Event Summary
On 5 March 2026, Pakistan enacted amendments to its accountability framework that link the minimum financial threshold for corruption cases under the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) to inflation. Under the revised law, the existing threshold of around Rs500 million will now be adjusted annually based on the inflation index, effectively increasing the minimum amount required for NAB to initiate proceedings over time.
The amendment is part of the broader National Accountability (Amendment) Bill 2026, introduced in early 2026, which also includes changes related to procedural clarity, appellate mechanisms, and administrative provisions within the accountability system. Government representatives have presented these reforms as efforts to modernize the law, maintain realistic financial thresholds, and focus institutional resources on high-value corruption cases. The rationale is that inflation-adjusted limits will ensure that the law remains relevant over time and avoids being eroded by changing economic conditions.
However, the changes have sparked concern among analysts and observers, who argue that raising and indexing the threshold could significantly reduce the number of corruption cases pursued by NAB. Critics point out that earlier amendments in 2022 had already restricted NAB’s jurisdiction to cases above Rs500 million, leading to the transfer or closure of many cases below that level. The new inflation-linked mechanism may further elevate this threshold, potentially excluding a broader range of cases.
With this narrowing scope of accountability oversight, concerns have been raised about the resulting weakening of transparency, accountability and institutional checks on the use of public resources. Reduced accountability may also increase risks of misallocation or misuse of public funds, ultimately constraining the resources available for public services and civic initiatives that civil society often depends on or monitors. A weaker accountability framework can limit the space and effectiveness of civil society in engaging with governance processes, advocating for transparency, and holding authorities to account. Therefore, while the reform is framed as administrative efficiency, it may have longer-term implications for civic oversight, public trust, and the overall enabling environment for civil society engagement.