THE government's reaction to the Supreme Court decision on the NRO has left little doubt in the public mind that it is in no mood to live up to the widespread expectations in the country that it would weed those elements out of its midst which have benefited from the notorious ordinance. These expectations were based not only on moral principles but also had the goal of good governance in view. It is noteworthy that the official comments on the judgment, which were made in response to journalists' queries soon after its announcement, led to the conclusion that the government intended to implement it in its true spirit. The verdict stipulated the reopening of cases against those who had been allowed to go scot-free as a result of the NRO and its spirit, obviously was to put a check on corrupt practices in the future. Its proper implementation would have helped restore the now sullied government's image. However, the ruling leadership seems bent upon sticking it out despite the barrage of criticism from the media and civil society. Newspapers' reports about certain NRO-tainted government functionaries, including Prime Minister Gilani's strong defence of President Zardari before the media on Friday, tend to detract from the impression that the government would like to put the verdict into effect in the real sense of the word. This also comes out of Mr Gilani's argument that since the President had already served imprisonment for so many years, there was no need for him to get his cases cleared through due process of law. It is clear that the view does not serve the interest of justice. Mr Zardari might be covered under the presidential immunity clause of the Constitution and the cases against him cannot, perhaps, be re-opened as long as he remains President but, according to the judgment, the court has to pronounce upon these cases in the ultimate analysis. Strangely also, instead of moving to cleanse the Cabinet of ministers tainted with the NRO or accused of corruption otherwise, the Prime Minister has given the Law portfolio to Mr Babar Awan, someone who is currently facing corruption charges in a court case. An accused in the corruption scandal of the Bank of Punjab has charged him with accepting a huge some of money as bribe to have him cleared. In this backdrop, to assign the Law Ministry to Mr Babar Awan is nothing short of a joke and certainly not in line with the spirit of the court verdict. The action Mr Gilani has taken against the Interior Secretary and three other FIA officials for stopping Defence Minister Ahmed Mukhtar from proceeding to China because his name was supposed to be on the ECL, reinforces the view that the verdict has neither shamed the concerned ministers into resigning nor prompted the government to act on moral grounds.