ISLAMABAD: The Senate on Thursday passed a private member’s bill seeking amendments to the National Accountability Ordinance (NAO) 1999, introducing a second appellate forum in accountability cases and clarifying several procedural provisions related to bail, jurisdiction and administrative continuity in the National Accountability Bureau (NAB).
The National Accountability (Amendment) Bill, 2026, moved by Senator Mohammad Abdul Qadir, proposes that decisions of High Courts in NAB cases may be challenged through a second appeal before the Federal Constitutional Court within 30 days, expanding the appellate framework for accountability proceedings. Federal Law Minister Azam Nazir Tarar apprised the House the government had no objection to the proposed amendments, describing them as constructive improvements to the existing law.
Expressing during the debate, Tarar said the bill addressed certain procedural ambiguities in the accountability law, particularly regarding the power of courts to grant bail and the handling of proceedings. “In my opinion these are good suggestions,” the law minister said, adding that the amendments aimed to provide clarity and strengthen legal safeguards in accountability matters.
Under the proposed amendments, accountability courts and relevant High Courts would be clearly empowered to grant bail or order release of an accused under the relevant provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The bill also proposes allowing the chairman of the National Accountability Bureau to serve a three-year term that may be extended once for an additional three years, replacing the current provision that bars reappointment or extension.
Another change seeks to adjust the financial threshold used in NAB cases annually according to the inflation index published by the Pakistan Bureau of Statistics, ensuring that monetary limits remain realistic over time. In addition, the bill clarifies that procedural provisions governing trials under the accountability law would also apply to appellate proceedings, a move aimed at removing interpretational ambiguity in the ordinance. Leader of the House Senator Ishaq Dar supported the bill during the debate, arguing that it introduced positive legal improvements and should not be politicised.
He said the Constitution allows the Federal Constitutional Court to hear appeals from High Court decisions if Parliament provides such a forum through legislation. “The Constitution clearly states that the Federal Constitutional Court shall have jurisdiction to hear appeals from judgments and orders of a High Court where an Act of Parliament so provides,” Dar said, citing the relevant constitutional provision. He noted that the measure was a private member’s bill and emphasised that Parliament regularly considers such legislative proposals.
“If anyone believes further changes are needed, another amendment bill can always be introduced. Legislation is an evolving process,” he said. However, the treasury benches supported the proposal, arguing that it would strengthen due process protections in accountability cases. Law Minister Tarar informed the House that under the existing NAB law only one appeal as of right is available, before the concerned High Court, and the proposed amendment would expand legal recourse available to remedy seekers.
He added that providing an additional appellate forum could help address longstanding criticism that the accountability law is overly stringent and lacks adequate safeguards for fundamental rights.The motion to introduce the bill was put to vote by the chair and carried by voice vote despite opposition from some members.
