ISLAMABAD: In a 2-1 verdict, the Pakistani Supreme Court (SC) on Friday ordered the restoration of corruption cases against public office holders that were withdrawn after amendments to the country’s accountability law.

Former prime minister Imran Khan had moved the top court in June last year against amendments made to the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) ordinance under the National Accountability (Second Amendment) Act 2022.

The amendments made several changes to the National Accountability Ordinance (NAO) 1999, including reducing the term of the NAB chairman and prosecutor general to three years, limiting NAB’s jurisdiction to cases involving sums of over Rs500 million, and transferring all pending inquiries, investigations, and trials to relevant authorities.

Khan had appealed that the amendments be struck down as they had been enacted to benefit influential suspects and legitimize their corruption.

The Supreme Court’s judgment could now lead to the reopening of cases against former prime ministers Nawaz Sharif, Shehbaz Sharif, Raja Pervaiz Ashraf and Shaukat Aziz, among many others.

“All inquiries, investigations and references which have been disposed of on the basis of the struck down Sections [of the NAB ordinance] are restored to their positions prior to the enactment of the 2022 Amendments and shall be deemed to be pending before the relevant fora,” said the majority 2-1 verdict written by Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial. “The NAB and all Accountability Courts are directed to proceed with the restored proceedings in accordance with law.”

Apart from limiting NAB’s jurisdiction to cases involving over Rs500 million, the 2022 amendments allowed suspects to claim the amount of plea bargain deposited after being acquitted.

The court also declared null and void verdicts issued by the accountability courts in light of the amendments made to the NAB law and directed NAB to send the record of the cases to relevant courts within seven days.

One of the Supreme Court judges, Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, however, disagreed with the majority verdict, also endorsed by Justice Ijaz ul Ahsan, saying he would write a detailed dissenting note in the coming days.

However, he said: “In my humble opinion, the primary question in this case is not about the alleged lopsided amendments introduced in the NAB law by the Parliament but about the paramountcy of the Parliament, a house of the chosen representatives of about 240 million people of Pakistan.”

“It is about the constitutional importance of parliamentary democracy and separation of powers between three organs of the State. It is about the limits of the jurisdiction of the Court comprising unelected judges, second judging the purpose and policy of an enactment passed by the Parliament, without any clear violation beyond reasonable doubt, of any of the fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution or of any other constitutional provision,” he added.

Pakistan’s last government, the coalition government led by the Pakistan Muslims League-Nawaz, had introduced 27 key amendments to NAO, which became law after being adopted in a joint sitting of parliament.

Khan’s petition against the amendments said they would set aside “corruption cases against the president, prime minister, chief ministers and ministers and provide an opportunity to convicted public office-holders to get their convictions undone.”

“The amendments to the NAO are tantamount to depriving the citizens of Pakistan of having access to law to effectively question their chosen representatives in case of breach of their duty toward the people of Pakistan,” the petition had argued.