Share this story!            

Pakistan Steel Mills’ privatisation: PC asked for reasons to sell ‘good’ unit

By Mohammad Kamran

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Thursday asked the Privatisation Commission (PC) to explain its process of selecting a unit for privatisation and questioned the urgency for selling a viable and profit-earning unit.

A nine-member larger bench headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry was hearing petitions challenging the sale of Pakistan Steel Mills which was to be handed over to a private consortium consisting of Tawairqi Steel Mills, Magni Togorsk Iron and Steel and Arif Habib Securities of Pakistan on May 29 at a total cost of Rs 21.68 billion. However, the court halted the transfer of possession to bidders till June 15.

During the hearing the chief justice also urged upon the evaluators, namely City Group, A F Ferguson and Company or Corus Consultants of UK, who evaluated the Pakistan Steel Mills (PSM) worth before its privatisation, to assist the court on the issue of determining the worth of Steel Mills.

The bench also directed the Privatisation Commission and Khalid Anwar, the legal counsel of the successful bidders, to respond to the allegations levelled by Iftikhar Shafi, chairman of the Diamond Group of Industries against Arif Habib.

Iftikhar Shafi filed an application exposing Rs18.2 billion civil suits pending before the Sindh High Court (SHC) and an FIR in Lahore against Arif Habib Securities. The court said that it would keep Shafi’s application pending and was not including him as a party in the case for the time being however the respondents will have to respond on the allegations. Shafi’s counsel, Ahmer Bilal Sufi said he just wanted to bring it on court record as to how the Privatisation Commission failed to identify the controversial background of the respondent.

The defence counsel of Privatisation Commission, Syed Sharifuddin Pirzada who is also advisor to prime minister, submitted before the bench that the privatisation of the Steel Mills was absolutely transparent and not tilted in favour of any one. He argued that the petitioners have failed to establish infringement of any fundamental rights and had not exhausted alternate remedy available to them.

Referring to the press reports and articles, relied by the petitioners, he said the newspapers cuttings and reports were not valid grounds for judicial review.

Home | National

Share this story!