PESHAWAR: Since its inception in the late ’90s, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) had been nurturing hope in its supporters for a corruption-free country, based on strict accountability standards that would equally be applied to all citizens, no matter how powerful and influential they are.
Luckily, PTI formed its first government in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province in 2013.
As far as the elimination of corruption is concerned, the nascent PTI government was not fortunate enough as it had inherited a toothless anti-corruption law, promulgated during the rule of President Muhammad Ayub Khan.
This outdated law—the West Pakistan Anti-Corruption Establishment Ordinance, 1961—came into force 63 years ago, and has failed badly as over 99 percent accused go scot-free.
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Ehtisab Commission Act passed in 2013 during party’s first term was repealed in 2018.
Bearing in mind the inadequacy of the existing law, the PTI’s government in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa introduced a new law—the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Ehtisab Commission Act, 2013. Under this law an Ehtisab Commission was established with a retired lieutenant-general, Hamid Khan, appointed as its first Director General.
However, disagreements between General (retd) Hamid and then-Chief Minister Pervez Khattak led to amendments to the act, rendering the commission ineffective. The law, amended in 2015, stripped powers from the Director General and transferred them to various boards. Additionally, it became mandatory to obtain permission from the Chief Secretary before initiating inquiries against government officers.
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Assembly 2019 report says, the Ehtisab Commission cost Rs. 1.03 to the national kitty without a single penny recovery of the embezzled money.
Ultimately, the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Ehtisab Commission Act was repealed by the Mahmood Khan-led government in 2018.
According to a report presented in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Assembly in 2019, the Ehtisab Commission cost Rs. 1.03 to the national kitty without a single penny recovery of the embezzled money.
Presently, PTI holds a three-fourths majority in the provincial legislature, but despite this strong mandate the province continues to operate under the Anti-Corruption Establishment Ordinance of 1961.
Anti-Corruption Establishment (ACE) Director Sadeeq Anjum says, “ever since its inception, no meaningful changes were made to this ordinance.”
Performance of ACE
According to the data obtained through the Right to Information Act, Anti-Corruption Establishment received 1,352 corruption complaints in 2024. While 2,498 cases from previous years were already pending, bringing the total to 3,850.
During the current year, as many as 1,380 complaints were disposed of. Those complaints were dismissed in the initial stage either due to lack of merit; or on jurisdiction issue, and in some cases the accused parties/individuals preferred to submit the embezzled money.
Likewise, 520 new inquiries were initiated with 365 inquiries completed. By the end of 2024, a total of 2,077 inquiries were still pending, while the number of unresolved complaints stood at 2,470.
The department registered only 38 new cases and has a total of 83 corruption cases in hand. It filed 38 First Information Reports (FIRs) and arrested 87 individuals throughout the year, but only two convictions were secured in special anti-corruption courts.
99.25 percent of allocated accountability budget is spent on payment of salaries
The main reason for the low conviction rate seems to be the lack of manpower and financial constraints. Anjum tells WE News that the Anti-Corruption Establishment has a total workforce of 397 persons. “The department’s total budget for the current fiscal year is over Rs. 400 million. Out of which Rs. 386.5 million [99.25 per cent] is disbursed on staff salaries. For operational duties, logistics, and utility bills, the department has only 13.5 million available.”
Challenges
Astonishingly, the Commission needs permission from the Chief Secretary to investigate or arrest officials of grade-19 or higher. The Anti-Corruption Establishment director explains it: “The Anti-Corruption Department director can register a case against any government officer up to Grade 18. However, for officers in Grade 19 and above, approval must be sought from the Chief Secretary.
Similarly, after completing an inquiry, the director can arrest officers up to Grade 16. For the arrest of officers in Grade 17 or above, permission from the Chief Secretary is required.”
Rules stipulate bureaucratic hurdles in bringing high officials under any scrutiny
But the law makes no mention of the eventuality as to whose permission would be sought if a solid complaint is filed against the chief secretary himself.
Special Advisor to Chief Minister on Anti-Corruption Musaddiq Abbasi candidly links the low conviction rate (which is less than one per cent) with the loopholes in the law and the shortage of the adequate staff and courts.
“Only two special anti-corruption courts function in the entire province. Each district has one Circle Officer who reports to the district’s Assistant Director, and a divisional-level Investigating Officer oversees broader investigations.”
The Establishment’s director for technical affairs, Muhammad Haseeb, also laments the dearth of staff to run the department efficiently. He goes on to add that most of the staff, including operational officers, come on deputation from the police department while legal cases are handled by general prosecutors from the law department rather than dedicated anti-corruption prosecutors.
At times, the Anti-Corruption Establishment faces the charges of misuse of authority. During a December 2024 session of the KP Assembly, PTI lawmaker Laiq Khan alleged that three months back a Rs. three billion corruption scandal in his home-district Torghar was reported to the Anti-Corruption Establishment. “But no action has so far been taken.”
He accuses the district’s circle inspector of routinely summoning government officials as if they were his subordinates. “He humiliates them and is involved in monthly extortion”.
Proposed Reforms
Abbasi acknowledges that reliance on the police personnel creates inefficiencies, as policing and anti-corruption require different skill-sets. Efforts are underway to introduce new legislation to improve sentencing guidelines, establish a dedicated anti-corruption workforce, and enhance case processing. Nevertheless, he admits that it could take one to one and a half year to implement these reforms.
Furthermore, the director of the Establishment mostly comes from the police department and sometimes from bureaucracy, usually an 18-grade officer. One cannot expect him to take action against police officials or bureaucrats—especially those senior to him—as he may have to work under them again upon returning to his parent department.
