Have any anti-corruption laws/ordinances/executive orders or institutions set up really succeeded in reducing the prevalence of corruption? Over the years, corruption has only scaled new heights. Does this not require us to think of some other way? Certainly not to those who benefit from the status quo i. e the corrupt bureaucrats, politicians and even the 'honest lawyers who take on all kinds of cases for a fat fee. Any change, or effort for change, is resisted because the lobby for corruption is virtually as indefatigable as it is invincible. Our approach is to try to punish the individual doing wrong, which is no bad thing in itself. But we do little to improve the system. No court of law the world over has even done it. We need to come up with something else. Mere resignations or dismissals of individuals dont achieve the goal. Our administrative accountability has collapsed totally. It is beyond resuscitation. Judicial inquiries are at best inquiries, no more no less. So what? A new NAB Chairman, given our judicial processes and law of evidence make prevention impossible. I have personal experience of this at the highest administrative levels of governance. The Supreme Courts job is not to set up monitoring cells, their primary responsibility lies elsewhere. So there can be no such thing as 'across the board accountability. I am somewhat amused by the expression certain acquittals lacked fair play and justice. I thought justice was in fact fair play and all fair play is justice. We in Pakistan are experts in proving black is white and vice versa, such is the depth of hypocrisy we are mired into. I suggest we revisit Article 216 of our interim constitution of 1972 and while doing so, give Napoleon Bonaparte the credit for adopting it in the early 19th century. -MASOOD HASAN, Lahore, April 12.