The Pakistan Engineering Council (PEC) is the premier regulatory institution for engineering in Pakistan which, as per PEC mandate, is responsible for the registration of engineers, consulting engineers, and the accreditation of engineering programmes offered by universities/institutions.
It ensures and manages continuing professional development, assists the Federal Government as a Think Tank, establishes standards for engineering products and services, and safeguards the interest of its members. Quite a handful, obviously, but is it up to the onerous task entrusted to it in its present shape?
The answer, unfortunately, is a big no, considering its past and present achievements and conduct.
A regulatory institution responsible for oversight and maintenance of top professional standards of multiple dimensions is supposed to have the best talent in terms of technical competence and integrity to enforce top professional standards in professional, educational, and technology development domains of engineering. However, the institution has developed into an elected body representing specific interests like those of contractors and construction firms’ cliques.
Pakistan needs a PEC that takes the country forward by improving professional engineering standards and preparing engineers and technicians to shoulder technological responsibilities nationally and internationally with utmost competence.
Indian and Chinese technological development was spearheaded by their top-class engineering and technology institutions, but here in Pakistan, no such initiatives were encouraged. A few top-class science and technology universities like NUST, which were given a charter, also diversified their disciplines to include business management and social sciences.
Others, like the National University of Technology (NUTECH), instead of concentrating solely on technology degrees and diplomas, diversified into engineering programmes.
Compared to the above, there are 23 IITs in India, all concentrating on specific specialties and producing world-class engineers.
Here in Pakistan, the PEC, which should have pointed out such needs to HEC and other policy-making government ministries, failed to ensure the development of specialized engineering and technology institutes.
PEC, being the top engineering and technology regulator, should have kept ownership of technological skill development institutes as well since technology and engineering are closely interlinked. PEC abdicated that responsibility and let alternative regulatory institutions like NTC be created under HEC.
NTC ideally should have been raised under PEC as it has complementarities with engineering disciplines, instead of creating a separate regulatory institution delinked from the apex engineering institution of the country.
Another egregious failure of PEC has been its inability to implement its own laws enacted under an Act of Parliament in 1976. According to those laws, all foreign engineering and construction firms desirous of undertaking projects in Pakistan must hire a percentage of Pakistani engineers besides involving a certain percentage (30%) of Pakistani firms in joint ventures.
The above was essential to develop the expertise of Pakistani firms and engineers while working on specialized technological and engineering projects in Pakistan. An additional spinoff of this policy was to give employment to Pakistani engineers, who suffer from unemployment and exploitation at the hands of contracting firms’ mafias.
Surprisingly, the PEC gave exemption to Chinese firms and CPEC projects from both the above requirements, depriving Pakistani engineers of valuable project experience and employment opportunities.
Why this violation of PEC’s laws was done is a question worth answering by the PEC leadership. PEC is supposed to keep a check on the quality of project development firms, including their categorization based on financial, technical, and ethical scrutiny by the PEC.
Over time, the quality of Pakistani firms and contractors has declined due to the munificent licensing practices of PEC. It is worth investigating how much influence peddling and corruption is involved in the licensing practices of PEC.
In addition to the above, there are rumours bandied about the corruption and mismanagement in the governance and administrative affairs of PEC. PEC has a bloated governing body comprising 65 elected members, which is unwieldy yet unrepresentative of several vital disciplines.
For instance, the vital aerospace specialty was clubbed with telecommunications for election purposes in PEC elections 2024, meaning that a telecommunication engineer would represent an aerospace discipline in the governing body.
Then there are question marks over such a large number of governing body members whose TA/DAAs and other expenses run into millions at the cost of other substantive requirements like the welfare of unemployed engineers.
A former member of the governing body, Engineer Zahur Sarwar, is on record having levelled corruption allegations against PEC, quoting a figure of 50 billion in a TV discussion. PEC, being a very important institution, should submit itself to a formal audit by the government auditors through the internationally recognized big four auditing firms to allay such allegations of misuse of funds.
PEC should seriously think of paring down its bloated organization, including an unwieldy governing body of 65 members. There is also a need for ethical and technical scrutiny of the contesting members in PEC elections, as many shady characters can get elected using money and unfair practices.
Coming over to unfair means in PEC elections, the example of the recently held PEC elections in August 2024 is eye-opening. Serious allegations of influence peddling through exorbitant spending during the election campaign surfaced.
Now, if the candidates for top slots and the governing body resort to prodigious spending to purchase votes, one can imagine the fate of PEC. Lavish banquets and advertisements employing social media and even PTCL channels were used as stratagems to woo voters.
Big business contractor mafias and vested interests use money to gain leadership positions in a regulatory institution that, like HEC, should be assigned based on technical competence and moral rectitude.
The conduct of PEC Elections 2024 was a botched-up affair with several instances of poll office mismanagement. Instead of proper premises with spacious infrastructure, the cramped and congested premises of NADRA offices were used, where several engineers could not reach due to dense traffic or lack of parking.
The worst glitch was the downing of NADRA’s link for over 4 hours, which created confusion and the return of several voters who did not come back to vote. Apart from serious questions about NADRA’s system’s credibility, doubts were sown about the fairness of the elections due to the four-hour hiatus.
PEC is far too sensitive an organization to be put at the mercy of vested interests. Serious consideration should be given to changing the system of choosing the PEC leadership from elections to nominations, just like the HEC Chairman. Instead of a bloated governing body, a lean co-opted body comprising the best and the brightest from all provinces could be considered.
The financial audit of the PEC should be conducted under government watch for financial transparency, and the NTC should also be put under PEC for better synergy between engineering and technology. The country cannot make it to the big league of technologically advanced nations without putting the PEC right.
The writer is the Director IPRI and a former Director Works and Chief Engineer Navy. He can be reached at: rwjanj@hotmail.com
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ