In a stunning show of defiance, Pakistan Telecommunication Company Limited (PTCL), which remains a government-owned entity under the management of UAE-based Etisalat, has refused to provide information to the National Assembly’s Standing Committee on IT and Telecom regarding the planned sale of its prime property on Karachi’s I.I. Chundrigar Road.
Red More: Etisalat-Owned PTCL Faces Accountability Calls in Parliament; Telenor Blamed for Internet Disruption
Despite repeated demands by lawmakers to explain the legal grounds for such a transaction, PTCL officials flatly declined to answer, arguing that they are not answerable to the National Assembly committee. This has ignited a fresh wave of outrage, with many questioning whether PTCL is acting like a “state within a state” under foreign control.
“THIS IS A BLATANT DISREGARD OF PARLIAMENTARY AUTHORITY. PTCL MUST BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE LIKE ANY OTHER STATE-RUN INSTITUTION,” SAID COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN SYED AMINUL HAQ, VISIBLY ANGERED DURING THE PROCEEDINGS.
No Proof, No Permission — Just Auction Plans: The controversy erupted when PTCL announced plans to auction a valuable property on I.I. Chundrigar Road—one of the most expensive commercial areas in Karachi. When questioned by the committee, the PTCL delegation failed to produce any documentary evidence supporting its claim of authority to unilaterally sell government-owned land.
Instead, PTCL argued in a written response to the Ministry of IT that its Memorandum of Association grants it sweeping powers to dispose of assets as it sees fit. Lawmakers, however, pushed back hard, asking if every state entity could now sell off national assets without oversight or permission.
“IF PTCL CAN DO THIS, WHAT’S TO STOP PIA OR OGDC FROM DOING THE SAME? THIS IS PUBLIC PROPERTY, NOT PRIVATE LOOT,” QUESTIONED ONE MEMBER.
Etisalat Calling the Shots?: In perhaps the most telling moment of the meeting, Mazhar Hussain, advisor to the PTCL president, stated openly that the company was not bound to answer to Parliament and any clarification should be sought from Etisalat, which holds managerial control of PTCL. This comment created visible tension in the committee room and raised serious concerns about sovereignty, transparency, and accountability.
“IF PTCL IS BEING RUN FROM ABU DHABI, THEN THE PAKISTANI TAXPAYER DESERVES TO KNOW WHO IS BENEFITTING FROM THESE LAND SALES,” SAID DR. MAHESH KUMAR MALANI, DEMANDING CLARITY AND CALLING FOR A FULL INVESTIGATION.
Privatization Commission Hides Behind Gag Clause: Further complicating matters, a representative from the Privatization Commission informed the committee that Clause 6 of the original agreement between the Government of Pakistan and Etisalat bars disclosure of contract details without mutual consent. This secrecy clause, ironically protecting a foreign stakeholder, has further enraged lawmakers.
In-Camera Session Called Amid Fears of Asset Stripping: Amid fears that PTCL’s representatives may have misled the committee or withheld crucial information, Chairman Aminul Haq has called for an in-camera meeting later this month. The session will involve officials from the Ministry of IT, Law Ministry, Privatization Commission, and Etisalat to finally open the black box surrounding PTCL’s asset sales.
Bigger Telecom Crisis Brews: Adding to the chaos, the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) informed the committee that 9 Long Distance & International (LDI) operators have defaulted on dues totaling Rs19 billion, with over 100 cases pending in courts. PTA has proposed an installment-based recovery mechanism, while a subcommittee headed by Sher Ali Arbab has been formed to investigate.
The Bigger Picture: Is PTCL Now a Liability?: Once a crown jewel of Pakistan’s telecom sector, PTCL now finds itself at the center of a storm—accused of hiding behind Etisalat’s shadow, selling off national assets, and refusing to answer to Parliament.
With billions in land and infrastructure on the line, and no transparency in agreements signed during privatization, critics say Pakistan may be witnessing a silent plunder of public property—sanctioned through legal loopholes and foreign management.
Unless urgent action is taken, PTCL’s land sale may just be the beginning of a much larger asset-stripping saga.
