Servants (Amendment) Bill 2025 passed in Senate
ISLAMABAD: The Upper House of the Parliament has passed the Civil Servants (Amendment) Bill 2025, which provides that the financial assets of gazetted officers and those of their spouses and dependent children, to be filed with the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR), shall be publicly available.
Already passed by the National Assembly, the bill now seeks the final yet ceremonial assent of President Asif Ali Zardari to become a law.
Law Minister Azam Tarar presented the bill in the Senate session, presided over by Chairman Yousaf Raza Gilani on Thursday, following its passage by the standing committee concerned, earlier this month.
The Civil Servants (Amendment) Bill, 2025 seeks to amend the Civil Servants Act, 1973 with the insertion of new Section 15-A.
This section provides that the declaration of assets of civil servants of basic scale (BS) 17 and above, their spouses and dependent children, including domestic and foreign assets and liabilities (if any), shall be digitally filed with the FBR, and same shall be publicly available— 'Provided that the extent of disclosure, under this section, shall give due regard to the balance between public interest for good governance and individual privacy and security.'
The Statement of Objects and Reasons of the bill reads: To further operationalise the Government Servants (Conduct) Rules, 1964— and consistent with the Right to Information Act of 2017, to 'ensure that asset declarations of high-level public officials (BPS 17 - 22) (Including domestic and foreign assets beneficially owned by them or a member of their family) will be digitally filed and publicly accessible (with sufficient safeguards over data protection and privacy of personal information such as ID numbers, residential addresses, bank account or bond numbers) through the FBR with a robust framework, resources and tools for the Establishment Division to conduct risk-based verification.'
Speaking on the floor of the House, Tarar, the Law Minister, said, the civil servants of BS-17 to 22 would have to declare their assets and those of their spouses and dependent children 'just like politicians declare their assets and those of their family members.'
New bills; Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils (Amendment) Bill, 2025, and Criminal Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2025, were moved in the House and referred to the relevant standing committees.
Meanwhile, the Senate continued discussion on the proposed federal budget for the upcoming financial year 2025-26.
Speaking on the occasion, Husna Bano from Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) demanded complete withdrawal of taxes on solar panels.
Another PPP Senator Aslam Abro demanded withdrawal of proposed carbon levy on vehicles.
Different senators from other political parties also shared their views on the proposed federal budget. The Senate was adjourned till today (Friday).
Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Recorder
an hour ago
- Business Recorder
Budget FY25-26: Finance bill still being discussed, says FBR
The Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) on Friday said the Finance Bill 2025 was still being discussed in the National Assembly (NA) and among various business circles. The FBR's statement comes as 'a number of news stories in the digital and print media give the impression that some of the amendments introduced in the finance bill are not understood well by the public at large', the tax body said. 'For instance, the legal provisions for the arrest of those involved in a tax fraud have already been provided under Section 37A of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 along with an elaborate procedure to be followed after the arrest which involves intimating the Special Judge immediately and the production of such person before Special Judge within 24 hours. 'However, the proposed amendment now restricts the powers of the officer to arrest by making prior inquiry after approval of the Commissioner Inland Revenue (CIR). Only on the basis of the findings of the inquiry CIR will authorise the investigation which would give the investigation officer the powers of an officer in charge of a police station under Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 (Act V of 1898),' the FBR said. Key highlights of Pakistan budget for 2025-26 The arrest could only be made with the prior approval of CIR if the investigation officer had reasons to believe that a tax fraud might have been committed by a person, the statement added. According to the tax body, the new legal provision further provides that if the arrest is mala fide the matter will be referred to the Chief Commissioner for fact finding inquiry. 'This shows that in contrast to the earlier provision where an Assistant CIR could arrest an offender, the new provisions bring transparency in the process by a mandatory prior inquiry and investigation and finally permission by the CIR. 'Moreover, certain changes and amendments are also necessary to reassure the compliant taxpayers that those evading taxes or involved in tax fraud are dealt with by the state with an iron hand.' FBR chairman Rashid Mahmood Langrial has expressed his willingness to discuss the recent changes made in the tax laws and introduce changes wherever needed, for example, the provisions related to arrest could be revised to mandate the permission of multiple senior officers before any arrest. 'Furthermore, in order to ensure that these powers are not misused by the authorised tax officers against the compliant taxpayers and business community, the Honorable Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif has formed a high powered committee, which will be headed by Minister for Finance and Revenue, to re-evaluate the proposed amendments and suggest adequate safeguards to prevent potential misuse of powers.' Budget 2025-26: Pakistan targets 4.2% growth as Aurangzeb presents proposals 'for a competitive economy' The other members of the committee will include Ministers of Law and Economic Affairs Division, Minister of State for Finance, SAPM Industries and Chairman FBR, as per the statement. 'The committee will also examine various options to ensure that legal economic activities are not stifled and propose additional protective measures against unlawful use of authority. The committee will submit its recommendations to the Honorable Prime Minister in three days.' **
Express Tribune
15 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Govt continues to score legal victories
After the 26th Constitutional Amendment, the government has got another major victory on Thursday as the constitutional bench endorsed the transfer of three judges from different high courts to the Islamabad High Court (IHC). The government's legal team must be jubilant that in view of the majority order, Justice Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar will continue as acting chief justice of the IHC, which is seen as crucial for the executive authority. The majority order will further frustrate the five IHC judges, who have been facing a tough time since writing a letter to the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) regarding interference of agencies in the judicial functions, particularly on matters related to the PTI. A senior government functionary admits that the 26th amendment is the outcome of the six IHC judges' letter. Constitutional Bench (CB) was created through the 26th constitutional amendment. The real purpose of the amendment was to control the superior judiciary for the stability of the current political set-up. The present government doesn't want that courts should give any substantive relief to the incarcerated former prime minister as he is perceived as a threat to the system. Since November last year, legal circles were keenly watching the outcome of three cases that they considered would determine how far the judiciary could go to assert its independence. The constitutional bench did not disappoint the government as two of the cases had been decided in its favour. Firstly, trial of civilians in the military courts have been endorsed by the CB. Now, the government initiative regarding the transfer of three judges to the IHC has also been endorsed by the constitutional bench led by Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar. It is interesting to note that the CB is not taking up petitions against the 26th constitutional amendment. If things stand the way as they are, it is no surprise that the government may get another victory in the reserved seats case soon. The chance that the July 12 order regarding the allocation of reserved seats will survive is very low. If the CB sets aside the decision, then the government will get a two-thirds majority in parliament. Moreover, in view of the "satisfactory performance", the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) by a majority vote extended the tenure of present CB judges until November 30. Unlike the past practice, CJP Yahya Afridi also voted in favour of giving an extension to the CB judges' tenure. Earlier, he was advocating that all SC judges should be included in the CB. The government has also been successful in appointing like-minded judges in the superior judiciary. Now, it would easily manage to appoint like-minded' chief justices in the high courts on July 1. Legal opinion Abdul Moiz Jaferii advocate says that the short order in the judges transfer case is disappointing. The majority has focused on the process of transfer itself being acceptable without dilating upon the particular transfer to Islamabad that was effected, how it was effected and what it aimed to achieve. Jaferii states that the order completely ignores the transfer of judges being expressly temporary in nature by the very language of the Constitution. It proceeds to validate such transfers on the premise of them being safeguarded by needing input from within the judiciary. "It then allows the president to redo the transfer and make clear the period of transfer and the seniority of the judges themselves, effectively opposing the very basis on which the transfers were validated: that this process was within the judiciary and insulated." He states that it is a bizzare reading of a plain constitutional premise. It ignores completely the scheme of appointment envisaged in Article 175A. And if one were to count the peculiar circumstances leading to this petition, completely ignored in the majority order but expressly considered by the minority, its reasoning becomes obvious. The minority opinion, other than the roundabout poetry at the end; is constitutionally sound", he adds. A former law officer says that the majority has taken a literal view. "It is premised on good faith and institution oriented bona fide exercise within the judiciary by three chief justices. If all three CJs act independently and in the interest of the institution, there should be no problem. Perhaps this was the reason Article 200 was inserted and it is working well in India. But if they don't act independently, this will become an instrument of coercion and silencing some judges, as in the present case. The majority has looked purely on law but not considered ground realities and facts." He says that as in many recent important constitutional cases, emotional advocacy and rhetoric continues instead of calm and cogent arguments. It is showing results every day more so when independent minded judges have already been sidelined and disarmed. At least the majority has left the question of temporary or permanent appointment. There is some contradiction as one the one hand the whole exercise is within the judiciary yet the matter has been sent to President alone. The whole exercise should be ordered to be conducted again but now the then CJ, IHC has gone. Who will give input on temporary or permanent status these judges, he adds. Hafiz Ahsaan Ahmad Khokhar advocate has stated that the majority decision is constitutionally valid, well-founded, and aligned with the spirit and intent of the constitution. He emphasised that the 3-2 majority judgment rightly affirms that under Article 200(1) of the Constitution, such transfers are permissible with the concurrence of the President, Chief Justices of the concerned high courts, and consent of the transferee judges. The court held that these conditions were conditionally met and found no mala fide on the part of the President. He noted that the president had issued a notification on February 1, 2024, under Article 200(1), transferring Justice Dogar, Justice Sumro, and Justice Muhammad Asif to the Islamabad High Court. Their inter-se seniority was later determined by then Chief Justice Aamer Farooq on 11th February 2025. However, this seniority order was challenged before the Supreme Court under Article 184(3). Explaining further, he said Article 194 makes no requirement for a second oath when a judge is transferred between High Courts, as the oath is to the Constitution itself — not to any specific court or jurisdiction. This is a principle recognized across other constitutional systems as well. Hafiz Ahsaan added that Article 200(1) does not specify whether a transfer must be temporary or permanent. Following the judgment, it now falls to the President to determine the nature of the transfers. If deemed temporary, no further seniority determination is needed; if permanent, the President must determine seniority based solely on the judges' original appointment dates. He stressed that under Article 200(3), the service terms of a judge cannot be adversely altered upon transfer, thereby preserving their rank, privileges, and entitlements. He further observed that the President, as directed by the Court, must independently determine seniority without relying on advice from the federal government. If the President declares the transfers permanent, and seniority is accordingly based on initial appointment, Justice Dogar may emerge as the senior-most among the three — qualifying him for consideration as Chief Justice of Islamabad High Court under Article 175A through the Judicial Commission of Pakistan. Contrasting with India's centralized seniority list, he noted that Pakistan's Constitution entrusts each High Court to determine seniority based on initial appointment — a practice also followed in the UK, US, Canada, and Australia. Hafiz Ahsaan while concluding said the 3-2 judgment is constitutionally sustainable and reinforces the legal structure under articles 200, 194, and 175A. The president's forthcoming decision will help shape a lasting constitutional precedent on judicial seniority and the limits of presidential authority in such matters.
Express Tribune
15 hours ago
- Express Tribune
NA panel reviews FBR powers
The National Assembly Standing Committee on Finance on Thursday directed the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) to incorporate safeguards before closing bank accounts of unregistered businesses, amid widespread tax evasion and underreporting by businesspeople. The committee, which met here with its chairman Syed Naveed Qamar in the chair, reviewed the FBR's proposed measures to enforce sales tax compliance, including the disconnection of utilities and temporary freezing of bank accounts for non-filers. During the meeting, FBR Chairman Rashid Mahmood Langrial gave a briefing to the committee. He said that unregistered businessmen would not be able to operate a bank account under sales tax laws, adding that such a person would be served a notice prior to the closure of the bank account. "The bank account of an unregistered person will be reactivated within two days after registration," he said. He revealed that out of 300,000 industrial units in Pakistan, only 30,000 to 35,000 were registered with the authorities. Explaining reasons, he acknowledged that the tax rate in Pakistan was high. "One-third of manufacturers are not registered in sales tax. People who even come under the tax net do not file returns," Langrial said. "Those who pay taxes underreport their incomes," he told the committee. "Electricity theft alone costs Rs500 to 600 billion every year." When asked how the FBR would identify businesses not paying sales tax, the FBR chairman explained that the income declared for income tax purposes would be used to estimate the volume of sales, supplies and overall business activity. Action would then be taken against individuals who fail to register, he added. Committee member Javed Hanif supported the FBR's proposals but the committee chair cautioned against enacting a law aimed at catching tax evaders if it also adversely affects compliant businesses. Another Committee member, Sharmila Farooqi, suggested that instead of making the penalties more stringent, the taxpayers should be given incentives. "Reduce the tax rate. It will broaden the tax net and encourage the people to get them registered. Finance Minister Muhammad Aurangzeb replied that the tax threshold and process would be improved. however, he made it clear that tax exemptions and amnesties would not be given anymore. "The time for tax exemptions and amnesties has passed. People have to be brought into the tax net." Langrial urged the committee to allow the FBR to temporarily deactivate the bank account of unregistered businessmen. The committee, however, directed for including safeguards in the process. Petroleum levy Meanwhile, the committee approved a proposal to increase the rate of petroleum development levy (PDL) to Rs90 and impose carbon levy on petrol, diesel and furnace oil. Finance Ministry officials told the committee that there was a proposal to impose the PDL on furnace oil as well. The officials said Rs100 billion in revenue was expected from the PDL on furnace oil. They added that 1.2 million tons of furnace oil was imported for 1,000MW Independent Power Producers (IPPs). The Power Ministry secretary said that the target of PDL recovery in fiscal 2025-26 was set at Rs1,468 billion. The Finance Ministry officials said that the government expected Rs45 billion in revenue through the carbon levy. The committee chair asked how much amount the Centre would get if the levy was turned into a carbon tax. On that the officials said that the amount in that case would be Rs18 billion. The committee was informed that the entire amount of a levy went to the federal government, but in taxes, provinces also get share. The chair stressed that the committee was not taking any decision regarding a levy or a tax on petroleum products. The industries secretary told the committee that Rs10 billion from carbon levy would be spent of the promotion of electric vehicles. He added that 30% of the vehicles would be shifted to electric vehicles by 2030. The production of all types of vehicles in the country is around 150,000, the officials said, adding that there were 76,000 electric vehicles in the country at present. "In the next five years, the production of electric vehicles will be increased to 2.2 million," the secretary said.
