Senators described the arrangement as opaque, unjust, and potentially in conflict with stated government limits on additional earnings by public officials.The issue surfaced during a committee session chaired by Palwasha Mohammad Zai Khan, when PTCL’s Group Company Secretary Zahida Awan presented official figures detailing board remuneration.
According to the disclosed data, the chairman of the PTCL board is paid USD 8,000 per meeting, while each director receives USD 5,000 per meeting. Members of board committees are additionally paid USD 1,000 per meeting. Beyond these dollar pegged payments, the chairman also receives a monthly honorarium of Rs. 25,000 and is entitled to a 1300cc vehicle with a driver.
Senators expressed shock that these payments are being made to serving government officials who already receive substantial public salaries. Committee members pointed out that a federal secretary typically earns between Rs. 1.5 million and Rs. 2 million per month, yet a single PTCL board meeting can generate a payment equivalent to Rs. 2.2 million to Rs. 2.5 million when converted from dollars.
Lawmakers termed this disparity “blatant injustice,” questioning how such payouts can be justified amid economic pressure on ordinary citizens.The controversy deepened when the committee recalled earlier assurances that a Finance Division policy capped additional earnings of government officials at Rs. 1 million per year, with any excess required to be deposited back into the national treasury.
Senators demanded to know whether PTCL board members were returning amounts beyond this limit. Officials were unable to provide confirmation, instead claiming that the policy had been revised, a statement that immediately drew criticism.Committee members challenged the assertion of a revised policy, demanding documentary proof and clarity on when the changes were approved and by whom.
Senators warned that without written evidence, claims of policy revision only strengthen suspicions of arbitrary decision making and selective benefit for senior officials. The chairperson remarked sarcastically that board memberships appeared far more lucrative than public service itself, underscoring the anger within the committee.The composition of the PTCL board further fueled criticism.
Government nominees occupy four seats, including the Secretary Information Technology, Secretary Finance, Secretary Commerce, and the Minister for Economic Affairs, alongside nominees of the company’s strategic partner. Senators questioned whether officials responsible for policy and oversight should simultaneously benefit financially from the same corporate entities they regulate or influence.
Beyond remuneration, lawmakers also scrutinized PTCL’s role in the country’s internet infrastructure. The committee was informed that newly introduced district level internet service providers are required to purchase bandwidth from PTCL or other long distance operators, placing PTCL at the center of last mile connectivity. Although officials said new licensees may deploy their own infrastructure if access is not provided within a defined period, senators warned that the framework risks entrenching PTCL’s dominance and limiting competition.
Members of the committee stressed that governance failures at board level and concentration of infrastructure control raise serious accountability concerns. They warned that when public officials benefit personally while overseeing critical national assets, public trust in institutions is undermined.The session concluded with a firm directive from the committee for the Finance Division and relevant ministries to submit the complete and revised policy governing board remuneration of government officials.
Senators made it clear that until the legality and transparency of the USD 8,000, USD 5,000, and USD 1,000 payments are fully explained, the matter will remain open under parliamentary oversight.
