Senators demand transparency for 3G licence auction

PML-N senator demands that the auction process be reviewed to avoid embezzlement.


January 25, 2012

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan Muslim League – Nawaz (PML-N) Senator Pervez Rasheed has criticised the auction of 3G technology licences in Pakistan and has demanded that the process be reviewed to avoid embezzlement.

The government has launched a mega campaign for auction of three licences for third generation (3G) telecommunication services in the country and has set a base price of $210 million for each licence. According to a PTA document, the base price for each 3G licence will be $210 million with bid earnest money of $31.5 million. The licence will be auctioned through multiple rounds and open outcry method.

Speaking during the Senate session, Rasheed said that it was astonishing that the base price for the 3G licence had been set at $210 million when the 2G licence was auctioned for $290 million.

He demanded that the process be stopped and the conditions reviewed to avoid embezzlement.

Senators Haji Adeel, Tahir Mashhadi and Professor Khursheed Ahmed also called for transparency in the auction process.

Senator Haroon Akhtar said that the auction process should not be stopped, but it should be debated. He said $800 million can be achieved from the process.

Deputy Chairman of the Senate, Jan Muhammad Jamali asked the concerned authorities to discuss the issue with the senators on Thursday.

Interior Minister Rehman Malik responded by saying that he was ready to remove all apprehensions and make the process transparent. He said that questions can be provided to him and he would seek details from chairman PTA and the Information Technology (IT) secretary.

 

COMMENTS (1)

Open ears | 12 years ago | Reply

What is the rush to auction at throw away base price?

Let the auction be after the election. Base price spectrum auction average prices exponentially high for 3G.

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ