LAHORE: The Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) has raised objections to the Punjab Enforcement and Regulatory Authority (Pera), explaining that it risks creating a parallel enforcement superstructure that overlaps rather than complements the functions of existing authorities.

“Punjab is not lacking in enforcement institutions as district administrations, municipal corporations, revenue authorities, price control mechanisms, market committees, and policing institutions already exercise jurisdiction over land use, commercial activity, encroachments, and regulatory compliance,” stated PTI MPA Aftab Ahmad Khan in a letter to the Punjab Assembly speaker, requesting legislative review of the Pera. He stated that the addition of another enforcement interface risks multiplying points of discretionary interaction between citizens and officials rather than rationalising them.

“Such duplication can result in jurisdictional ambiguity, procedural inconsistency, and uncertainty for citizens attempting to comply with regulatory requirements. In practice, overlapping authority frequently weakens the predictability of governance rather than strengthening it,” he stated.

Mr Khan stressed that there was a growing need for the Punjab Assembly to review the broader institutional implications of this initiative to ensure that legislative intent, administrative clarity, and the rights of citizens remained fully protected.

“Institutional reform must strengthen rather than complicate the relationship between citizens and the state,” he added.

While speaking to Dawn, Mr Khan said the Pera force, established in the midst of last year, was facing corruption complaints and viral videos showing authority officials harassing and humiliating vendors.

In his letter, the PTI MPA stated that the encroachment enforcement powers, in particular, required careful legislative scrutiny because they directly affect homes, shops, livelihoods, and long standing informal economic arrangements that sustain thousands of families across Punjab.

“Where enforcement action proceeds without transparent notice procedures, accessible hearing mechanisms, and verifiable documentary safeguards, citizens may experience regulatory intervention as disruption rather than lawful governance,” he pointed out.

“Instead of dismantling entrenched corruption patterns, there is a genuine risk that another enforcement body may reproduce them in a new institutional setting, thereby adding another administrative checkpoint through which citizens must navigate rather than simplifying their engagement with the state,” he explained.

Referring to fiscal prudence, he said, establishing a new authority entailed substantial expenditure on infrastructure, personnel, logistics, vehicles, monitoring systems, and administrative support. “Strengthening municipal institutions, digitizing land record verification systems, modernising market inspection protocols, and improving district level enforcement capacity could have produced measurable improvements within existing frameworks without the need to create an additional institutional layer,” he opined.

Mr Khan also commented that the regulatory challenges faced by Punjab had historically stemmed not from the absence of enforcement authorities but from fragmentation among them.

Published in Dawn, April 17th, 2026