Experts term the act a criminal breach of trust, and misappropriation
Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK)
Legislative Assembly Speaker, Sardar Ghulam Sadiq, has
The move, according to some
esteemed legal and constitutional experts, is tantamount to “criminal breach of
trust and misappropriation” and can land Mr Sadiq in serious trouble if
challenged at an appropriate forum, such as the accountability bureau or
election commission.
Mr Sadiq was elected Member
Legislative Assembly (MLA) for the second consecutive term in July 2006 from LA
18 Poonch-2 as a nominee of the PPP, which was then the ruling party in
Islamabad but had to sit on opposition benches in AJK until an in-house change
on January 6, 2009 saw it sharing power with a rebel group of Muslim Conference
for nine months.
However, some five weeks before the
in-house change, Mr Sadiq was appointed as adviser to the AJK Council chairman
on November 30, 2008 under section 21 (8) of the AJK Interim Constitution Act,
1974, which empowers the chairman, that is the prime minister of Pakistan, to
appoint an adviser from amongst the six elected members of Council or 49
members of the Legislative Assembly.
Generally regarded as “toothless,”
these advisers enjoy perks and privileges of a federal minister of the state
and sit in the AJK Council secretariat in Islamabad.
Mr Sadiq held this position until
July 4, 2011, a week after the general elections which he won for the third
consecutive term from the same constituency.
The Assembly was installed on July
25, 2011, and he was elected as speaker.
From November 30, 2008 to July 4,
2011, Mr Sadiq received a total of Rs 5.141 million from the AJK Council as
basic salary, sumptuary and utility allowances and house rent. Of this amount,
he paid Rs 545,507 as income tax.
However, despite having been
appointed as adviser (by virtue of being an MLA), Mr Sadiq did not discontinue
claiming perks and privileges of MLA.
From December 1, 2008 to June 30,
2011, he received around Rs 1,833,960 from the LA secretariat as basic salary,
house rent, office maintenance, sumptuary and telephone allowances. Of this
amount, Rs 111,000 was deducted as income tax.
According to Raja Muhammad Hanif,
an acclaimed legal pundit, Mr Sadiq had unlawfully claimed salary and
allowances of MLA after his appointment as adviser.
“Emoluments of an MLA are included
in the emoluments of a minister or adviser… No lawmaker can receive both
emoluments simultaneously,” he said.
“Mr Sadiq has deceived both the
Assembly and Council secretariats to claim dual benefits in an act that amounts
to corruption. It’s a fit case for the AJK Ehtesab Bureau provided an
application is lodged against him by someone,” he said.
Mr Hanif’s views were endorsed by
Abdul Rashid Abbasi, a former LA Speaker as well as a senior legal and
constitutional expert.
“It’s an established principle of
law that no person can concurrently claim salary and some certain allowances
from two offices,” he said.
“Suppose, if the public money is
inadvertently credited to the account of a government functionary, he is
required to return it to the official kitty. But if someone claims dual
benefits knowingly, it amounts to criminal breach of trust and misappropriation
on his part,” he said.
The former speaker pointed out that
not only that the AJK Council was a product of the AJK Constitution but also
the source of its ‘consolidated funds’ and that of the AJK government was same,
i.e., the taxes collected from the AJK people.
When asked if any law directly
suggests penalty for such an acts, Mr Abbasi replied in the negative, but
added: “If it’s challenged before the election commission, accountability
bureau or any other appropriate forum, the culpable person can be declared as a
convict and thus ineligible to contest elections.”
When contacted, AJK’s additional
advocate general Chaudhry Shoukat Aziz expressed almost similar views.
“Claiming dual benefits is misappropriation
and hence an offence…Perks and privileges of one office have to be returned by
the beneficiary to avoid punitive action under the law,” he said.
Interestingly, when this scribe
contacted Mr Sadiq for his version, he repeatedly pretended ignorance of the
matter.
“I don’t think any such thing has
happened…I am not aware of it and I am listening it from you for the first time,”
he claimed.
When told about the documentary
evidence in possession of this correspondent, he said: “Let me obtain details.
If it’s proved, I will deposit the additional benefits instantly.”
Tariq Naqash
