The failure of General Headquarters (GHQ) to submit an inquiry report of the National Logistic Cell (NLC) scam involving three retired generals by the deadline of June 30 given by parliament’s Public Accounts Committee (PAC) did not come as a surprise. Never in the history of Pakistan has a general been held accountable for his wrongdoings, whether it is illegal intervention in politics or wrong economic decisions. In the case under discussion, the management of the NLC borrowed Rs 4.2 billion from commercial banks and invested the money together with the pensioners’ funds in the stock market between 2003 and 2008, incurring in the process a loss of Rs 1.8 billion. The PAC was investigating this issue, but GHQ intervened in December last year and requested the committee to put its investigation on hold, promising to submit a report after holding an internal inquiry. The case has been hanging fire since then as GHQ has been dilly-dallying and the PAC has not been able to take punitive action against the three retired generals it holds responsible for the scam. These are indications that the army wants to cover up the misdeeds of its personnel by not disclosing the report in public, hence the delaying tactics. Although there is no credible institution of accountability of public functionaries, elected officials and bureaucrats have been subjected to questioning and punishments in the past, even if in politically motivated cases. The military and its affiliated bodies’ dealings and decisions, however, are marked by complete opacity and unaccountability. Given the military’s excessive involvement in political and economic affairs of the country, it is inevitable that some decisions, like the present one, will be questioned. But they always manage to get away with whatever they do, because neither parliament has the power or political will to prosecute the wrongdoers, nor is the military interested, for obvious reasons. One might recall the $ 98 million Chinese locomotives scam, where another set of three retired generals was exonerated by the National Assembly PAC for having struck the deal in ‘good faith’ in 2006. Most likely, the PAC’s verdict would have been different if non-military persons were involved in the scam. The military’s involvement in economic activity places great temptation before its personnel. The distraction of greed and economic advantage has eroded professionalism and affected its preparedness for the task assigned to it. It is sad that instead of taking the culprits to task, GHQ is covering up for the erring generals by not presenting its findings to the PAC. The scandal is an extreme example of breach of public trust. Now that the debate on accountability of the armed forces has started, it would be in the interest of the military itself to end this culture of impunity and refurbish its image in the eyes of the public. The time has come to dismantle the old practices. If a wrong decision has been taken, whether by a uniformed or non-uniformed person, the law must be the same for everyone. The money that was squandered by the generals was public money. They must be dealt with to the full extent of, and in accordance with, the law. It is a fit case for the Supreme Court to take suo motu notice, because perhaps parliament alone cannot mount enough pressure on the military to answer for this huge financial scam.*