LAHORE: Pakistan Information Commission (PIC) has declared that Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) a public body, answerable and accountable under the Right of Access to Information Act, 2017.
The Commission has directed chairman PCB to implement the decision and directed him to provide the appellant the certified copies of contracts signed by PCB the lawyers and law firms from January 01, 2015 to date forthwith but in any case not later than ten days of the receipt of this order.
The Commission further directed chairman PCB to implement sections 9 and update the official website as mandated in section 5 of the Act, in letter and spirit under intimation to this Commission within one month of the receipt of this order.
According to documents, available with Bol News, the PIC passed this order on the complaint of a citizen Raza Ali.
Raza Ali had filed an application with PCB using the Right to Information Act to seek details of those lawyers/law firms which had contested its cases at legal forums from 1991 to 1999. The PCB didn’t respond to the request within a given time and afterwards, the applicant approached PIC to seek the information from the PCB.
The PCB’s counsel contended before the PIC that as the PCB generates its revenues solely from its own resources and avails no public funds or grants, that’s why the requested information is exempted from disclosure under Section 16 (d) and (g) clause 1 of the Right of Access to Information Act, 2017 as it would tantamount to breach of confidence. Therefore, the PCB claimed that the contracts with lawyers cannot be disclosed.
However, the PCB shared a list of panels of lawyers and law firms engaged by the Pakistan Cricket Board from 01-01-15 till date.
The appellant disputed the points raised by the organization and claimed that PCB is a government organization and liable to provide the contracts signed by PCB with the lawyers / firms.
The appellant contended that the PCB was established under the Sports (Development and Control) ordinance 1962. The section 2 of the above mentioned Act (ix) and (d) states “any statutory corporation or other body corporate institution set up or established or owned or controlled or funded by the Federal Government”.
The appellant further contended that the PCB ever received any funds & grants from the government or not? Similarly, the appellant asked that the offices being used by the PCB is government property or PCB owned/rental property? “Are the playgrounds used for cricket by the PCB owned/rented by the PCB from the government?”
The PCB responded to the queries raised by the appellant.
“PCB is a unique entity entirely different from other autonomous/semi autonomous bodies, corporations and commissions in that it receives no funds/monies whatsoever from the Federal Government/the Consolidated Funds the Public Exchequer rather generates its own revenues from the sale of its commercial and media rights and other ventures.”
PCB is the only sports organization which has been made amenable to Income Tax Laws of Pakistan. PCB annually pays millions of Rupees as tax to the Public Exchequer. Similarly, the PCB has instilled its own robust financial management system and undergoes external and internal audits which are conducted by the internationally acclaimed firms of Chartered Accounts.
“In light of the above, it is submitted that payment of the professional legal fees paid to lawyers on PCB’s panel of advocates are not made from the Public Fund but from PCB’s own income, therefore protected under Qanun e-Shahadat Order, 1984.”
During the course of arguments, learned counsel has argued on the similar lines and produced a copy of the deed dated 06.12.1980 signed between President, Board of Control for Cricket in Pakistan and the President of Islamic Republic of Pakistan for the lease of 104.5 acres of land for the annual rent of Rs. 12,6445 for land situated in KDA scheme No.24, Karachi for the period of 99 years.
The appellant invoking his fundamental right guaranteed under Article 19A of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 read with Right of Access to Information Act 2017, has desired the certified copies of the contracts signed by the Pakistan Cricket Board with the lawyers and the law firms.
At the first instance the commission is required to resolve the point raised by the sports organisation that the Pakistan Cricket Board is a unique entity, different from other autonomous/semi-autonomous bodies for the reason that PCB generate the funds through its own resources and revenues from the sale of its commercial, media rights and other ventures and that government exchequer isn’t involved for any payment.
According to the Commission, the learned counsel on behalf of the organization hasn’t taken the stance either in the reply or during the course of arguments that the Pakistan Cricket Board is not a public body within the meanings of the Right of Access to Information Act, 2017 rather argued that the PCB is not liable and accountable to provide the information under the Act as PCB generates all its funds through its own resources and revent from the sale of its commercial, media rights and other ventures.
“Although the organization is earning its revenues from the sale of commercial and media rights, it is worth to note that all the activities carried out by the organization are based on the cricket stadiums/grounds constructed on the leased land, owned by the government,” the Commission observed.
It further adds, “All offices of the PCB are constructed on government land leased in favour of the PCB at a highly subsidised rate which affords the source of income for the organization.”
The organization [PCB] is therefore earning from the activities, sports or commercial, carried out on the leased land sponsored by the government at a supported rate.
Apart from the sport activities, the Commission noted, the PCB is deriving income from the commercial activities like shops, showrooms and restaurants etc, outside the stadiums.
“According to the lease agreements provided by the organization in the case of Qaddafi Stadium, Lahore the PCB is paying token rent of Rs1000 per year for very valuable land measuring 180 kanal Marla while in the other case of land in Karachi the annual lease rent is worked out at the rate of Rs1210 per acre.”
According to the Commission, this token money paid by the PCB is figurative and symbolic aiming to provide the citizens of Pakistan the facility of enjoying the sports and other activities.
Section 5 of the constitution of Pakistan Cricket Board states that the Prime Minister of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan shall be the Patron who may from time to time, give general policy directions to the Board for its consideration.
PCB is established under the Sports (Development and Control) ordinance 1962 and section 2 of the ordinance states “any statutory corporation or other body corporate or institution set up or established or owned or controlled or funded by the Federal Government.
In the Rules of Business, 1973 of Cabinet Secretariat (Cabinet Division), Islamabad the Pakistan Cricket Board is placed at item 18(38) under the Interior Division. All the Divisions, attached departments including the autonomous bodies of the Federal Government are enlisted in the definition of the public body as defined in section 2(ix) (a) the Act.
In the light of the discussion above the commission is therefore of the considered view that the PCB is a public body, answerable and accountable under the Right of Access to Information Act, 2017.
According to the commission, the citizens have the privileged right under article 19A of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan read with the Right of Access to Information Act, 2017 to seek information and record in all matters of public importance.
“The Commission in the light of aforementioned reasons and discussion hold that the requested information and record is encompassed in the definition of public record and merits to be shared with the public.”
The Commission further observed that the information may be exempt if it was obtained from a third party then it would constitute an actionable breach of confidence; or the information was obtained in confidence from a third party and it contains a trade secret or if communicated it may prejudice the commercial or financial interests of that third party.
Transparency in the working of the government departments is the essence for the enactment of the Act, 2017. This practice would improve the participation of the people in the public affairs aimed at reducing nepotism, corruption and inefficiency in the governance.
“The disclosure of the requested information is neither likely to cause any damage to the economy of the country or the organization nor would constitute an actionable breach of confidence of the third party rather would improve the transparency in the affairs and eradicate nepotism and favoritism.” Moreover, the Commission observed that the referred section of the Act does not exempt the organization from disclosing the requested information.
The Commission is mindful that one person’s right must not be violated by another person’s right of freedom but in the light of the discussion above the requested information cannot be attached to the freedom or privacy of any identifiable individual.
“The respondent organization has alleged the abusing the law for his personal and ulterior motives by the appellant but has not produced even an iota of evidence to prove the allegation.”
Suffice to say that under section 11(5) of the Act in no case shall an applicant be required to provide reasons for asking any information.
