Brig (retd) Farooq Naser Awan, the committee in its findings stated: “It is viewed that the officer concerned was required to possess the academic qualification and experience laid down in the advertisement. Prior to his regular appointment in the NAB, he was already working on a lump-sum contract basis as Principal Secretary to the Chairman NAB under section 28(f) of NAO-1999 and the experience certificate was not obtained by the NAB, the officer produced the experience certificate from his previous employer which certifies the relevancy of required experience. Therefore, it is recommended that NAB may subject to confirmation of the contents of his experience certificate(s) from his previous employer(s), consider his retention in NAB.”

 “The committee has viewed that the service rendered in BOI had been calculated as qualifying service for the purpose of promotion to director (BS-20) which is against the promotion policy, therefore, the committee recommends that subject to the decision of the competent authority for retention of the officer in service with respect to his initial appointment, NAB may convene a meeting of review board to re-consider his promotion to the post of director (BS-20) subject to satisfaction of the conditions for promotion, from the date when he actually becomes eligible for consideration, in the light of the NAB rules/promotion policy etc,” the committee stated in its findings in the case of Muhammad Altaf Bhawani.

In the case of Hussain Ahmed, the committee recommended that he did possess the relevant experience in inquiries and investigations so his retention may be considered in NAB and reconsider his promotion.

In the cases of Farman Ullah and Fayyaz Ahmed Qureshi, both grade-20 officers, the committee in its finding stated that the former could not satisfy the requirement of experience and recommended for his repatriation to his parent department.

In the cases of Saleem Shehzad and Raza Khan, the committee recommended that “the NAB may in the first place re-consider the case for promotion from BS-18 to BS-19, on a regular basis, when they actually become eligible subject to the completion of prescribed length of service and mandatory training in accordance with NAB rules and thereafter, reconsider their further promotions to BS-20, accordingly in the light of decision arrived at in case of his promotion of BS-19.

In the cases of Abdul Hafiz Khan and Mujahid Akbar Baloch, the committee recommended that “subject to the decision of the competent authority for retention of the officers in service, NAB may convene a meeting of review board to re-consider their promotions to the post of directors (BS-20), from the date when they actually become eligible for consideration, in the light of NAB rules.”

In the case of SM Hussnain and Abdul Hafiz Siddiqui, the committee recommended for “re-consideration for promotion from BS-17 to BS-18 in first place and then from BS-18 to BS-19 on a regular basis.”

In the cases of Zafar Iqbal Khan and Ghulam Farooq, the committee has recommended for reconsideration for promotion to the post of additional director (BS-19).

Similarly, regarding Mubashir Gulzar, Additional Director BS-19, the committee said, “he mislead the committee by submitting wrong statements and observed that he has no case for his repatriation to PAEC as well as retention in NAB.”

Regarding Lt-Col (retd) Tariq Mehmood Bhatti, the committee has recommended that “after scrutiny of his credentials by the Higher Education Commission, he may be allowed to continue in the NAB.”  Regarding Muhammad Shoaib of Grade 17, the committee concluded that “the NAB had already declined to consider his request for grant of relaxation under the NAB TCS-2002, therefore, the case stood decided and needed no further review.”

The committee has also recommended five cases of officers of grade-20 for retention in the NAB.