ISLAMABAD, Aug 2: The ministry of law has ruled that privatised public utilities and companies remain answerable to the Wafaqi Mohtasib in case of public complaints and consumer issues.

Two such companies — PTCL and KESC — had recently declined to appear before the ombudsman’s office or to respond to its queries arising out of public complaints on the ground that they had become private concerns after partial or full management transfers and hence not answerable to the ombudsman, sources in the government told Dawn.

The situation turned further complicated when these companies even refused to apprise ombudsman officials of their internal resolution mechanism for public complaints.

They took the position that various regulatory authorities had been set up which had enough powers to look after consumer interests and hence they could not be made answerable to the ombudsman.

This put the Wafaqi Mohtasib in a quandary because its jurisdiction would have shrunk to various ministries only had this argument been accepted. Consequently, the case was presented to the ministry of law and justice for legal opinion. The law ministry held that all public utilities would remain accountable to the ombudsman even after their privatisation.

Quoting relevant laws, the ministry said that the ombudsman’s secretariat was a constitutional institution with the powers to “investigate, redress and rectify any injustice done to a person through maladministration of an agency including a ministry, division, department, commission or office of the government or a statutory body, corporation or other institution established or controlled by the government”.

As such, completely privatised units also fell under the jurisdiction of Wafaqi Mohtasib because they were established by the government even though it lost their management control after the sale process. That also meant that even the regulatory bodies like National Electric Power Regulatory Authority (Nepra), Oil and Gas Regulatory Authority (Ogra) or Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) were answerable to the ombudsman in case of public complaints or injustices although their policy decisions and determinations could only be challenged before the superior judiciary.

Sources in the ombudsman secretariat said its powers were so wide-ranging that the Supreme Court, the Supreme Judicial Council, the Federal Shariat Court or a High Court was outside the ombudsman’s ambit besides matters relating to foreign affairs, federal public service commission and the ministry of defence.

These sources said the ombudsman could question any decision, process, recommendation or any act that is contrary to law, rules or procedures which are arbitrary or discriminatory, including bribery, jobbery, favouritism, nepotism and administrative excesses or neglect, delay or incompetence and inefficiency.