Bureaucratic intervention has once again deprived the inflow of foreign exchange into the country. Former IT secretary Farooq Awan has delayed the recovery of $33 million owed by India to Pakistan Telecommunication Company Limited (PTCL).
PTCL is the central point of international calling traffic coming from and going to different countries around the world including India. PTCL’s network is used as a transit point in routing calls to India.
Since 1947, PTCL – now a subsidiary of UAE telecom giant Etisalat – has been handling these transactions with Indian telecom companies including state-owned fixed line operator Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL), Reliance and Bharti Airtel, the broadband giant said in a statement. The transaction cost between PTCL and BSNL amounts to $33 million from 1947 to 2012.
Successive governments since the creation of Pakistan have failed to recover these dues, an official close to the matter said.
PTCL has taken various measures including arbitration to recover the money especially in the past four years, he said.
The former federal secretary – who has now been appointed as Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) Chairman – delayed the process by creating doubts about the actual claimant, the official said.
The official said Indian Parliament had sanctioned the agreed payment last year. On November 9, 2011, the Indian High Commission (IHC) wrote to the Foreign Office requesting a verification of PTCL’s claim and asked if there are any other claimants.
The Foreign Office forwarded the query to Ministry of IT and Telecom, however, they did not receive a reply. The IHC sent three reminders while Foreign Office sent five reminders to the former IT secretary but the latter did not respond until June 22, delaying the recovery of these hard-fought dues for six months, the official said.
Had Awan sent a proper response before the end of Indian fiscal year on March 31, the payment would have made it to PTCL’s account long time ago, the official said.
Making matters worse was Awan’s reply to the foreign office and the IHC June 22. The secretary’s response not only halted the payment but also confused Indian authorities, the official said.
“Since PTCL is not the sole beneficiary of the amount, therefore, the amount should be transferred to the Government of Pakistan immediately,” reads the letter – Awan’s wrote in response to IHC’s query.
The letter, which is available with The Express Tribune, also said that the Auditor General of Pakistan would facilitate by deputing a special team to work out the claim of PTCL for settlement of outstanding receivables.
Had the secretary endorsed PTCL’s claim – to be the sole claimant – India would release the payment and all the stockholders, including the government that has 62% stakes in PTCL, would automatically get their share, the official said.
“The person who cost us $33 million will now be responsible for 3G auction that’s worth about $1 billion,” the official said, adding, “Supreme Court should take notice of the issue before he could do further harm to the nation.”
Farooq Awan did not respond to the queries, however, his office did send an acknowledgment of the receipt of the questions.
PTCL, too, refused to comment on Awan’s response. “We are not in a position to comment on this,” said PTCL’s General Manager for PR Ammara Durrani.
The broadband provider, however, emailed its official statement on the matter, which describes it as the sole claimant of the amount.
“If PTCL network is the transit or termination point for an international call coming into Pakistan, then it will be PTCL’s receivables,” it said. “For international calling traffic between Pakistan and India, PTCL is the origin as well as the transit point,” it added.
PTCL has international calling traffic transactions with more than 160 countries of the world, making it an important source of earning foreign exchange. The broadband giant contributed more Rs1.5 billion to the national exchequer for six months ended December 31, 2011.
Awan’s response, however, almost cost it $33 million by putting the matter in pending once again, the official said.
Published in The Express Tribune, August 4th, 2012.
Correction: An earlier version of the story incorrectly stated "$33 billion" instead of "$33 million" in the last line. The error is regretted.
COMMENTS (23)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
@mr. righty rightist: " Just like murder, rape, torture etc. But if any of it is imposed on non-muslims, it’s called Jihad." It would be good if you proof read what you type sometimes you like to reword the sentence.ET mods you seem to be on long leave.
Mr. Righty right !!!! OMG at ur explaination of interest & islam :S
@gp65 who writes "I thought interest was un-Islamic?"
Interest is unislamic only when imposed on Muslims. Just like murder, rape, torture etc. But if any of it is imposed on non-muslims, it's called Jihad.
Thats why i like Lacs and Crores. Its our own system and is less confusing. we dont have to follow west in everything, let be original for once.
@elcay: then you are not going to get the principle as well as your cumulative interest!!!
@elcay: "@ Indian catholic, $33 billion could be inclusive of Cumulative interest on $33 million !!!!"
I thought interest was un-Islamic?
What money? That should be used as bounty on Hafeez Saeed. Catch the perpetrators of Mumbai Massacre, Indian can settle account.
When wonders about the motives behind bringing this issue to light at a time when the person has been tasked with an important responsibility?
The Express Tribune personnel gets confused when it comes to 'millions' or 'billions', at the end of which they make a mess of whole news
This article starts off with the amount due as being $33 million and ends up with the amount due as being $33 billion!!!
It's not 33bn as in the last sentence but 33mn. Ask Etisakat to pay the 800m it owes Pakistan and we will settle this matter also.
@Zalim Singh: ''The official said Indian Parliament had sanctioned the agreed payment last year. On November 9, 2011, the Indian High Commission (IHC) wrote to the Foreign Office requesting a verification of PTCL’s claim and asked if there are any other claimants."
its 33 million not 33 billion,the author has mad a mistake in the last paragraph
"Awan’s response, however, almost cost it $33 billion by putting the matter in pending once again, the official said."
Last para reads, "Awan’s response, however, almost cost it $33 billion by putting the matter in pending once again, the official said." You mean $33 million. Please correct the error.
Its $33 million. Please correct the last line
What money? We dont owe you anything.
Awan should be held accountable and punished for causing the loss.
This imbecile Awan is delaying the payment, yet he has been made in-charge of PTA. Such are the strange affairs of our beloved country.
this is the same guy who messed up everything in PTA! I hate him.