The apology to Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif by The Mail on Sunday and the acquittal of Interior Minister Rana Sanaullah in a drug trafficking case both raise the question of what is to be done about such accusations, which could destroy the reputation of an individual. Both cases are linked to the accountability process, or rather its misuse. Mr Sharif stood accused by the story of The Mail On Sunday of having embezzled aid for flood victims while Punjab CM. The settlement of the case by The Mail on Sunday taking down the story from its website, and issuing an apology to Mr Sharif is good news not just for him, but for the country as a whole, because he has become PM, and there is now no excuse of that story to deny aid for this year’s floods. Rana Sana was finally acquitted by a special court in Lahore of possession of 15 kg of heroin, for which he was arrested in July 2019. He was acquitted because of a lack of evidence, with an Anti- Narcotics Force Assistant Director and an ANF inspector submitting affidavits saying that they had not witnessed any recovery when Rana Sanaullah’s car had been stopped. Rana Sanaullah had already made bail in the case, when evidence could not be produced against him.
Both cases have in common the readiness to accuse without sufficient evidence. They also show the impunity of those who bear false witness. The person ‘credited’ with fomenting the story against Mr Sharif, PM’s Interior Adviser and PTI’s accountability czar, Shahzad Akbar, is nowhere to be seen. Similarly, Shehryar Afridi, who was the Minister of State in charge of Anti-Narcotics, who had sworn on the Quran in the National Assembly, that he had evidence of Rana Sanaullah’s wrongdoing, is also nowhere to be seen. Also common to both cases was the desire to lay the accusation, false or true, for political purposes.
Politicians are both victims and instigators, depending on whether they are in power or not. It must not be forgotten that their principal stock-in-trade is their repute, and its being damaged is as painful as actually being convicted or punished. They must make necessary tweaks to the law so that such political misuse of the law becomes impossible. The law already provides for the punishment of those making false accusations; there is a need to operationalize it so that this particular abuse is stopped.
