ANNUAL REPORT 2007 - Wafaqi Mohtasib

Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive Governance Responsive

A N N U A L R E P O R T

222 000 000 777

Acronyms

ADB Asian Development Bank AIOU Allama Iqbal Open University AJP Access to Justice Programme AOA Asian Ombudsman Association AOMA Association of Ombudsman and Mediators of Africa CDC Card Distribution Centre CNIC Computerized National Identity Card CP Fund Central Provident Fund DHQ District Headquarters FDE Federal Directorate of Education G.P Fund General Provident Fund HBFC House Building Finance Corporation HVC Headquarters Vigilance Committee ICB Islamabad College for Boys ICG Islamabad College for Girls ICT Information Communication Technology IESCO Islamabad Electric Supply Company IOs Investigating Officers IOI International Ombudsman Institute KESC Karachi Electric Supply Company KW Kilowatt LESCO Lahore Electric Supply Company MIS Management Information System NADRA National Database Registration Authority NCHD National Commission for Human Development NEPRA National Electric Power Regulatory Authority NGOs Non-Governmental Organizations NIC National Identity Card NOC No Objection Certificate NWD Nation-Wide Dialling NWFP North West Frontier Province OGRA Oil and Gas Regulatory Authority Pak. PWD Pakistan Public Works Department PEPCO Pakistan Electricty & Power Company PESCO Peshawar Electric Supply Company PLI Postal Life Insurance PO President’s Order POL Petroleum, Oil and Lubricant PTCL Pakistan Telecommunication Company Limited SCMR Supreme Court Monthly Review SLIC State Life Insurance Corporation SNGPL Sui Northern Gas Pipeline Limited SOP Standard Operating Procedure SSGCL Sui Southern Gas Company Limited UAN Universal Access Number UNDP United Nations Development Program WAN Wide Area Network WAPDA Water and Power Development Authority WLL Wireless Local Line ZTBL Zarai Taraqiati Bank Limited

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Transmittal Letter ....................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Foreword ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Acknowledgement ...................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Vision, Mission Statement...............................................................................................................5

Chapter 1 The Challenges of Change Management.......................................................................................................... 9 Chapter 2 Responsive Governance: A Framework for Performance Analysis................................................................ 25 Chapter 3 Volume and Causes of Complaints in Major Agencies ................................................................................. 34 Chapter 4 Tackling the Challenges of Implementation .................................................................................................. 41 Chapter 5 Addressing Systemic, Policy & Procedural Issues........................................................................................... 45 Chapter 6 International Linkages..................................................................................................................................... 59 Chapter 7 Workplan 2008................................................................................................................................................ 64

Appendices......................................................................................................................................................................... 67

Appendix I Public Feedback ............................................................................................................................................... 68 Appendix II Our Team......................................................................................................................................................... 78 Appendix III Contact Details................................................................................................................................................ 79

Index of Tables Table 1 Institution of Complaints ................................................................................................................................ 25 Table 2 Workload and Disposal (2003-2007) ............................................................................................................... 26 Table 3 Average Workload and Disposal per Investigating Officer............................................................................. 27 Table 4 Office-wise Disposal as a Proportion of Workload ......................................................................................... 28 Table 5 Time Profile of Disposal of Complaints (2003-2007) ..................................................................................... 29 Table 6 Total Disposal, Relief and Rejections .............................................................................................................. 30 Table 7 Volume of Admitted Complaints against Major Agencies ............................................................................. 34 Table 8 Office-wise Receipt of Complaints against WAPDA in 2007......................................................................... 34 Table 9 Causes of Complaints against WAPDA/PEPCO ........................................................................................... 35 Table 10 Causes of Complaints against SNGPL-SSGCL ............................................................................................... 36 Table 11 Causes of Complaints against PTCL ............................................................................................................... 37 Table 12 Causes of Complaints against NADRA........................................................................................................... 37 Table 13 Causes of Complaints against the Pakistan Post ............................................................................................. 38 Table 14 Causes of Complaints against SLIC................................................................................................................. 39 Table 15 Causes of Complaints against AIOU............................................................................................................... 39 Table 16 Overview of Implementaiton Status 2007....................................................................................................... 43 Table 17 Nature of Complaints in Service Matters ........................................................................................................ 58

Index of Boxes Box 1 Comparison of Financial Arrangements ......................................................................................................... 10 Box 2 The Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman)'s Values System................................................................................... 10 Box 3 Performance and Service Standards for Complaint Management ................................................................. 14 Box 4 Tools for Empowering the Investigating Officers............................................................................................ 16 Box 5 Knowledge Management; Products, Instruments and Practices ..................................................................... 20 Box 6 Responsive Governance Framework................................................................................................................ 25 Box 7 Key Public Interest Actions Initiated in 2007 ...........................................................................................32---33 Box 8 Typical Reasons for Defective, Excessive and Wrong Billing by WAPDA/PEPCO...................................... 35

Index of Figures

Figure 1 Complaints Admitted and Rejected in limine .................................................................................................. 28 Figure 2 Closure Findings............................................................................................................................................... 29 Figure 3 Outcomes of Representations to the President ............................................................................................... 30

Islamabad, 21st March, 2008

Dear Mr. President

As required by Article 28 (1) of the Establishment of the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman) Order, 1983 (P.O. No. 1 of 1983), I have great pleasure in presenting the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman)’s Annual Report for 2007. I may point out that for the first time, a thematic treatment has been rendered to our annual report, with Responsive Governance selected as this year’s theme as it permeates all aspects of our work. Our performance assessment and management plans are presented in this report in the context of this theme.

The year 2007 was one of change and challenges. We took significant steps forward during 2007. By implementing our strategic vision encompassing Business Process Re-engineering, repositioning of the institution and improving our advocacy and outreach, we embarked on a process of enhancing the range of services and quality of our service delivery.. The successes achieved have reinforced our resolve to continue on the path of reform, while the challenges have led to more rational assessments of our capacity gaps and will serve to improve our future planning and implementation.

In the light of the trend of falling complaints over the last few years, the statistics for 2007 are significant. Complaints filed by the public more than doubled, with 70% related to maladministration in WAPDA, SNGPL, SSGCL and PTCL. As a result of the establishment of performance benchmarks, our average disposal per Investigating Officer rose to 335 from 40 in 2006 and from 228 in 2005 (The very low disposal in 2006 was due to the position of the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman) lying vacant for nearly eight months). Importantly, one-fifth of complaints resolution was achieved within 3 months and one-third within 6 months, although we shall strive to improve on this in coming years. Relief was provided in 87% of the cases disposed of, compared to 83% in 2006.

During 2007, a total of 423 representations were made to your office against our Findings. Of the decisions made by the President, 76% upheld our Findings and recommendations, which is a positive reflection on the quality of our work. To further improve this quality, the President’s decisions have now been made available to our Investigating Officers online, to inform and guide their work.

With your continued support and our resolve to stay the course in our efforts, I am confident we can redress more public grievances in a more efficient and effective manner.

Yours sincerely,

Javed Sadiq Malik

General (R) Pervez Musharraf President, Islamic Republic of Pakistan

FOREWORD

The year 2007 was an eventful one in which we took some major steps to improve our institutional performance. I would like to acknowledge the contribution made by all our officers and staff, whose efforts shaped our institutional performance. In particular, I would like to appreciate the performance of our Investigating Officers, who responded positively to changes introduced for better complaint management during 2007. However, all staff members contributed to a shared vision that sees us transforming into a more efficient, effective and credible institution—an imposing, but purposeful agenda that we will continue to pursue in 2008.

As I look back on 2007, I believe we were able to achieve substantial progress in important areas. By taking a fresh look at how we work and by reflecting on our mandate, objectives, organization structure and our work culture, we were able to identify several gaps and opportunities to improve our performance. The amendments in the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Investigation And Disposal of Complaints) Regulations 2003, setting of quantitative and quality standards and benchmarks for complaint management, operationalization of the complaints MIS and focus on implementation were all part of efforts to improve our service delivery. Vision, Mission and Values statements were framed for the first time, definitions of ‘maladministration’ as well as strategies to improve our advocacy and outreach and creation of space for civil society in our work, were developed and we deepened our engagement with donor partners. All of these improvements form part of a progression towards more responsive governance—the theme for this year’s report.

In 2008 however, we need to up the ante. All aspects of our work must reflect greater client-friendliness, within the context of strict impartiality. Our output and efficiency in complaint handling have to improve further and we need to demonstrate substantial improvements on implementation of our recommendations.

Complacency is the bane of the public sector but there is no place for it in an institution such as ours, which is mandated to proactively assist in raising standards of public sector efficiency, accountability and good governance. We must therefore challenge ourselves continuously to raise the bar of our own performance. I am confident that with team play and our firm resolve to perform better, we can achieve much more in coming years, than we did in 2007.

As ever, feedback and comments from the general public, and our other valued stakeholders, are encouraged and welcomed, so that we can learn more about stakeholder expectations and take purposeful steps to serve the public better.

Javed Sadiq Malik

Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

This report has been written by the following team:

Farrukh Bashir Moriani Lead Author

Contributing Team Members Syed Shabbir Ahmed Viqar-un-Zeb Farhat Hussain Liaqat Ali Choudhry Aftab-ul-Islam Raja Azmat Hussain Muhammad Ashfaq Ahmad Abdur Rauf

The team gratefully acknowledges the guidance and quality assurance provided by Mr. Javed Sadiq Malik, Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman) of Pakistan and the valuable input of Mr. Mohammad Ihtesham Khan, Secretary of the Wafaqi Mohtasib Secretariat. The team would also like to thank Zahid Mehmood, Shahid Mehmood, Syed Nabil Shah Gilani and Muhammad Shabbir for their assistance in developing this report.

The Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman)’s Values System

Vision

To promote high standards of governance, accountability and efficiency through administrative justice services.

Mission

To redress public grievances in a fair, prompt and transparent manner.

Values

Fairness Integrity

Continuous Improvement Transparency Independence Promptness

Confidentiality Accessibility Informality

Client friendliness

MMMaaannnaaagggeeemmmeeennnttt RRReeevvviiieeewww

Instruments for Realizing our Strategic Vision

Business Process Reengineering

Institutional Repositioning

Improved Advocacy & Outreach

Chapter 1

The Challenges of Change Management

The year 2007 marked the beginning of a new phase for our office, one that focuses on a strategic approach towards improving service delivery. Indeed, business was unusual during the year as we began to put in place requisite systems and procedures and equip ourselves with the resources, tools and enabling frameworks that would help us become a more responsive, responsible and accountable institution. Indeed, we have analysed our performance in 2007, using a Responsive Governance Framework, that includes measures for assessing our efficiency, effectiveness, inclusiveness and accessibility.

2. Built around three pillars—business process reengineering, repositioning the institution and improving our advocacy and outreach—our strategic vision embraces the aim of transforming ourselves into a modern, dynamic and more citizen-centred institution over a period of time. We recognize that our bid to improve public sector governance begins with improving ourselves and based on this principle, we had charted out a strategic roadmap last year, with several milestones identified for crossing during 2007.

3. As we mentioned in last year’s report, the process of change management is enveloped in its own dynamics, with a proclivity for throwing up new, often unexpected challenges. Our experience has been no exception, as we encountered several challenges ranging from employee resistance rooted partly in cultivated comfort zones and partly emanating from the fear of the new, to being stretched in terms of resources—both human and financial. Despite these challenges, we were able to achieve substantial progress on several fronts, as is detailed in this section.

4. While our experience underscored the value of having a strategic vision, persisting with that vision and of learning to sidestep temporary diversions and frustrations that inadequate resources and slow progress can generate, it also emphasized the fundamentally tenuous relationship between our resources, objectives and operations. We are faced with an unusual situation where our operations and assessment of these operations in the form of this report are carried out on a calendar year basis, whereas the resource availability in the form of government grants for this institution is on a fiscal year basis. Consequently, effective planning and implementation of these plans is difficult to synchronize, particularly in view of the rigidities of actual financial flows and the compartmentalized allocations.

Box 2 The Wafaqi Mohtasib

(Ombudsman)’s Values System

Vision To promote high standards of

governance, accountability and efficiency through administrative

justice services.

Mission To redress public grievances in a fair,

prompt and transparent manner.

Values Fairness Integrity

Continuous Improvement Transparency Independence Promptness

Confidentiality Accessibility Informality

Client friendliness

Secondly, with nearly all financial resources committed in nature—sufficient only for establishment costs such as salaries, allowances and overheads—we operate in a highly restrictive planning space, specially when compared with some other leading Ombudsman

institutions in Asia (see Box 1). This was the subject of a study by the Ombudsman of Hong Kong and highlights the difference in the operational models.

5. By striking partnerships with donor agencies, we have been able to circumvent the issue to an extent, but it does present deep challenges for our plans to put in place more responsive governance systems, procedures and practices and distracts us from focusing on creating greater value for the citizen by improving our own service delivery. We hope to address this basic issue in 2008 by taking it up with the government.

Developing a Values System

6. This report proudly features our Vision, Mission and Values statements at the outset (see Box 2). As we move forward to improve our institutional performance, we thought it was important to reflect on our mandate, objectives, organization structure and our work culture: What is it that we do? What and where do we want to be in future? And what are our binding institutional features and guiding principles?

7. The values system encapsulated in these statements is a shared vision of the institution, with input from all our officers. The institution of the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman) now has a defined values system, which we expect will shape our strategic direction, serve as the overarching standards for our work and reflect our principles, work ethics and organizational culture.

Box 1

C o m p a r i s o n o f F i n a n c i a l A r r a n g e m e n t s

Hong Kong Pakistan Expenditure control

Has full discretion in utilization and deployment of funds within the overall approved limit Not subject to scrutiny by the Government over its expenditure Cash-limited and no supplementary fund for increase would be provided

Has no authority to deploy funds between “Employee Related Expenses” and other subheads Subject to same degree of scrutiny as a Government department Can apply for supplementary grant for increase in expenditure

Unexpended funds

Can retain and invest surplus fund Unexpended funds will lapse at the end of a fiscal year and go back to General Revenue

Source: Comparative Study on Administrative and Financial Arrangements of the Hong Kong and Pakistan Ombudsman Offices, Ombudsman of Hong Kong 2007

Business Process Re-engineering

8. Our efforts at undertaking Business Process Re-engineering (BPR) entailed taking a fresh, self-critical look at our procedures, work flows, performance benchmarks and service standards, legal instruments and their fit with our new managerial ethos. As a result of this reflection, we were able to identify several opportunities for improving the level and quality of our responsiveness, both internally and to our clients. During 2008 we shall continue with our BPR initiatives, building on the following successful interventions:

i. Distilling the procedures

As an institution charged with the responsibility of cutting red tape in the federal government agencies, we consciously set out to lead from the front by simplifying our own procedures first. A key task towards achieving this administrative simplification was a review of our legal and administrative instruments. This review was originally planned to be performed through the assistance of the ADB financed Access to Justice Program (AJP) but delays in provision of technical assistance by the AJP, prompted us to initiate the process of reviewing our legal instruments ourselves, using in-house capacities. On the operational aspects, our subject of review during the year was the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Investigation and Disposal of Complaints) Regulations 2003, which govern and guide the complaint management processes. With the aim of removing redundancies and rigidities in these Regulations, the task was assigned to the newly established Research & Analysis Wing whose Additional Secretary headed a committee which included the end users of the Regulations, namely the Investigating Officers and Registrar. After considerable deliberations and consultations with the regional offices, the Regulations were revised and now provide simpler processes and reduced timeframes for specific actions, which will help increase our productivity and efficiency. The amendments in the Regulations marked a first, but important, step towards administrative simplification; its benefits have already started accruing, as is evident from the fact that disposal of complaints per Investigating Officer is higher than it has been over the past three years and that nearly one fifth of the complaints are now disposed of within 3 months.

On the administrative side, we drafted and submitted the Employees (Service) Rules for the Office of the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman) -- unchanged since 1983—to the Ministry of Law, Justice & Human Rights for vetting. However, despite considerable follow up, we were unable to arrive at an agreement with the Ministry on the proposed Rules. We intend to achieve closure on this issue during 2008.

ii. Migration to IT-enabled Operations

Our plans for migrating complaint management processes within the organisation to an online environment were perhaps the most ambitious and challenging for 2007. Although the process of developing customised software and implementing IT-enabled operations had been in the wings since 2005, it was only during the first quarter of 2007 that we finally overcome the impediments that had severely delayed going online. Our Management Information System (MIS) covers several components—including Human Resource, Accounts, Inventory Control and Library software applications—but the centre piece is the online Complaint Management Information System (CMIS), which serves as the platform for streamlined, integrated complaint management processes. From a managerial perspective, it was important to press ahead with the CMIS application as it is an instrument for improving our responsiveness to the public, the complainant, whereas the other modules were for internal consumption; hence the focused managerial attention towards operationalization of the CMIS.

While the benefits of Information Technology (IT)-enabled services are fairly obvious and numerous, so are the challenges that surface in the wake of their introduction, particularly in terms of IT-readiness at the employee as well as the procedural levels. During the soft launch of the CMIS, employee fears of any downsizing were allayed through investments in their training, while we sought to synchronize our online and offline case flow management through a series of communications with investigating officers on how to use the CMIS. The launch of the CMIS was coupled with the institution of standards for complaint management and once the investigating officers, and staff associated with them, understood the link and the usefulness of the CMIS as an aid for their performance, their earlier misgivings gradually gave way to acceptance of, even a level of comfort with, the new operational environment.

Since July 2007, our CMIS has been fully operational and minus the predictable early-life glitches, has worked well. All complaint records from 1998 onwards and final Findings from July 2007 are now available on our online database, with plans afoot to bring all records and Findings since the establishment of this institution on this database shortly; in the wake of the CMIS launch, the cycle of receiving, finalizing and issuing Findings has been reduced from a few weeks to 24 hours or less in most cases, raising the institutional efficiency levels.

We have also initiated the use of emails for intra and inter office communication. Every officer and official of Basic Pay Scale 14 and above has an official email account and communication over email is encouraged; so far, the use is limited—old habits die hard—but within the office we hope to slowly replace endless paper and file trails with emails as the preferred form of communication. We now also accept complaints via email, although the number remains very small due to lack of public awareness about this feature, something we intend to address in 2008.

iii. Driving performance through standards

The year saw the introduction of service and performance standards for our complaints management operations. Together, these standards comprise our service charter for complaints management (see Box 3). For an organization that has clearly defined outputs, such as the number of complaints handled, such standards are fundamental to close monitoring of performance; in their absence, performance assessment of the Investigating Officers and the Registration branch tends to be subjective and is the cause of poor accountability. That is no longer the case.

To arrive at fair, equitable and measurable performance standards for Investigating Officers, we carried out a detailed exercise of reviewing case load, productivity and efficiency trends over the past ten years. Based on this analysis, we determined that the optimal caseload of every Investigating Officer at any given time was 250 cases, while the standard for disposal per month was 35 cases. Besides these productivity standards, we set an average of three months as the standard timeframe for completion of a case; this timeframe was arrived at by considering the telescoped processing timelines contained in the revised Wafaqi Mohtasib (Investigation and Disposal of Complaints) Regulations 2003 for specific actions leading to the disposal of a complaint.

Enforcement of these standards gave rise to several considerations, including the need to hire more Investigating Officers, more equitable distribution of work amongst existing officers, as well as rationalization of staff associated with Investigating Officers. All of this was achieved and will continue to be a live issue during 2008.

Box3

The Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman)’s Performance and Service Standards for Complaints Management

Registration Wing Standards

Efficiency • A decision to either admit or reject a complaint shall be made within 24 hours of its receipt. • A complaint that has been admitted shall be forwarded to the relevant Investigating Officer

within 24 hours of its admission. • Acknowledgement or a letter of regret to the complainant shall be sent within 24 hours of the

decision to admit or reject the complaint.

Investigating Officer Standards Productivity Every Investigating Officer shall dispose of at least thirty five complaints per month. Efficiency Complaints shall be disposed of within three months of admission.

To improve our responsiveness to the complainant, we also instituted service standards for our Registration Wing, which performs the important task of conducting preliminary assessment of complaints received in this office. The standards were exacting, requiring decisions to be made on admission of complaints and conveyed to the complainants in no more than a combined time period of 48 hours, but this level of responsiveness was important to set

the tone for further processing of admitted complaints.

As with any process of standards setting, the real challenge lies in the ability to enforce standards. Although our capacity for performance oversight has been strengthened through the Research & Analysis Wing, it remains an area requiring further attention. However, to arrive at a scientific determination of the extent to which our Registration Wing met their service standard, we conducted a sample survey and found that the standards were met in 100% cases. In relation to the performance standards for investigating officer, we also gathered evidence, which indicates that these standards are having the intended effect of raising the bar for our institutional performance, as has been detailed in the section on performance review. While the results so far are encouraging—we have been able to raise both our productivity as well as efficiency--there is no doubt

though, that with regard to our monitoring capabilities, we need to do more and do it better, in 2008.

iv. Improving the governance structures

A key development during 2007 was the operationalisation of the Research & Analysis and the Implementation Wings. These additions to our governance structure provide appropriate focus for evidence-led operations and for effectively achieving compliance with our recommendations. Admittedly, we need to bolster the human resource base in both Wings to enable them to fulfil their assigned roles in an even better fashion, but the inputs of these Wings—the Research & Analysis Wing in particular—have already sharpened our ability to sift the facts from perceptions and thus improved the quality of our decision making and planning.

During 2007 we also established the International Wing, headed by an Additional Secretary, to provide a dedicated resource for our work on the Asian Ombudsman Association (AOA), the International Ombudsman Institute as well as ongoing and potential partnerships with the Asian Development Bank and the UNDP. We play an important role as the President of the AOA, the AOA Secretariat and as a Director on the IOI Board. This engagement at regional and international levels also has a direct impact on our work as the process of knowledge and experience sharing that occurs through the AOA and IOI, allows us to bring new, global insights in to our work and also helps set benchmarks for comparing our performance.

To actively debate and reflect on matters of importance, especially those involving policy issues, a Senior Officers Forum has also been active, during the year, which meets from time to time to deliberate such issues. The outcomes of these discussions invariably translate in to important decisions that help clarify issues related to our jurisdiction, ways in which investigations can be improved and important decisions of the President and their implications.

We’ve also institutionalized the practice of regularly meeting all ministerial and support staff of this office and following up on commitments made to resolve their problems. Staff now has a forum for openly sharing their views and airing grievances and the fact that many good points emerge from these meetings is an indication of a more open culture slowly being developed in our office.

Box 4 TOOLS FOR EMPOWERING THE INVESTIGATING OFFICERS

Online systems and services Launch of the online complaint MIS which provides an online case load management system Online access to the President’s decisions as an aid to improve quality of draft Findings

Delegation of powers Powers were delegated under Article 14(3) of the President’s Order No.1 of 1983, to the Heads of our

Regional in specific cases, for issuing summons to enforce attendance of chronic absentee officials of various Federal agencies in hearings

Revision in the Regulations Amendments in the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Investigation and Disposal of Complaints) Regulations

2003 were made to facilitate the work of the Investigating Officers and provide a more efficient legal instrument that supported quicker disposal of a complaint

Issuance of policy circulars The regular issuance of circulars on important issues serve as guidelines for the investigation process

and helps improve the quality of the draft Findings

Detailed definition of ‘maladministration’ Although ‘maladministration’ itself is defined in the President’s Order No. 1 of 1983, our main legal

instrument, but terms used in defining ‘maladministration’ are not. This initiative helped reduce selective interpretation by detailing definitions for various terms. These definitions can be accessed from our website at www.mohtasib.gov.pk/definitions

Rationalization of work and staffing To address the issue of disproportionate distribution of work and support staff, a rationalization

exercise was carried leading to relatively fairer and reasonable allocations on both counts

v. Empowering the Investigating Officers

The Investigating Officer is the lynchpin of this institution, performing the primary task of investigating a complaint and providing fair and speedy redress of a grievance. While there is always room for improvement in the output of the Investigating Officers, their contribution in providing relief to thousands of people every year is admirable. As part of our BPR exercise, a need was however, felt to empower the Investigating Officer to enable them to comply with newly set performance standards. This empowerment took several forms (see Box 4) ranging from provision of IT tools to better policy guidance, to improved legal instruments. The outcome of this empowerment is reflected in relatively improved performance of this institution as reported in the Performance Review section. We intend to continue on this path of

empowerment of the Investigating Officers, through building capacity using training, analytical and communication tools in 2008.

Ombudsman’s National Consultative Conference 14 April 2007

The Wafaqi Mohtasib Secretariat organized this major event, bringing together—for the time ever—all Ombudsmen in Pakistan, experts from government, civil society and international donor agencies. Sponsored by the ADB funded Access to Justice Program, the conference served to highlight the issues and challenges faced by the Ombudsmen institutions.

Extensive policy dialogue took place on the five themes that impact the performance of the Ombudsmen institutions, namely Freedom of Information, internal public grievance redress systems, procedures and systems, human resource development and training and strengthening of outreach through public awareness. An impressive line up of speakers, including Dr. Ishrat Husain, Chairman National Commission for Government Reforms, Mr. Imtiaz Sahibzada, ex-Advisor to the Prime Minister and former Wafaqi Mohtasib, Mr. Kunwar Idris, former Chief Secretary Sindh, Barrister Shahida Jamil, former Federal Law Minister, Dr. Masuma Hasan, former Cabinet Secretary, Mr. Hamid Sharif, Country Director, Asia Foundation, Mr. Hifz-ur-Rehman, Additional Secretary Establishment Division, Mr. Mukhtar Ahmad, Executive Director CPDI and Mr. Sarwar Khan, ADB Team Leader for the AJP, provided a diversity of perspectives and insights.

Several policy recommendations were made during the conference, covering areas such as setting of standards for improved service delivery; review of legal instruments; strengthening of grievance redress systems in public institutions; improving outreach and oversight of Ombudsmen through stakeholder partnerships; and building capacity of Ombudsman staff through training and evidence-led operations.

Repositioning the Institution

Our bid to transform into an institution that can not only redress public grievances in a more responsive manner but also help raise overall governance standards is dependant as much on our willingness to shed our old skin as it is on our ability to assume and execute new roles. The year 2007 was the first year of implementing our vision. And the experience of managing the transition was instructive and pointed out areas where greater focus is required, such as stakeholder engagement, policy analysis and oversight. Despite being stretched, we made significant progress in key areas as reported in this section.

i. Breaking the ice

Our aim during the year was to emerge from a phase of introvertedness and enhance our engagement with stakeholders. Admittedly, we could not follow

through with our intention to regularly interact with Agencies outside of the investigation process, but we did make significant strides forward through four instruments: first, the organization of the first ever Ombudsman’s National Consultative Conference (see opposite) which brought together all Ombudsmen in Pakistan as well as relevant stakeholders in the Federal and provincial governments as well as members of the civil society; second, we created a basis for regular coordination with the Agencies by getting the list of Focal Persons updated by the Agencies and circulated to all our offices, encouraging Investigating Officers and heads of the

regional offices to interact with these Focal Persons every month for expediting investigations or implementation of our recommendations; we also aggressively marketed ourselves to the ADB and UNDP—whom we identified as the most relevant partners based on a good fit between mutual priorities—and built on our ongoing relationship with the Access to Justice Program, resulting in new opportunities for building our capacities in research, implementation and knowledge sharing; and lastly, we piloted our advisory role by working with the Capital Development Authority (CDA) to

develop a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for more efficient sanitation in the capital city. The latter intervention is of particular importance since it represented the first effort made by this office to function in an advisory capacity to address a systemic issue. All three interventions were most encouraging in terms of the interest and reception of the stakeholders to this new mode of working of this office, as well as their outcomes. Clearly, its early days yet for our plans for enhanced stakeholder engagement, but the ice has certainly been broken.

ii. Taking the bull by the horns

Over the past year, we have focused on enhancing our capacity for research and analysis and building our knowledge management capabilities in partnership with specialized institutions such as the academia. As a first step and with financial support from the Asian Development Bank (ADB) through their Governance Cluster TA funds, we will be carrying out a research study on systemic failures in WAPDA; the choice of WAPDA as the subject of our research was based on the fact that more than half of the complaints received by us relate to maladministration in WAPDA; the outcomes and recommendations emerging from the study would likely have the greatest impact on our work and in providing relief to thousands of aggrieved members of the public. The study, which will be carried out as a collaborative effort in conjunction with WAPDA and a leading academic and research organization, will examine the internal grievance redress procedures in WAPDA in their entirety, examining institutional, legal, financial and administrative frameworks and is intended to deliver strategic, actionable next steps for addressing systemic issues, particularly those related to defective billing.

iii. Improving Oversight

As with most public sector institutions, Monitoring & Evaluation (M&E) is our Achilles heel. This is true for both our administrative and substantive operations of grievance redress. With particular reference to our grievance redress procedures, our internal system for monitoring the implementation of our recommendations is weak. Prior to 2007, there was in fact no dedicated wing of the organisation charged with this vital task. Investigating Officers were expected to perform this function in addition to their main responsibility of handling complaints. As a result, oversight efforts were dissipated, inconsistent and varied widely in terms of outcomes.

To provide adequate focus for this critical function and to put in place a dedicated team and systems for M&E, an Implementation Wing was established in 2007. This Wing works directly under the supervision of the Secretary of the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman)’s Secretariat. Currently, its staffing consists of a Director with support staff, but a plan for expanding staffing and providing other human and technical resources has been approved and will be rolled out in the first quarter of 2008. As per this plan, Implementation Cells will be established in each of our eight regional offices, headed by a Director with a small team attached with him; the strength of officers at the head office level is also being bolstered. Moreover, a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) or implementation has also been developed and an online implementation monitoring module is under development for integration with our online complaint MIS. This would enable improved data collection, dissemination and timely risk management.

As mentioned elsewhere in this report, we have instituted more objective performance evaluation systems and standards for our complaints management, introducing performance and service standards for our investigating officers and Registration office, both in terms of minimum output per month and timeframes for these outputs or service delivery. We aim to refine and strengthen oversight of performance through use of more sophisticated analysis and tools over the next twelve months.

On the managerial aspects, we have tried to improve our M&E systems in relation to our budget and human resource use, but clearly there is great room for improvement in these areas. One way in which this objective is being realized is through the introduction during 2008 of work planning, with each of our Wings preparing their own business plan, identifying key tasks and initiatives for 2008; assigning clear responsibilities for these tasks as well as timeframes for implementation; and providing performance indicators for these tasks/interventions.

iv. Bridging the knowledge gap

The only knowledge product developed and disseminated by this office is the Annual Report, which is published to fulfil a legal requirement under the P.O No. 1 of 1983. As the sole publication of this office, it thus carries a rather large responsibility for public disclosure on our institutional performance, addressing information needs of multiple stakeholders as well as sharing and dissemination of our policies, plans and challenges faced in implementing them.

Box 5

Knowledge Management Products, Instruments and Practices

Online access to case details through

the Complaints MIS Online access to President’s Decisions

since 2002 Analysis and internal dissemination of

performance assessments on investigations and implementation

Development of a strategic framework for communication: “Improving Service Delivery through Improving Advocacy and Outreach”

Development of an institutional Fact Sheet

Development of a strategic framework for ‘Role of Civil Society in the Work of the Ombudsman’

Development of Practice Notes on eleven topics of operational relevance including our legal instruments; steps taken for speedy disposal; implementation issues; Freedom of Information

Development of proposals for knowledge management in partnership with ADB and UNDP, including conduct of a major research study on systemic issues in WAPDA; Best Practice case studies; conferences and workshops on thematic issues related to public grievance redress

Website updates, including posting of annual reports.

Recognizing the immense value in focusing on knowledge management we have been laying great stress over the last year on providing an enabling environment for learning and sharing. Our partnerships with both UNDP and ADB prominently feature our focus on knowledge management (detailed in chapter on the workplan for 2008) and are aimed at building both a culture and capacity for knowledge based operations. Weaning staff away from entrenched practices and mindsets immersed in bureaucratic inclinations is a big task, but we are approaching the issue positively and with purpose.

During 2007 we made several efforts to take small, measured steps towards knowledge management (Box 5). The establishment of the Research & Analysis and Implementation Wings has resulted in management now dealing more regularly with evidence rather than perceptions. Moreover, in conjunction with the AJP, we published a report on the Ombudsman’s National Consultative Conference which contained the proceedings of the conference as well as important policy recommendations, on which we shall work during 2008 with TA input from ADB and UNDP.

Improved advocacy and outreach

As has been mentioned in several parts of this report, attempting to adopt a more inclusive approach and style of management, one in which advocacy and outreach form critical elements of policy, is a daunting task for an institution that is not used to or comfortable with, openness. But as the overview of steps taken in this direction presented below affirm, our journey has begun:

i. Treading the path less travelled

Appropriate, timely and regular communication plays an extremely important role in the life of any organization, but even more so in the case of institutions such as ours, which deliver public services. Owing to a lack of strategic direction, our first move towards addressing the yawning gap between our work, its outcomes and the perceptions of the stakeholders, was the decision to develop a holistic communication strategy. Technical support in the form of a consultancy from the AJP was expected to develop this strategy but delays led us to undertake the exercise through in-house resources. The outcome of this effort is a comprehensive and strategic framework which not only provides a roadmap for action, but identifies the instruments through which our advocacy and outreach initiatives can address divergent stakeholder needs in this regard. Implementation of this strategic framework will be undertaken in 2008, with financial and technical support of the UNDP and will, we are confident, lead us to new, better paths of efficiency and transparency.

Improving Service Delivery through Improving Advocacy & Outreach

Key Features of the Communication Strategy

Ensure credibility of information Focus on enhanced public disclosure and

knowledge management Develop the Ombudsman brand Introduce Customer Relationship

Management (CRM) Deeper engagement with media Use IT-enabled outreach through websites,

UAN, Toll Free and SMS based services Partner with civil society for extending

outreach and advocacy net, especially for creating awareness about Ombudsman services in rural areas and amongst women and aged

Create and sustain engagement platforms for frequent stakeholder consultation

Improve internal communication using various instruments

Out-of-the-box innovations such as Ombudsman FM programming; TV programming including plays; tapping Corporate Social Responsibility frameworks

ii. Engaging civil society

As part of our plans for greater openness we have embarked upon a drive to introduce a role for civil society institutions in our work. In line with our attempt to approach these new areas of policy and practice by first developing a strategic framework, we conducted a research study on ‘The Role of Civil Society in the Work of the Ombudsman’. This study proposes to create space for civil society institutions in the operations and policy making of our office and presents an actionable framework for strategic engagement with civil society (Box ---, left). Implementation of this framework will also be initiated in 2008 under the UNDP project, although the proposed strategic interventions will spill over several years.

iii. Initiatives Still Under Implementation

While positive beginnings were made on several fronts during 2007. However, we were unable to work on one crucial area, namely improving the public’s accessibility to our services. Mindful of the need to facilitate complainants, we intended to introduce several services, including a Universal Access Number (UAN); a toll free telephone service; a Call Centre; and launching an interactive website. However, these initiatives could not materialize during 2007, because of delays in receiving funds from donor partners. We do want to point out however, that groundwork for all these initiatives has been completed in the form of concept notes, cost estimates and content development. In 2008, we intend to take these initiatives up for implementation, to be financed under the proposed UNDP project, which focuses on enhancing our outreach and improving access to our services.

Framework for Inclusiveness

Establish a Civil Society Advisory Committee to

provide independent input on policy issues related to outreach, advocacy and inclusiveness

Institute client-led oversight mechanisms Engage civil society for co-delivery of services

on PPP arrangements Invite and integrate as far as is possible, civil

society views on public interest actions initiated on own-motion

Facilitate and encourage civil society-led accreditation systems for federal government agencies

PPPeeerrrfffooorrrmmmaaannnccceee RRReeevvviiieeewww

Box 6

Responsive Governance Framework

Building public confidence Raising productivity Increasing efficiency Improving effectiveness Focusing on accountability Improving accessibility Encouraging flexibility Introducing stakeholder voice Enhancing transparency Public interest actions

Chapter 2 Responsive Governance: A Framework for Performance Analysis

Over the past year, the office of the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman) has followed a new, multi-pronged strategic vision to reposition itself as a more professional, efficient and credible institution. Using several instruments and initiating implementation of key aspects of a strategic approach to improving services, efforts have been made to institute better, more responsive public grievance redress systems. This section of the report provides an analysis of our performance in this respect.

2. In line with the theme of this year’s report—responsive governance—and as a departure from previous reports, an effort has been made to evaluate our institutional performance using a Responsive Governance Framework (see Box 6). This framework consists of key indicators that provide an objective, holistic manner of gauging our performance, consolidating quantitative and qualitative analysis and information on all major aspects of our service and service delivery.

A. Building Public Confidence 3. The nexus between poverty reduction and access to justice is well established. Several studies in Pakistan1 have demonstrated that vulnerability to poverty is likely to be greater in countries where the public does not have ready and equitable recourse to justice services. It is in this broader context that we view our services and the importance of delivering these services to as large a segment of the population as is possible. Outreach to the traditionally marginalized segments of our population, such as women, adequate geographic dispersion to achieve a balance between urban and rural areas in relation to origin of complaints are added dimensions of our service delivery that feature prominently in our planning.

4. A measure of the public’s confidence in the institution of the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman) is the number of complaints filed every year. The downward trend witnessed over the past few years in the number of complaints filed, was arrested in 2007, with more than 23,000 complaints filed by the public—-double the number in 2006 and one and a half time more than in 2005 (Table 1).

1 See the PRSP II, Government of Pakistan; ‘Between Hope and Despair’ DFID; ‘Access to Justice Program- Program Loan Document’, ADB; ‘Legal Empowerment in Pakistan’, UNDP and ‘Access to Justice for Women’, CIET

Table 1 Institution of Complaints

Year Opening Balance Received

2003 22,219 25,761

2004 15,617 25,327

2005 8,333 15,136

2006 3,889 11,887

2007 5,611 23,290

5. A key factor for the increased institution was the decision to readmit complaints against the WAPDA/PEPCO, SNGPL and SSGCL, in the light of the clarification on jurisdiction by the Ministry of Law, Justice & Human Rights. Other factors contributing to this significant rise in complaints included efforts made to raise our public profile through regular press releases, which played a useful role in creating greater public awareness about services offered by the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman). While recognizing that rising public complaints are indicative of poor governance at the federal level, we view this as a positive indicator from a client-provider perspective, since it also reflects the increasing trust that the public has in our institution.

6. Besides the increase in sheer volume of complaints, an interesting aspect of the complaints filed is that 10% were filed by women, double the percentage in 2003. In sharp contrast to their male counterparts whose complaints tended to be predominantly against WAPDA/PEPCO, complaints by females accounted for majority of complaints against SLIC, (51%), more than a third of complaints against Pakistan Bait ul Maal and AIOU and nearly a quarter of those filed against Pakistan Railways.

7. As regards geographic dispersion of origins of complaints, the districts from where maximum complaints were received were Peshawar (3,338), Lahore (1,367), Karachi (795), Nowshera (665) Islamabad (620), Rawalpindi (546), Charsadda (505), Faisalabad (421) and Sargodha (348). The maximum number of complaints against any single agency in Peshawar (92%), Charsadda (92%), Nowshera (91%), Lahore (57%), Faisalabad (46%), Rawalpindi (31%) and Sargodha (31%) pertained to distribution companies of WAPDA. The maximum complaints in Karachi were against PTCL (29%).

8. While these statistics are encouraging in that they point towards a basic level of awareness amongst different segments of the public across most parts of the country, they also highlight the need to focus on improving advocacy and outreach efforts, particularly amongst females, the rural population and in the provinces of Sindh and Balochistan, whose citizens account for a very small proportion of our total complainants.

B. Raising Productivity 9. In a bid to raise productivity and thus redress more grievances, we set a standard for monthly disposal of at least thirty five complaints by every IO. The outcome of this initiative has

been a rise in disposal to 13,388 in 2007 (Table 2). While low disposal in 2006 was due to the position of the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman) lying

vacant for nearly 8 months, output in absolute numbers in 2007 compares favorably even with 2005, even though the number of IOs was higher in 2004 and 2005. In the coming year, we expect the trend of increased disposal to gain further strength and close in on disposals as a percentage of workload, achieved from 2003—2005, as we consolidate the measures taken for higher productivity, including hiring new IOs and further simplification of procedures.

Table 2 Workload and Disposal (2003-2007) Disposal after Investigation

Year Opening Balance

Received Disposal in limine

Disposal in limine d÷ f (%)

Admitted Total

Workload Relief Rejected Total (h+i)

Disposal j ÷ g (%)

a b c d e f g h i j k 2003 22,219 25,761 10,346 40% 15,415 37,634 16,921 5,096 22,017 59

2004 15,617 25,327 10,581 42% 14,746 30,363 18,433 3,597 22,030 73

2005 8,333 15,136 8,867 59% 6,269 14,602 8,934 1,779 10,713 73

2006 3,889 11,887 8,431 71% 3,456 7,345 1,507 227 1,734 24

2007 5,611 23,290 5,472 23% 17,818 23,429 11657 1,731 13,388 57

10. Although the average disposal of the IOs during 2007 increased to 335 complaints, from a paltry 40 in 2006 and 228 in 2005, the average disposal per IO per month was 28 (Table 3); since the standard of minimum monthly disposal of 35 was set midway through 2007, this figure is not a representative one. In the context of lower number of IOs and increased institution, the performance is encouraging, especially when compared to 2005 and 2006, and emphasizes the importance of setting and enforcing standards for improving performance.

Table 3 Average Workload and Disposal per Investigating Officer Office / Description 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Workload / No. of IOs 5550 /9 4783 /10 3165/9 1871/8 4448/7

Average workload Per I.O. 617 478 352 234 635

Disposed of 3156 / 9 3304 / 10 2203 / 9 667 / 8 2525/7 H.O.

Average Disposal Per I.O. 351 330 245 83 361 Workload / No. of IOs 8780/12 5608/12 2869/12 1427/12 4609/11


Disposed of 6337 / 12 4846 / 12 2082 / 12 133 / 12 3405/11 Lahore

Average Disposal Per I.O. 528 403 174 11 309 Workload / No. of IOs 4731/7 2687/7 2084/7 1189/6 2010/6


Disposed of 2643 / 7 2041 / 7 1408 / 7 566 / 6 1261/6 Karachi

Average Disposal Per I.O. 378 292 201 94 210

Workload / No. of IOs 9814 / 8 9356 /10 3295 /9 771 /8 5910 / 7


Disposed of 5176 / 8 6608 / 10 2697 / 9 109 / 8 3274 /7 Peshawar


Workload / No. of IOs 200 / 1 222 / 1 192 / 1 136 / 1 307/ 1


Disposed of 183 / 1 163 / 1 144 / 1 8 / 1 237 /1 Quetta


Workload / No. of IOs 3595 / 4 2803 / 4 3536 / 4 673 / 3 1720 / 2

Average workload Per I.O. 899 700 884 224 860 Disposed of 1338 / 4 2468 / 4 874 / 4 45 / 3 685 /2

Sukkur


Workload / No. of IOs 3402 /3 2017/ 3 907 / 1 661 / 2 2190 / 2


Disposed of 2230 / 3 1639 / 3 498 / 1 41 / 2 987 /2 Multan

Average Disposal Per I.O. 743 546 498 21 494 Workload / No. of IOs 1562 / 3 1043 / 3 811 / 3 482 / 2 1760 / 3


Disposed of 954 / 3 926 / 3 658 / 3 157 / 2 730 /3 Faisalabad


Workload / No. of IOs 285 / 1 231 /1 135 / 1 479/ 1

Average workload Per I.O. 285 231 135 479 / 1

Disposed of 35 / 1 149 / 1 8 / 1 284 /1 D. I. Khan

Average Disposal Per I.O.

Office not established

35 149 8 284

Workload / No. of IOs 37634 / 47 30363 / 51 14602 / 47 7345 / 43 23429/

40


Disposed of 22017 / 47 22030 / 51 10713 / 47 1734 / 43 13388

/40 Average Disposal Per I.O. 468 432 228 40 335

Overall

Average Disposal/IO/Month 39 36 19 3 28

11. However, disposal as a proportion of workload, an important and perhaps a more equitable measure of productivity, has risen from 24% in 2006 to 57% in 2007. While comparison with performance in 2006 needs to be qualified due to unusual circumstances whereby the position

of the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman) was vacant for more than eight months, thus impacting disposal, there is clear evidence of improvement. It is also interesting to note the considerable variation in performance of the regional offices not only in terms of their average disposal, but also disposal as a proportion of workload (Table 4). As is readily evident from the table, while all offices have improved disposal as a proportion of workload over 2006, the Lahore, Quetta and Sukkur offices have demonstrated improvements even over their performance in 2005.

C. Increasing Efficiency 12. Efficiency in redress of grievances is a critical measure of our performance. Over the last year, we have striven to increase our levels of efficiency by introducing a service charter that focuses on setting standards for our complaint management operations, reducing delays in processing of complaints through administrative simplification, amendments in the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Investigation And Disposal of Complaints) Regulations 2003 and empowering the IOs through various instruments such as an online complaints MIS, elaborate definitions of maladministration and access to the President’s decisions (for details, please see the chapter on Management Review).

13. As a result of this focus on raising efficiency levels and as a consequence of implementing the service charter, we were able to make some headway on several fronts. Rejections in limine2, which reflects the quality of our initial review of complaints, reduced from a high of 73% in 2006 to 23% in 2007 (Figure 1), indicating the impact of the decision to again start admitting complaints against the WAPDA/PEPCO, SNGPL and SSGCL, as well as our willingness to be reasonably flexible, within legal constraints, in upfront review of complaints. Indeed, lower rejections in limine are the outcome of not only more careful screening by the

2 in limine is a Latin term which in a legal context means ‘at the outset’

Table 4 Office-wise Disposal as a Proportion of Workload (%)

Office 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Head Office 57 69 70 36 57

Lahore 72 86 73 9 74

Karachi 56 76 68 48 63

Peshawar 53 71 82 14 55

Quetta 92 73 75 6 77

Sukkur 37 88 25 7 40

Multan 66 81 55 6 45

Faisalabad 61 89 81 33 41

D. I. Khan NA 12 65 6 59

Overall 59 73 73 24 57

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Admitted Rejected in limine

Figure 1 Complaints Admitted and Rejected in limine

Figure 2 Closure Findings (%)

Registration Wing, but also of a policy decision to take a liberal, more accommodating view of complaints received, sidestepping tendencies to subject complaints to a mechanical and unsympathetic review; a case in point is complaints that are marginally time-barred, which are no longer rejected simply on a technicality. This policy of being more flexible and client-friendly will be continued in 2008, at the same time as efforts to improve initial review capacities continue.

14. As an alternative dispute resolution system and in line with the ethos of delivering administrative justice in a fair and speedy manner, we are very conscious of the need to reduce the time taken to resolve a complaint. Performance against the newly established benchmark of striving to resolve complaints within 3 months has been encouraging in that nearly one-fifth of complaints were resolved within 3 months, a vast improvement on performance since 2003 (Table 5); equally

encouraging was that a third of complaints were disposed of within 6 months, again the highest percentage since 2003. However, the fact that 24% of complaints still take up to an year for disposal, with nearly a quarter taking longer than a year, is a cause of concern and an area where even greater focus will be laid in 2008.

Similarly, there is a need to continue to drive the process of resolving ever higher proportion of complaints within 3 months; since the institution of the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman) is meant to be an alternative to formal and lengthy justice delivery systems such as the courts, enhancing efficiency in terms of quick disposal of complaints is a means of improving our credibility and of building public confidence in our institution. As mentioned earlier, we took several steps in 2007, such as telescoping timeframes for processing complaints, use of the MIS etc. which have contributed to the considerable improvement in the time profile of disposal, but these initiatives need to be reinforced and scaled up in 2008. Special emphasis was also laid on following a Last in First Out (LIFO) approach to dispose of complaints filed earlier than 2006 that remained unresolved. As a result of this focus, the number of aged complaints has been brought down from 5611 at the start of the year 2007, to only 362 by its close.

15. In addition, it is worth pointing out that to achieve our aim of quick disposal of complaints, we have encouraged our IOs to achieve closure by employing Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) techniques such as mediation and conciliation. Although no formal training in ADR techniques and instruments is provided to the IOs—something we will address in 2008 through our partnership with the ADB and UNDP—they are able to fall back on their experience and try and resolve a complaint through mutual satisfaction of the complainant and the Agency. In 2007, nearly half of the complaints were resolved through closures (Figure 2). Although there are several reasons for closing a

Table 5 Time Profile of Disposal of Complaints (2003-2007)

Year Within 3 months

Within 6 months

Within 1 year

More than 1 year

2003 1% 11% 38% 51%

2004 2% 20% 37% 41%

2005 4% 28% 37% 31%

2006 3% 10% 22% 65%

2007 19% 33% 24% 24%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

% 3.94% 5.76% 7.25% 9.90% 11.18 9.28% 8.90% 18.23 22.85 34.37 48.60

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Accepted Rejected

Figure 3 Outcomes of Representations to the President

complaint, nearly 80% complaints were closed in 2007 on account of relief already having been provided by the Agency or the satisfaction of the complainant with the Agency report and response. Closures through mediation and conciliation only accounted for 5% in 2007 and we hope to increase closures in 2008 using these ADR techniques, so as to provide quick relief to the public.

16. A third and important measure of our efficiency and more particularly, the dimension of quality of our Findings is the degree to which the President accepts representations against our Findings and recommendations contained in them. During 2007, 423 representations were filed with the President, out of which 188 were decided in 2007, with 76% rejected (Figure 3), reflecting well on our output. Of the 46 representations that were upheld in 2007, fourteen were accepted on grounds of merit, while the remaining 32 were accepted on grounds of jurisdiction, interpretation of law, rules and regulations, contractual disputes, and time barred cases. In the light of the President’s decisions we aim to strike a balance between our objective to be more citizen-friendly and flexible in our approach within the confines of law and the need to improve the screening functions in our office.

D. Improving Effectiveness 17. Achieving desired levels of efficiency present a part of the strategic approach towards improving services offered by our institution; the other, equally important aspect of our work is the extent of our effectiveness. We measure effectiveness in two ways: one, the extent to which we provide relief to complainants; and two, our ability to ensure implementation of our recommendations within prescribed timeframes.

18. The performance in 2007 as regards provision of relief was at par with previous years, with relief provided in 87% cases (Table 6). Although the consistently high figure of percentage of cases where relief is provided is indicative of recurrent and pervasive maladministration in the Agencies, we use it as a mirror of our effectiveness since the raison d’etere of our institution is redress of grievances. Nevertheless, we are mindful of our mandate to work with the Agencies in raising

standards of governance, instituting better internal grievance redress systems and improving accountability and transparency in their operations. As has been detailed in the Management Review and Strategic Plan chapters of this report, we intend to take concrete steps

Table 6 Total Disposal, Relief and Rejections

Description 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Total Disposal 22,017 22,030 10,713 1,734 13,388

Relief 16,921 18,433 8,934 1,507 11,657

Rejected 5,096 3,597 1,779 227 1,731

Percentage of Relief Cases

77% 84% 83% 87% 87%

Percentage of Rejected Cases

23% 16% 17% 13% 13%

in this regard. Fulfillment of that aspect of our mandate however, cannot detract from our basic function, which is resolution of complaints, hence the positive way in which we perceive the high percentage of relief provided to the public.

19. In relation to implementation of our recommendations within prescribed timeframes, the situation is not that encouraging, with implementation achieved in only 62% of cases, and merely 9% implemented within the prescribed time. This is a cause of concern and a challenge for our objective of raising levels of our institutional effectiveness, since provision of relief by the agency is the eventual test of our performance. Details of the several steps planned to address this serious issue are available in the chapter on implementation, which presents both an analysis of the implementation as well as the institutional arrangements being made to improve our performance.

E. Focusing on Accountability 20. During the course of investigating a complaint, if a case is clearly made out against a particular officer or official in an Agency, whereby his or her acts of commission or omission have directly resulted in the maladministration under investigation, our Findings contain specific recommendations for initiating disciplinary action against the staff member concerned. In the absence of strong tort laws in the country in relation to public servants, this is an important aspect of our output in that it establishes a process of accountability within Agencies and can serve as a deterrent for public servants. Furthermore, in cases where our recommendations are unimplemented by an Agency within the prescribed timeframe and despite being given opportunities to explain the reasons for non-implementation, the powers conferred upon us under the President’s Order No.1 of 1983 can be invoked to initiate proceedings against specific public servants for Defiance of Recommendations. These proceedings again serve as an important instrument of public accountability.

21. During 2007, recommendations for disciplinary actions were made in a total of 29 cases, out of which 11 have been implemented. Proceedings for Defiance of Recommendations were not initiated, an area we intend to address in 2008 with the intent of raising levels of accountability.

F. Other Measures of Responsiveness 22. As was outlined at the outset of this chapter, as part of the Responsive Governance Framework, we have identified several indicators, including adopting a flexible approach, introducing stakeholder voice, enhancing transparency and improving accessibility. Since a number of these measures are intertwined with managerial actions, an assessment of our performance on these fronts can be found in the Management Review chapter. That assessment, read with our plans for implementation in 2008, will provide readers with a sense of the direction in which we intend to steer this institution and the manner in which we hope to improve our service delivery to the public.

G. Public Interest Actions 23. The power to assume cognizance of any maladministration on the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman)’s own motion is an important instrument of legal empowerment of this institution, allowing as it does, the initiation of investigations on endemic maladministration in areas that

impact large segments of the population. However, the areas of intervention need to be of a nature that are broad based, related to policy issues, as well as ones where assuming direct cognizance is justified on the basis of being in larger public interest. By initiating such public interest actions, the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman) serves as an important bridge between the public and the public sector and short of acting as a voice for civil society on matters of public accountability, transparency and integrity, it delivers on its mandate of being an independent institution established for redress of public grievances.

24. In 2007, we initiated several important public interest actions (Box 7), including on the absence of transparent procedures for approval of changes in land use plans in CDA; the unfettered installations of mobile phone towers in the capital’s public spaces; pollution in the Khanpur Lake and its public health implications; and a review of sanitation management systems in CDA. The latter case has added significance since it represented the first instance of our office advising an Agency to find systemic solutions to recurrent problems.

Box 7

Key Public Interest Actions Initiated in 2007 Pollution in Khanpur Lake Action was initiated on the reported pollution in and around the Khanpur Dam Lake. Since the drinking water supply to Islamabad and Rawalpindi is sourced from the Khanpur Dam Lake, the reported pollution posed health hazards for the inhabitants of the twin cities and thus assumed great public significance. Investigations clearly established that environmental damage was being caused by real estate development around Khanpur Lake; plying of diesel boats in the lake; and the contamination of water reservoirs by unchecked dumping of solid/liquid waste into the lake. The Pakistan Environmental Protection Agency (PEPA) had failed to take concrete steps in line with its responsibilities defined under law and its actions thus amounted to neglect, inattention, delay, discrimination and inefficiency in the administration and discharge of its duties and responsibilities and attract Article 2(2)(ii) of President’s Order No.1 of 1983.

Based on these Findings, it was recommended that PEPA issue Environmental Protection Orders (EPOs) to offending parties, including farm house owners and WAPDA and to report penalties imposed on WAPDA, in relation to the plying of the diesel boats in the lake. EPA has begun implementing these recommendations by initiating action under the Environmental Protection Act, while other aspects of the recommendations are being addressed.

Mobile Phone Towers in Public Spaces Several public complaints appeared in the print media, about the alleged misuse of children’s playgrounds/parks by the Capital Development Authority (CDA) by way of allowing mobile phone companies to install cellular Base Tower Stations (BTS) in these parks.

The investigation carried out revealed that the absence of any defined, transparent procedures and policies governing the erection of structures in open areas and parks, had allowed CDA to permit installation of BTS in several public spaces such as children’s parks and other public spaces. Moreover, approval for these changes in land use and original layout plans, were mostly given at lower tiers of management, without any specific criteria and transparent procedure for such approvals. The failure to put in place and follow appropriate procedures and criteria for approving changes in land layout plans was determined to amount to arbitrary decision making, and thus maladministration, attracting the provisions of the President’s Order No.1 of 1983. CDA was asked to ensure that in future, children’s parks, sites of children’s parks or other recreational places were not allowed to be used for such commercial purposes. Furthermore, a clear policy and procedure was to be laid down, providing for proper criteria, transparent scrutiny and appropriate levels of competent authorities to approve changes in the layout plan of a residential sector or for utilization of ‘open area’ of that sector. CDA was also asked to widely publicise this transparent procedure. CDA took steps for implementing these decisions, but these were deemed to be unsatisfactory in terms of their detail relating to transparency of procedures and defined levels of approvals. CDA has therefore been asked to carry out further work on developing the requisite policies and procedures.

25. It is worth mentioning that we distinguish between suo moto actions related to broader public interests, examples of which are given in Box 2, and suo moto actions initiated on complaints related to individual grievances and. As regards the latter, cognizance was taken in a total of 89 cases, which mainly pertained to WAPDA/PEPCO (28%) and PTCL (25%). More than half of these complaints were disposed of in 2007.

Box 7 continued

Key Public Interest Actions Initiated in 2007 Improving sanitation management systems in CDA In response to public outcries against the deteriorating conditions of sanitation in the Federal capital, a public interest investigation was initiated to ascertain whether the CDA had in place am adequate system of sanitation management, After reviewing the legal framework and examining in detail the current system of sanitation and solid waste disposal within the territorial jurisdiction of CDA, it was determined that the CDA’s Byelaws and Regulations on the subject were too broad & sketchy and did not prescribe the operational procedures necessary to carry out the daily garbage disposal functions of the Authority in an organized, effective and accountable manner. Inattention of the CDA to the important requirement of translating its broad Bye laws and Regulations into a standard operating procedure (SOP) amounted to neglect of its responsibilities, leading to inefficiency in its functions and thus falling within the definition of “maladministration” under the President’s Order No.1 of 1983. CDA was directed to develop and implement a SOP for improving delivery of its basic municipal service of efficient sanitation. CDA was further directed to widely publicize the SOP, establish a complaint redress system and improve transparency of its operations by inscribing garbage collection times on bins and skips. This case provided the first instance of a new business approach, with the Ombudsman’s office assisting the CDA in developing the SOP. The Ombudsman’s office developed and shared guidelines for developing the SOP and then also provide mentoring and advice during the phase of developing the SOP itself. This new approach is an example of the advisory role the Ombudsman intends to play to help address systemic failures that lead to recurrent public grievances. CDA is in the process of implementing the SOP and giving it wide publicity.

Chapter 3 Volume and Causes of Complaints in Major Agencies

1. Although the higher number of complaints received in 2007 are spread across nearly the full spectrum of our Agencies, the overwhelming majority of the complaints were filed—as they have been over the past years—against the utility companies, namely WAPDA, SNGPL, SSGC and PTCL., which put together, account for 70% of the total complaints admitted (Table 7). As mentioned earlier, the increase in complaints filed was mainly due to the renewal of admission of complaints against the utilities, following the resolution of the issue regarding our jurisdiction over them.

2. Although there is no clear definition of a major Agency, there are two ways in which we can categorize Agencies: in terms of their importance for and impact on the daily life of the general public; or based on the number of complaints filed against them. For purposes of analysis in this report, Agencies against whom more than 100 complaints were filed have been classified as major Agencies and detailed analysis on them presented below.

WAPDA

3. WAPDA, or more specifically, its nine distribution companies accounted for more than 56% of the total complaints admitted. There was considerable regional variation in complaints filed (Table 8) against respective electricity distribution companies (DISCOs), with the Peshawar regional

office making up for 46.6% of the total complaints against WAPDA in the region and Quetta only 0.36%. In the absence of detailed information and pending deeper assessment, it would be reasonable to surmise that these variations reflect varying degrees of systemic failures in the DISCOs as well as public awareness of and confidence in the Wafaqi Mohtasib

Table 7 Volume of Admitted Complaints against Major Agencies

Agency 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

WAPDA 9,545 9,253 2,181 508 10, 179

SNGPL-SSGCL 1,005 832 196 65 1,253

PTCL 1,331 1,227 1,015 708 1,190

AIOU 324 342 353 317 683

NADRA 400 370 394 270 435

Pakistan Post 216 142 182 173 351

SLIC 248 216 210 200 242

Estate Office 172 195 187 80 130

Table 8 Office-wise Receipt of Complaints against WAPDA in 2007

Office Number of complaints

Islamabad (Head office) 361

Lahore 2053

Karachi 310

Peshawar 4750

Quetta 37

Sukkur 818

Multan 991

Faisalabad 591

D.I. Khan 268

Total 10,179

(Ombudsman).

4. This conclusion is further strengthened by the statistics regarding the causes of complaints filed in 2007 against WAPDA, which show that two thirds of complaints relate to excessive, wrong and inflated billing by the DISCOS (Table 9). The fact that these very reasons have been the prominent causes of complaints against WAPDA since 2003, strengthen the argument that there are systemic issues that contribute to or result in maladministration in the DISCOs and lead to recurrent complaints. Our experience reveals that the reasons for maladministration are rooted in both practice and policy (Box 8), although these are issues that require deeper analysis.

5. To understand and identify these systemic issues, a major research study will be carried out in 2008 financed under the Access to Justice Programme, and to be executed in collaboration with the Lahore University of Management Sciences (LUMS) as well as WAPDA. The proposed study would focus on the internal grievance redress procedures of WAPDA in their entirety, covering institutional, legal, financial and administrative issues. The outcomes and the recommendations emerging from the study will likely have important policy and operational implications for WAPDA and enable us to work with the Agency to address issues in a more informed manner and improve its grievance handling mechanisms.

Table 9 Causes of Complaints against WAPDA 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Causes of Complaints

ReceivedAdmittedReceivedAdmittedReceivedAdmittedReceived Admitted Received Admitted %

Excessive / wrong / inflated billing / imposition of penalty

8,921 7,478 9,496 7,700 3,167 1,823 1,151 297 7,458 6,978 68.6

Disconnection 333 216 310 136 77 15 68 11 218 176 1.7

Delay in providing connection

285 176 265 138 143 22 163 28 246 203 1.99

Delay in replacement of defective meter

264 143 255 135 83 23 94 15 117 98 0.96

Delay in installation of poles / transformers

124 62 115 35 94 18 88 17 196 173 1.96

Others 2,064 1,470 1,991 1,109 845 280 751 140 2,896 2,551 25

Total 11,991 9,545 12,432 9,253 4,409 2,181 2,315 508 11,131 1,0179

Box 8

Typical Reasons for Defective, Excessive and Wrong Billing by WAPDA/PEPCO

Incorrect and irregular meter reading by staff Corruption Incorrect application by field staff of

WAPDA’/PEPCO’s own policies and directions Lack of trained staff Perverse incentive of meeting revenue targets Detection billing on unverified consumption Unjustified claims of meter tampering

SNGPL and SSGCL

6. The number of complaints admitted in 2007 against SNGPL and SSGCL, the two gas distribution companies, was the highest for the period 2003-2007 (Table 10). The low volume of complaints in 2005 and 2006 is attributable to the decision of this Office taken in March 2005 not to admit fresh complaints in the wake of the establishment of the Oil & Gas Regulatory Authority (OGRA). On the advice of the Ministry of Law, Justice & Human Rights, who had opined that the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman) has full powers to consider cases of the gas companies about maladministration and Article 37 of P.O.1 of 1983, admission of complaints against SNGPL and SSGC was restored in early 2007, leading to the rise in complaints in 2007 although wide publicity in this regard also contributed.

7. It is evident from data that excessive billing and delay in providing connections together account for 73% of the total complaints admitted against the two gas distribution companies in 2007. This figure follows the pattern since 2003 and points towards a systemic deficiencies in these organizations. When seen in the context of their corporatization, the consistently high percentage of complaints on account of the two reasons cited above is disappointing, as one would expect autonomy to improve services but the facts belie this expectation.

Table 10 Causes of Complaints against SNGPL-SSGCL

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Causes of Complaints

Rec

eive

d

Adm

itte

d

Rec

eive

d

Adm

itte

d

Rec

eive

d

Adm

itte

d

Rec

eive

d

Adm

itte

d

Rec

eive

d

Adm

itte

d

Excessive / wrong / inflated billing

607 463 500 412 171 77 104 14 470 437


427 321 316 256 256 78 182 29 500 476

Disconnection 77 57 57 47 11 4 6 1 73 69

Others 228 164 255 117 116 37 90 21 320 271

Total 1,339 1,005 1,128 832 554 196 382 65 1,363 1,253

PTCL

8. As in the case of WAPDA/PEPCO, SNGPL and SSGC, jurisdictional issues also cropped up in 2007 in relation to PTCL. With the privatization of PTCL and transfer of management to Etisalat, the new PTCL management raised the objection that the Agency was no longer within the jurisdiction of the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman). A reference from our office to the Ministry of Law, Justice and Human Rights clarified the situation, with the Ministry’s legal opinion conveying that since 74 % shares were still with the Government, the PTCL fell within the definition of ‘Agency’ in terms of Article 2(1) of P.O.1 of 1983.

9. While this clarification was being sought, admission of complaints was continued and the number of complaints admitted was almost at par with the numbers since 2003, with admission of complaints as a proportion of institution rising from 64% in 2003 to 86% in 2007. The declining trend in complaints received can be attributed to improved internal grievance redress systems in PTCL as well as improved customer service, as brought out also by the statistics (Table 11) which show, for example, a decline in the number of complaints in relation delays in providing connection.

Table 11 Causes of Complaints Against PTCL

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007


Rec

eive

d

Adm

itte

d

Rec

eive

d

Adm

itte

d

Rec

eive

d

Adm

itte

d

Rec

eive

d

Adm

itte

d

Rec

eive

d

Adm

itte

d

Excessive / wrong / inflated billing

850 625 748 572 562 368 342 249 376 325

Non-repair of telephone 417 342 397 347 284 261 275 209 348 305

Administrative irregularities 179 65 64 57 132 109 122 45 100 85

Disconnection 195 115 61 44 124 79 97 64 176 165


228 138 220 151 155 100 76 54 40 36

Others 250 46 585 56 449 98 224 87 346 274

Total 2,054 1,331 2,075 1,227 1,706 1,015 1,136 708 1,386 1,190

NADRA

10. With the establishment of the National Database Registration Authority (NADRA) and the launch of the computerized national identify card (CNIC), the federal government took an important step towards streamlining the process of registration of the citizens of Pakistan. Relying on impressive information technology tools and replacing the outdated, manual modes of registration and issuance of national identity cards, NADRA offers a very important public service, with the entire population as current or potential clients. Public expectations of an efficient service are justified. The fact that of the 435 complaints filed (Table 12) against NADRA in 2007, nearly all the complaints related to delays in issuance of CNICs points to a need for the Agency to review and improve its service delivery.

Table 12 Causes of Complaints Against NADRA

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007


Rec

eive

d

Adm

itted

Rec

eive

d

Adm

itted

Rec

eive

d

Adm

itted

Rec

eive

d

Adm

itted

Rec

eive

d

Adm

itted

Delay / Non-issuance of ID Card 430 361 453 339 436 347 324 248 435 405

Administrative Irregularities 27 5 22 4 64 25 26 10 17 12

Pension / GPF 22 14 34 14 21 13 13 4 6 6

Others 51 20 25 13 25 9 21 8 19 12

Total 530 400 534 370 546 394 384 270 475 435

The Pakistan Post

11. As one of the oldest departments in the sub-continent, the Pakistan Post has undergone several changes in its structure and governance. Having been established as a Department of Post & Telegraph in 1947 and graduating to the status of an attached department of the Ministry of Communications in 1962, it now somewhat awkwardly straddles the public and the private sector, with an independent Board, but operations subject to typical government procedures and regulations. Perhaps because of this ambivalent corporate structure, service delivery has not improved, as is readily evident from the fact that the principal cause of complaints since 2003 has consistently been problems related to delivery of mail, which have tended to account for 40% of total complaints admitted against the Agency (Table 13). Disappointingly, complaints on account of administrative irregularities were the highest in 2007 in terms of absolute number for the period 2003-2007 and as a proportion of total complaints (21%), were up by nearly 4% over the proportion in 2006.

12. Postal services in the public sector the world over have experienced difficulties in terms of the range and quality of their services; Pakistan Post too appears to be suffering from several issues related to quality service delivery and their performance pales in comparison to the more nimble private sector companies operating in the courier industry. When seen in the context of the size of its clientele, around 20m households and businesses, their outreach across the country through 13,000 post offices, and the range of products and services offered (surface and air mail, financial services such as postal banking and postal life insurance, agency functions such as utility bills collections) improving service delivery and meeting client expectations is admittedly a challenge, especially when constrained by government regulations that impinge issues such as staffing. Recent efforts to improve corporate image through a rebranding exercise, automation of services at counter-level and introduction of mobile post offices are welcome steps but the statistics above indicate, there appear to be issues related to internal processes and procedures leading to rising complaints against administrative irregularities, misconduct of officials and discrimination in appointments, and not just with the Agency’s distribution system as indicated by complaints against maladministration in mail delivery. The Agency would be well advised to work on a two-pronged strategy to address both its management and marketing aspects; otherwise, the pattern of complaints may likely follow the same trend as it has over the last five years.

Table 13 Causes of Complaints Against Pakistan Post

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007


Rec

eive

d

Adm

itte

d

Rec

eive

d

Adm

itte

d

Rec

eive

d

Adm

itte

d

Rec

eive

d

Adm

itte

d

Rec

eive

d

Adm

itte

d

Maladministration in delivery of mail

164 83 159 59 105 51 136 60 157 144

Delay in sanction of Pension / GPF

45 30 61 32 56 37 77 40 59 42

Discrimination in appointments

50 18 41 10 29 7 31 12 25 17

Misconduct of Officials 32 19 3 0 2 1 3 3 15 10

Administrative Irregularities 78 41 84 18 167 67 110 29 88 74

Others 62 25 28 23 22 19 55 29 131 64

Total 431 216 376 142 381 182 412 173 475 351

SLIC

13. The State Life Insurance Corporation (SLIC) is the largest life insurance company in the public sector and provides an important service to the public. Both the number and nature of complaints against SLIC have been more or less the same between the period 2003-2007 (Table 14), indicating either an unwillingness or inability to innovate and improve customer service. A notable aspect of our complaint processing in relation to SLIC is that the percentage of complaints admitted has risen to 85% in 2007 from a stable level of 65% over the five year period for which data is presented. This reflects an improvement in the quality of our initial scrutiny with a de-emphasis on a mechanical approach and rigidity.

AIOU

14. From the line of business the AIOU is i.e in—distance education, one would not think that it would feature as one of the main Agencies against whom complaints are received, but it does.

Owing to what can only be surmised as poor management, the total number of complaints against the Agency has also doubled from an average of 334 per annum during 2003 to 2006, to 683 in 2007 (Table 15). Symptomatic of this poor governance, complaints relating to non issuance of results/certificates have sharply increased to 484 as against an

annual average of 232 from 2003 to 2006, with failure to give admission also giving rise to higher number of complaints, indicating problems with admission procedures. In 2008, we aim to work with the AIOU to improve their services and systems, particularly the admission procedures and timely issuance of results and certificates.

Table 14 Causes of Complaints Against SLIC 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007


Rec

eive

d

Adm

itte

d

Rec

eive

d

Adm

itte

d

Rec

eive

d

Adm

itte

d

Rec

eive

d

Adm

itte

d

Rec

eive

d

Adm

itte

d

Non-payment of Insurance claims

226 156 92 75 121 81 132 90 97 85

Delay / non-payment of death claims

100 72 64 55 91 65 102 84 89 79

Administrative irregularities

44 15 88 41 75 43 30 15 58 45

Others 66 41 85 45 36 21 32 11 40 33

Total 436 284 329 216 323 210 296 200 284 242

Table 15 Causes of Complaints Against AIOU 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007


Rec

eive

d

Adm

itte

d Rec

eive

d

Adm

itte

d Rec

eive

d

Adm

itte

d Rec

eive

d

Adm

itte

d Rec

eive

d

Adm

itte

d

Non-issuance of Diploma / Certificates / Results

346 232 320 230 317 229 425 237 506 484

Failure to give admission

56 47 86 65 45 34 59 38 67 65

Administrative irregularities

44 20 42 18 128 64 93 27 56 50

Others 46 25 31 29 31 26 34 15 111 84 Total 492 324 479 342 521 353 611 317 740 683

THE CASE OF THE ESTATE OFFICE The Estate Office works under the Ministry of Housing and Works and is responsible for allotment of residential accommodation for government servants, allotment of office accommodation for federal government organisations and management of all records and documentation for these allotments. Anecdotal evidence would suggest that the number of complaints against the Estate Office be high, particularly in view of the common perception of delays and non transparency in allotment of residential accommodation. However, the facts are that only 130 complaints were lodged against the Estate Office in 2007. Although this number is almost 40% higher than it was in 2006, it remains small in itself. This could either be because of lack of awareness or confidence in our institution. Our experience has also shown that in a number of cases, the use of discretionary powers lead to grievances, but since the Accommodation Allotment Rules provide for such powers, complaints are either not formally filed or have to be rejected since the Rules themselves allow for such discretion to be exercised. We have nevertheless pointed out to the Agency several times, that the discretionary powers are meant to be exercised as an exception, rather than the rule, as they currently are. The Estate Office typifies the challenge faced in terms of closing the gap between the potential and actual number of complaints in public dealing offices about whom grievances are generally aired. In 2008, we shall seek to address this issue through improving our advocacy and outreach.

Filling a Void in Grievance Redress

In Pakistan, in addition to our office, there is an Ombudsman for the Azad Jammu & Kashmir,

provincial Ombudsmen in Sindh, Punjab and Balochistan, as well as specialty Ombudsmen for Tax, Insurance and Banking. Each one of these Ombudsmen has their jurisdiction and scope of work defined under specific legal frameworks and is performing their functions responsibly and capably.

However, despite this fairly large number of Ombudsmen and the breadth of their respective

jurisdictions, significant pockets of the public either do not have recourse to any grievance redress mechanism or are not aware of the appropriate forum to approach for redress of their grievance. In both instances, the public suffers for no fault of its own. At our level, we try and fill this void in three ways: one, by adopting a flexible, empathetic approach during initial scrutiny of complaints received within the confines of law; by providing redress of public grievances, with the consent of relevant institutions, where there currently is no other redress mechanism in place; and lastly, by guiding and redirecting the public, as far as is possible within available means, to the appropriate office for resolution of their issues.

In all three cases, the paramount guiding principle is provision of relief to as many people as is

possible and attempt to uphold their right to grievance redress. In 2007, the impact of flexible and empathetic initial scrutiny is best demonstrated by the 1509 complaints admitted out of the 2609 received, relating to ‘service matters’. This is a new high since 2003, not only in terms of number, but also as a proportion of total complaints received. Although ‘service matters’ are not within our jurisdiction, we do admit and process complaints but only if they pertain to inattention, neglect or delay rather than any substantive issues such as terms and conditions of service.

By admitting complaints—albeit a very small number, with only 40 admitted in 2007—relating to

subjects under the purview of the provincial government of the NWFP, we provide relief to a few people, and for good reason: there is no Ombudsman in the NWFP. Likewise, in the case of complaints against the Ministry of Defence and the cantonment boards, we do admit complaints—with their consent—mostly relating to delays in payments and issuance of certificates. While the number of such complaints is small and progressively getting smaller—down from 54 in 2003 to 49 in 2007—we do process them; to their credit, the Ministry of Defence and the cantonment boards respond positively to our intervention; based on their consent, we are thus providing some relief to whoever approaches us.

Since in limine rejection of complaints is fairly high—more than five thousand in 2007 alone and

mainly due to their being out of our jurisdiction—it is morally incumbent upon us to guide and redirect the complainant to an appropriate forum for grievance redress. If none exists, as in the case of the NWFP, beyond the relief provided in the token cases, there’s not much we can offer the complainant. However, if the complaint can be redirected, it is and we’re improving the quality of our communication in this respect.

These actions are carried out in good faith, and restricted to situations where both parties to the

complaint agree to our intervention. However, since these choices carry an opportunity cost, our willingness to help the public needs to be balanced against the sustainability of diverting time and effort away from subjects of which we can legally take cognizance, as well as tempered and guided by the President’s decisions on jurisdictional issues.

We do feel obliged to recommend that in the interest of enabling the public access to appropriate

fora for grievance redress, institutional arrangements be made where none exist. From a public policy perspective, there is also a need to achieve clarity on jurisdictions so that accountability, transparency and integrity processes can be strengthened further. This is the subject matter of the next chapter.

Chapter 4 Tackling the Challenges of Implementation

Adequate follow up on implementation of recommendations and any proposed disciplinary action against public servants, form critical parts of the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman)’s functions; the former impacts its institutional effectiveness and the latter allows it to ensure accountability of public servants. Indeed, in the value chain of administrative justice services that the Ombudsman provides, while output in the form of disposal of complaints is important, its credibility as an institution is dependent on the eventual outcome of such disposal, namely the implementation of its recommendations by the Agencies to whom these recommendations are sent. The importance of this aspect of our mandate is reflected in Article-11 (2) of the P.O.1 of 1983, which stipulates that the concerned agencies must act upon the recommendations of the Wafaqi Mohtasib within a specified period of time. Failure to do so invokes provisions of the P.O. 1 of 1983, leading to intervention of the President of Pakistan at his discretion against the defaulting agency.

2. However, the current implementation practices and systems fall short of delivering optimal results. Although the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman)’s recommendations, given as part of his Findings, specify the action and timeframe for redress of a grievance and while we do call for a report on implementation from the Agency concerned, the follow up mechanism hitherto has bordered on being ad-hoc, insufficient and passive in nature, relying largely on feedback from the complainant and working on the assumption that if a complainant does not approach us, the grievance would have been redressed. As mentioned in last year’s report, while this may be a reasonable assumption, it risks exclusion of a number of complainants who do not get the desired relief and are hesitant to approach us again for implementation of our recommendations.

Providing Managerial Focus on Implementation

3. Despite its obvious importance, monitoring of implementation has been a weak link in our operations. Lack of focused attention on this aspect of our work and absence of specific institutional arrangements has resulted in the Agencies showing growing laxity in implementing the recommendations within prescribe timeframes, despite the fact that under Article 13 of the President’s Order No.1 of 1983, the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman) is also empowered to refer cases for appropriate disciplinary action to the concerned agency where its employees are found guilty of the allegations. However, these powers have been sparingly used in the past, with only a few cases recommended for disciplinary action against employees of various agencies. In 2007, we took this issue up in earnestness, as has been detailed later in this chapter.

4. Reflecting management focus on improving and streamlining the implementation system of our recommendations and addressing the implementation issues in an organized, proactive manner, an Implementation Wing was established in the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman)’s Secretariat in the first quarter of 2007. An indicator of the importance and priority assigned to this function is that this Wing is headed by the Secretary of the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman)’s Secretariat himself.

5. At the moment, the Wing consists of a small team at the headquarters, with plans to set up Implementation Cells in all the eight regional offices as well, during 2008. The effect of having a dedicated resource for looking into issues of this organisation has been that we are now able to review Agency responsiveness, identify laggards and engage with them proactively for achieving the

end result—implementation of our recommendations. In this way, we are able to better address gaps in the eventual delivery of our services.

Dealing with Data Deficiencies

6. The first hurdle faced by the Implementation Wing after it began operations was the absence of updated data on the status of implementation. To address this deficiency, the Wing carried out a special purpose exercise and collected data of unimplemented cases in two batches, one for the period year 2000 and earlier, and the other for 2001-2006. The data collected for the period 2007 and earlier, was disaggregated agency-wise and sent to the Agencies concerned for intimating the latest position of each case and the reasons for not implementing the findings so far. This exercise has proved very useful and our office now has more updated information on the status of implementation. However, since the exercise requires reference to old records by Agencies and our own processing of the data was carried out manually, this exercise is still not complete.

7. To ensure quick and reliable data collection, the reporting formats were revised to make them easy to use and comprehensive in terms of data requirements. The regional offices were required to report on these new formats, indicating the source of confirmation of implementation—the complainant or the agency—the delay in implementation beyond the stipulated period and disciplinary action against officials who were found involved in mal-administration.

Strengthening Institutional Arrangements

8. A second hurdle faced in effective monitoring of implementation of the Ombudsman’s recommendations was the absence of a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP), which defined procedures, assigned responsibilities and identified instruments for ensuring implementation of the Ombudsman’s recommendations within specified timeframes. Prior to the establishment of the Implementation Wing, the Investigating Officers (IOs) in the Ombudsman’s head office as well as the eight regional offices were solely responsible for tracking implementation, but with the new Wing now in place, the roles of the IOs and the Wing staff needed to be clearly demarcated and their relationship rationalised. Similarly, although the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Investigation and Disposal of Complaints) Regulations 2003 were updated and amended in 2007, they remained silent on the subject of implementation. In order to organize the monitoring function along more systematic lines, the Implementation Wing has begun working on an SOP which would provide a holistic operational framework for the Wing and its elements would be incorporated in the next update of the Regulations to accord it due legal cover. The SOP will likely be rolled out in the first quarter of 2008.

9. Alongside the development of the SOP and in recognition of implementation being a full time, iterative and vital function, a move to strengthen the structure of the Wing itself has been initiated. Employing a hub and spoke model, the Implementation Wing will have its headquarters in the Ombudsman’s Secretariat Head Office, while Implementation Cells will be established in each of the regional offices, staffed with a small team and relying on use of the online Complaint Management System for data collection and reporting. This would allow for better coordination on implementation issues between the Wing at the Ombudsman Secretariat’s head office and the regional offices; enable monitoring of regional office performance on implementation follow up; and allow for proactive, local action against reluctant or tardy Agencies at the regional office level first, and by the head office later.

Implementation as a Measure of Agency Responsiveness

10. The extent to which Agencies act on the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman)’s recommendations and the time they take to implement them, is a strong measure of their responsiveness. Data collected for 2007 (Table 16), provides mixed results: of the 2,657 complaints where relief was provided in 2007, 1660 (62%) were implemented, which is a reasonable figure; what is worrying however, is that only about 9% of the recommendations were implemented within the prescribed time frame. This not only reflects poorly on the responsiveness of the Agencies, but also on our internal oversight systems, which failed to provide alerts to these low levels of timely implementation.

Table 16 Overview of Implementation Status 2007

Findings Implemented

Cases with Disciplinary Action Recommended

Name of Agency

Implementable

Findings Within Due Date After Due Date Total Number/ %

Total Implemented

WAPDA 2140 221 560 781 (36%)

19 7

SUI GAS 138 14 49 63 (45%)

1 -

PTCL 83 05 19 24 (28%)

1 -

SLIC 55 07 11 18 (32%)

3 2

PAKISTAN POST 32 09 10 19 (59%)

1 -

RAILWAYS 48 07 09 16 (33%)

1 1

BAIT UL MAL 14 - 12 12 (85%)

- -

KESC 02 - - - - -

NADRA 10 01 03 04 (40%)

- -

PLI 11 01 02 03 (27%)

- -

EOBI 13 02 01 03 (23%)

1 -

CDNS 06 02 04 06 (66%)

1 -

NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TIB 02 01 01 02 (100%)

1 1

Others 103 18 28 46 (44%)

- -

Total 2657 288 737 997 (38%)

29 11

11. Since WAPDA/PEPCO is the major agency in terms of complaints received, it comes as no surprise that 81% of implementation cases related to it, with the two gas distribution companies—SNGPL and SSCGL—second with 13%. The performance of these two Agencies in terms of responsiveness through timely implementation of the recommendations is poor, with WAPDA/PEPCO having implemented only 781 (36%) during the year and SNGPL and SSGCL

only 63 (46%) respectively. Since these public sector utilities have the most frequent interaction with the general public, their responsiveness, or the lack of it, is a source of concern.

12. The detailed information available in the Implementation Wing for the year 2007 shows that out of the 8 regional office, the highest number of findings requiring implementation pertain to Peshawar Region where out of total 1311 in that region 990 (76%) were against PESCO.

13. From the evidence on offer, one can readily arrive at the conclusion that the internal complaint management systems in the agencies is either non existent or extremely weak. Efforts will be made to help some of the large organizations like the public utilities to establish effective and efficient cells for the purpose. Once this arrangement is in place, it will enable provision of better customer services and lead to fewer complaints.

14. It is also clear that the success of increasing both the overall proportion of recommendations implemented and those implemented within specified timeframes, hinges on close linkages between the Implementation Wing of the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman)’s Secretariat and the complaint management offices of the Federal Government agencies. Based on the experience gained during 2007, we will strive to achieve the objectives of close engagement with the Agencies.

15. Other steps, especially with respect to the expansion of our implementation system through Implementation Cells in every office, and for integrating of implementation monitoring data needs with our online complaints MIS, will be taken in 2008.

Chapter 5 Addressing Systemic, Policy & Procedural Issues

1. The analysis of complaints received in terms of their nature, causes and target Agencies, as well as the evaluation of our own performance presented in the previous chapters of this section, lead to two conclusions: one, that despite 2007 having witnessed the doubling of complaints over the number filed in 2006, the disparity between actual volume and potential complaints is large; and second, that complaints against the major agencies are of a recurrent nature that point towards deep rooted systemic issues. Although these conclusions are distinct in their nature---the former is an endogenous factor emanating from inadequate attention paid by this office to advocacy and outreach of our services, while the latter is exogenous to our institution—together they raise implications of similar intensity for our responsiveness to stakeholder needs and expectations.

The Tools for Influencing Policy

2. In dealing with complaints against all federal government agencies, we encounter a broad range of policy and systemic issues that impact their ability to provide better public services. Recognizing that there are no quick fixes for meeting these challenges and that they need a holistic, strategic approach rather than a compartmentalized one, we seek to tackle the two conclusions reached through our analysis, by implementing our strategic vision. Details of steps taken in 2007 for the implementation of that strategic vision are presented in the Management Review section of this report. Alongside the implementation of this broader, longer term vision, specific issues that emerge from our grievance handling and interaction with the Agencies are also closely monitored and are highlighted in this chapter along with the response of the Agencies.

a. President’s Decisions

3. As mentioned earlier, the decisions made by the President on representations made against our Findings serve to not only establish quality benchmarks for our output, provide guidance for our complaint handling processes but also to articulate and reinforce the principles of efficient administrative justice and public policy. The President’s decisions, featured in this chapter, contain key determinations that clarify various policy issues and have implications for the standards of governance, practices and procedures within the federal government agencies, in addition to our outputs.

4. We are greatly encouraged by the fact that three fourths of the President’s decisions in 2007 on representations made to his office, were in our favour, as this testifies to the quality of our Findings, but we shall strive to further improve on this in 2008.

5. Given their importance, and particularly with the intent of guiding our IOs, we have placed select decisions of the President dating from the period 2002 on our intranet, providing ready access for our IOs to inform their work. In 2008, we shall make these available on our website so as to benefit the Agencies as well.

KEY DECISIONS OF THE PRESIDENT WAPDA/PEPCO Decision of electric inspector is necessary before charging the consumer retrospectively To check the accuracy of the reading of electric meter, the Agency installed another meter in the series of existing meter at the complainant’s premises. This meter recorded higher consumption and the Agency charged the complainant differential of the consumption shown by the two meters. On his complaint the Wafaqi Mohtasib recommended that charges of difference should be withdrawn and cancelled as the matter should have been referred to the Electric Inspector for correct evaluation of the status of the meter. The Agency made a representation to the President against the Mohtasib’s recommendation. The President rejected the Agency’s representation and held that Agency was required to obtain the decision from the Electric Inspector before charging the complainant. Wherever, a difference or dispute arises between a licensee and a consumer as to whether the meter is or is not correct the matter shall be decided, upon application of either party by the Electric Inspector. Where the meter has in the opinion of the Electric Inspector, ceased to be correct, he shall estimate the amount of the energy supplied to the consumer during the period the meter was not corrected. Suit for the price of goods sold can be filed within three years of the date of the delivery of the goods but where there was a mistake the claim could be made when the mistake was known The Agency had been supplying electric power to the complainant from 1/2004 to 12/2004 for the purpose of running a cinema. The power supplied for the purpose was chargeable under the commercial tariff, which is high, but the Agency had been charging the complainant under the industrial tariff, which is low. When the mistake came to light in 2005, the Agency charged the complainant for the difference between the two tariffs. A complaint was lodged with the Wafaqi Mohtasib in which it was alleged that the Agency was not authorized to charge the difference after so many years. The Wafaqi Mohtasib investigated the complaint and recommended that the difference should be recovered in six monthly installments and disciplinary action should be initiated against the officials responsible for the delay in intimating the change of tariff and delay in billing the complainant. The complainant made a representation against the Mohtasib’s recommendations on the ground that the claim had become time-barred. The President rejected the representation and held that the facts and circumstances of the case show that it was a mistake of the Agency to charge the complainant under industrial tariff rather than the commercial tariff. Under the Limitation Act, year the suit for the price of goods sold can be filed within three years of the date of the delivery of the goods but where there was a mistake the claim can be made when the plaintiff knows about the mistake. SNGPL Agency can decline to supply electricity/ gas to the complainant if he wants it at the same premises on which the defaulting previous consumer was getting supply. Scope of premises is to be constructed narrowly Mst. A was a sole owner of a piece of land in a certain khasra. On one part of that khasra, her husband was operating steel works, which was a defaulter of the Agency. The complainant purchased a piece of land out of the khasra from the ownership of Mst. A and applied for an industrial gas connection. The Agency declined to supply gas on the ground that the premises is located in the same khasra, where the defaulting steel works was operating. A complaint was lodged with the Wafaqi Mohtasib in which it was contended that the premises although located in the same Khasra were separate from the defaulting premises. The revenue authorities also verified the facts. The Mohtasib recommended that the Agency should provide gas to the premises of the complainant. The Agency made a representation against the Mohtasib’s recommendation. The President remanded the case to the Mohtasib for reconsideration to determine in which khasra the works were located and whether Mst. A was a sole or a joint owner, because a joint owner owns the joint property as tenant in common. On the other hand if the works were located on the area owned by a person, or allocated to a co-sharer, other than Mst. A, the area purchased by the complainant shall not be deemed defaulter. The Wafaqi Mohtasib reinvestigated the complaint and recommended that there was no reason to amend the earlier finding and Agency should supply gas to the complainant. The Agency made a representation against the recommendations of the Mohtasib. The President sustained the Mohtasib’s findings and held that the word “premises” was to be understand in narrow sense as a demarcated building in which gas was supplied. If the building in which gas is supplied forms part of a large piece of land, it could not be said that the entire area was the premises at which gas was supplied. The entire area of khasra could not be treated as the same premises on which the gas was supplied to the defaulter.

KEY DECISIONS OF THE PRESIDENT SLIC He who signs a document must own it unless he proves that he signed it under duress or a mistake In May 1996, the complainant’s husband obtained a life insurance policy. In August 1997, he abandoned this policy and obtained a fresh policy for a higher sum. He died in June 2000. The Agency repudiated the policy on the ground that the assured had failed to disclose the true state of his health in the proposal for the second policy. The widow of the deceased complained to the Wafaqi Mohtasib. Her case was that instead of renewing the original policy, the Area Manager of the Agency issued a new policy to her husband with the intent of obtaining more commission. The Wafaqi Mohtasib rejected the complaint on the ground that “being an educated person, it was inconceivable that he (the assured) was not aware of the nature/category of the new policy being issued as he had signed the undertaking that he had none of the health conditions that he was required to identify in the proposal form”. The complainant made a representation to the President against the Mohtasib’s decision. She contended that her husband was misled by the Area Manager, to sign the proposal for the new policy. In rejecting the representation of the complainant, the President decided that the Mohtasib was absolutely right to hold that since the existence of the assured’s signatures on the proposal for insurance was not disproved he was bound by the proposal. The law was that he who signs a document must own it unless he proves that he signed it under duress or mistake. No such plea had been raised in the representation. Further, a person who signed a document driven by an allurement could not allege fraud or mistake. Existence of disease in the body of the insurant is not sufficient to repudiate the policy. The Agency must possess the proof that the insurant knew that he suffered from the disease The complainant’s husband purchased a life policy from the Agency in December 2001. He died in March 2004. The Agency repudiated the claim on the ground that her husband was suffering from liver disease when he took the policy but did not disclose the disease. The widow complained to the Wafaqi Mohtasib, contending that her husband had not concealed any fact and the policy was obtained after his medical examination by the Agency’s authorized doctor. She prayed that the Agency may be asked to pay the death claim. The Mohtasib rejected the complaint on the ground that the widow herself admitted that the policy holder was suffering from liver disease at the time of death. The doctor’s certificate produced by the widow, showed that her husband was suffering from liver disease for more than 15 years ago. The complainant made a representation to the President against the Mohtasib’s decision. The President while accepting the widow’s complaint held that there was no evidence that the complainant knew that he was suffering from the disease. The doctor who issued the certificate had not attended to him earlier. His certificate appeared to reflect the stage of the disease which caused the insurant’s death and not the knowledge of the disease the insurant had been suffering from. The existence of disease in the body of the insurant was not sufficient to repudiate the policy. The Agency must have possessed the proof that the insurant knew that he suffered from the disease. Non-repudiation of life insurance policy that remained operative for more than two years unless made fraudulently The insurant obtained a life policy in December 1998. He died in May 2001. The Agency declined to pay the claim on the ground that the insurant had misstated his state of health. The widow decided to seek redressal of her grievance from the office of Wafaqi Mohtasib by taking the plea that the Agency repudiated the death claim of her deceased husband without assigning any reason. She prayed for payment of the claim. The Mohtasib recommended payment of claim on the ground that since the policy had remained in force for more than two years, the Agency could not repudiate it. The Agency made a representation to the President against the Mohtasib’s findings contending that the insurant committed fraud by making a false statement about his health in the proposal. The President held that the Mohtasib was right to say that the Agency could not repudiate insurance policy which remained operative for two years. According to the law the insurer can repudiate the contract of life insurance if the policy was obtained by the insurant by suppressing material information regarding his health. In that case the Agency had failed to prove the concealment of material fact. Thus, where a life policy had remained in force for more than two years it could not be repudiated unless the insurer showed that the proposal was fraudulently made.

KEY DECISIONS OF THE PRESIDENT PTCL Mohtasib is not a substitute for courts and tribunals. The legal forum must decide contentious issues between the parties

The complainant was a consultancy firm. Its grievance was that the Agency hired its services on contract in January 1994 but did not make full payment of the services it rendered. The complainant placed a request in the Mohtasib’s office praying that the Agency may be directed to release the payment.

The Wafaqi Mohtasib rejected the complaint on the ground that the dispute involved determination of consultancy charges in accordance with the contract and remedy of such disputes was available in the said contract. The Mohtasib noted that his role is to identify maladministration. The proper forum to enforce provision of a contract is the court. Accordingly, the Mohtasib advised the complainant to approach the competent forum.

The complainant made a representation to the President against the recommendations of the Mohtasib.

The President sustained the recommendations and held that the Mohtasib had rightly concluded that he was not a substitute for courts and tribunals. The legal forum must decide contentious issues between the parties.

The crime committed by the employees of the Agency is not the crime of the Agency unless the Agency either approves it or gets benefit out of that crime

Two telephone subscribers living in nearby houses in the same street received their telephone bills inclusive of charges on account of overseas calls. Both approached PTCL for remedy but without avail.

Both the subscribers, lodged a complaint with Wafaqi Mohtasib in which it was alleged that the Agency had charged them for certain overseas calls which they did not make.

The Wafaqi Mohtasib observed that the phone encoded with * 01 # was prone to misuse. There was a possibility of involvement of technical staff of Agency in the misuse of telephone. The Mohtasib therefore, recommended that the Agency could withdraw the overseas calls in question from the bill of complainant and take action against the officials involved in the matter.

The Agency made a representation against the recommendation of Wafaqi Mohtasib. The President held that the Agency had provided a perfect code barring facility of * 04 # which is to be used by complainant. The Agency and the complainants both are innocent. The rule is that out of two innocent persons he, who provided occasion to the other to suffer the loss must bear the loss. Moreover the subscribers had to accept the facility with all its shortcomings. The Agency could be responsible only if it encourages the misuse of telephone to disadvantage of subscriber. Here involvement of Agency’s employees had not been proved. Even, if anyone was involved he did not commit the act with the authority from Agency. The crime committed by the employees of Agency is not a crime of the Agency unless the Agency either approves it or gets benefits out of that crime.

KEY DECISIONS OF THE PRESIDENT CDA

The principle of estoppel is applicable to the Agencies in the light of their conduct.

The complainant purchased a plot in 1996 from Mst. B and C, who were daughters of Mr. A. The Agency transferred the plot from the names of Mst. B etc. to the name of the complainant. The complainant constructed a house on the plot after obtaining duly approved building plan from the Agency. Thereafter he requested the Agency for issuing him a completion certificate. The Agency told the complainant that the allotment of the plot in the name of Mr. A i.e., the original allottee, was found to be fake. The Agency would be ready to transfer the plot in the name of complainant if he pays the reserve price.

The complainant submitted an application in the office of Wafaqi Mohtasib requesting that the Agency may be asked to exempt him from payment of the reserve price and to regularize the transfer of the plot.

The Mohtasib recommended that the complainant should not be charged any reserve price for the plot and the transfer of plot may be regularized.

The Agency made a representation to the President against the Mohtasib’s recommendation on the grounds that the allotment of plot in the name of original allottee (Mr. A) was not valid. The complainant did not make any investigation before purchasing the plot and in such cases purchasers had to pay the reserve price.

The President sustained the Mohtasib’s recommendations. The Agency had conceded that the complainant was a bona fide purchaser and that, his transfer letter was not forged. The Agency had itself approved the building plan. These facts estopped the Agency to deny issuance of the completion certificate of the house.

PAKISTAN STEEL MILLS

The proper forum for award of compensation is a court of law and not the office of the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman)

The complainant was an ex-employee of the Agency. He got booked a residential unit in a housing project launched by the Agency for welfare of its employees. He complained to the Wafaqi Mohtasib that the Agency had committed maladministration by not handing over the physical possession of the house. He further prayed that the Agency may be directed to pay him compensation for the delay.

The Agency’s case was that its housing units including that of the complainant, were to be completed by a construction company. The said company failed to complete the construction and timely handing over of the possession. Therefore, a case had been filed by the Agency against the company in the court of law.

The Mohtasib declined to investigate the case on the ground that the matter was sub-judice.

The complainant made a representation to the President against the findings of the Mohtasib.

The President while rejecting the representation held that neither the complaint nor the representation showed in what manner the Agency had failed to deliver the possession of the house to the complainant when the Agency was not withholding the possession of the house. The reason for non delivery of the houses was that the contractor who was employed, did not complete the construction. As for complainant’s claim of compensation for breach of contract was concerned, the proper forum for award of compensation was a court of law and not the office of Wafaqi Mohtasib.

SELECT FINDINGS OF THE WAFAQI MOHTASIB (OMBUDSMAN) 2007 WAPDA/PEPCO SERVING OF DETECTION BILLS FOR THEFT OF ELECTRICITY TO A PERSON WHO IS NO MORE A CONSUMER SERVES NO PURPOSE. SUCH PERSONS NEEDED TO BE PROCEEDED AGAINST UNDER CRIMINAL LAW. This was a complaint against the Agency which had served a detection bill to the complainant for directly connecting his house to the power supply line and stealing electricity. The point to be noted in this complaint was that the complainant’s power supply had been disconnected some time back and, therefore, in accordance with the definition given in the Electricity Act, 1910, the complainant no more fell under the category of a ‘consumer’. As the law envisages the service of detection bills on consumers only, no detection bill could be served on the complainant. In any case, the service of such a detection bill was irrelevant as the Agency held out no threat of disconnection in the event that the bill was not paid. The Mohtasib held that the case was one of straight forward theft of government resources and was best dealt with by instituting criminal proceedings against the complainant rather than serving him detection bills. The complainant would have full opportunity to defend the case before the court and, therefore, such a matter did not lie before the Wafaqi Mohtasib for decision.

DENIAL OF BENEFITS TO EMPLOYEES ON NARROW INTERPRETATION OF OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS AMOUNTS TO POOR GOVERNANCE. The complaint was that telephone operators in the Agency were not being paid “off day wages”. The complainant stated that such wages were paid to all subordinate staff of the Agency except telephone operators. The Agency provided a notification that included a list of 29 technical posts which were entitled to “off day wages”. The list contained the post of telephone-cum-complaint clerk but did not include the position of “telephone operator”. Investigations showed that the post of telephone-cum-complaint clerk no more existed and had, in fact, been replaced by the post of a telephone operator. While technically the Agency could take the position that since the post of telephone operator was not actually specified in the notification, a post with such a designation could not be given “off day wages”, it was determined by the Mohtasib that this amounted to a very narrow and restricted interpretation in a case where it was obvious that the telephone operators were now performing the function of the extinct post of telephone-cum-complaint clerks and therefore deserved to get the benefit of “off day wages” by being included in the list. The approach of relying on such technicalities in the matter of benefits to employees of the Agency without looking at the spirit and intention of an official order in this respect spoke of very poor governance in the Agency. Accordingly it was recommended by the Wafaqi Mohtasib that the post of telephone operator be now included in the list of subordinate technical staff who were entitled to “off day wages” in place of the post of telephone-cum-complaint clerk.

b. Findings

6. The principal tool used to address all manner of issues is our Finding on a complaint and recommendations for specific action contained in it. As has been explained earlier, while a number of complaints deal with seemingly routine matters, their recurrence is a clear indicator of the problem rooted in systemic and/or policy issues. By analyzing the cause of the complaint and attempting to go beyond the obvious, we make an earnest effort to identify deficiencies in the Agencies’ operations; subsequently, recommendations are framed in a manner that the benefits accrue to the public beyond the immediate beneficiary i.e. the complainant. This is not possible in every case and the depth of our analysis is often constrained by pragmatic considerations such as internal capacities for detailed analysis, quality of response of the Agency, and the aim to provide expeditious relief. Nevertheless, every year, we do give Findings that have a larger and longer term implication for the Agency’s systems and policies (see below). All these Findings are in process of implementation and we shall pay special attention to them as part of our monitoring exercise.

SELECT FINDINGS OF THE WAFAQI MOHTASIB (OMBUDSMAN) 2007 WAPDA/PEPCO ANY CONCESSION GIVEN TO AN EMPLOYEE OUTSIDE THE RELEVANT RULES CANNOT BE MADE A BASIS TO CLAIM BENEFITS NOT ALLOWED BY THE RULES. The complainant stated that her husband retired from service in December 1987 and died in September 1997. In March 2004 she applied for a grant from the WAPDA Welfare Fund which was not accepted by the Agency’s management. The position taken by the Agency was that the complainant’s husband had died in September 1997 whereas the widow had applied for a grant in March 2004. Accordingly, she was not entitled to the grant from the fund owing to a provision in the WAPDA Welfare Fund Rules that cases delayed over a period of 5 years were considered on special recommendations or directions of courts of law and, if approved, were approved with immediate effect only. The agency further stated that the management of the WAPDA Welfare Fund had sanctioned a grant to the complainant with immediate effect i.e. from May 2005. The complainant agitated that the grant should have been allowed from the date of the death of her husband i.e. with effect from September 1997. The point to be investigated was from which date the complainant was entitled to receive the grant from the WAPDA Welfare Fund? It was determined that while the complainant was entitled to receive the monthly grant from the date of her husband’s death, she applied for it in March 2004 after a lapse of over 6 years. The rules of the Fund required that the request for grant should be submitted within 6 months from the date of the death of an employee. This period was extendable to one year in the Rules. It was clear that the period of submission of 6 months and its extension to one year was a part of the rules and any extension beyond that fell outside the ambit of the rules. As the period of 6 months to one year was a part of the Rules, any action within this time frame in respect of the application of a widow had to be in accordance with the other relevant provisions within the same Rules. One of these provisions was the date from which the benefit would commence. As the benefit was tied to the date of death of an employee, it stood to reason that it was this date that spells the starting point of the benefit. Therefore, if the application was made within 6 months or the period was extended to one year, the benefit would accrue to the widow from the date of death of the spouse. On the other hand, acceptance of an application beyond one year fell in a period that was outside the realm of the Rules and, therefore, any action or decision that would follow needed not be tied up strictly to the other provision of the Rules, one of which was the starting date of the grant from the Welfare Fund. The very fact that a relaxation and concession had been made in extending the time frame gave the deciding authority the flexibility to frame policy on the benefit to be gave if the application fell outside the time frame of the Rules. In the present case this discretion had been used to frame the policy that the benefit was to commence with immediate effect. The act of extending the date beyond that prescribed in the Rules was in itself a benefit being extended to the applicant and consequently the additional benefit of claiming the welfare grant from the date of death of the employee could not be insisted upon. On reaching this conclusion, the Wafaqi Mohtasib determined that the complainant had already been given the benefit of acceptance of her application after over six years and consequently the date of commencement fixed for the welfare grant from the date of application was fair and just. In consequence of these findings, the complaint was rejected.

SELECT FINDINGS OF THE WAFAQI MOHTASIB (OMBUDSMAN) 2007 SSGCL

IN MATTERS RELATING TO PETTY CLAIMS, AGENCIES SHOULD SHOW FLEXIBILITY IN RESPECT OF EVIDENCE OF ENTITLEMENT The complainant’s late husband had applied for a new gas connection which was not given. He, therefore, applied for a refund but died soon after. His widow, the complainant, asked for the refund but the Agency insisted on a succession certificate from a Civil Court to refund the amount of Rs.1,680/-. The complainant pointed out that a lawyer had asked for Rs.3,000/- as his fee to get the succession certificate from a civil court. In addition she would have to incur cost for the issuance of mandatory notice in the newspaper. This was likely to cost her about Rs.5,000/- for a refund of Rs.1,680/-. Being a poor widow she could not afford such a cost. The investigation revealed that the widow was a poor person of very limited means. It was accordingly recommended by the Mohtasib that the Agency should show flexibility in matters, such as this one, which involved petty claims and use its discretion of relaxation of rules judiciously to settle cases where unnecessary hardship would be caused to citizens pursuing small claims to which they were entitled. It was recommended that in the instant case, there was an occasion of waiver of the conditions of succession certificate by relying on the heirship certificate by the Mukhtiarkar who was a responsible officer of the Sub-Division.

PLI

ACCEPTANCE OF PREMIA FOR INSURANCE POLICIES AFTER THE POLICY IS HELD TO BE LAPSED MAKES IT OBLIGATORY ON THE AGENCY TO HONOUR THE POLICY

The complaint was that the complainant’s late husband paid the premia of an insurance policy from April 1988 to March 2006 and died in April 2006. After his death, the Agency refused to pay the death claim on the ground that the insurant had paid his premia late for August 1989 in June 1992. Owing to this late payment the policy had become void. The complainant’s contention was that the Agency had not informed the insurant that his policy had lapsed and it continued to receive premia till his death. The investigation showed that while it was true that the insurant paid the premium due in August 1989 in June 1992, the Agency continued to accept further annual premia for the next 14 years without giving timely information to the insurant that his policy had lapsed. It was determined that the retention of the insurant’s money for 14 years could not be justified under any circumstances. It showed a high degree of irresponsibility on the part of the Agency, a flawed policy of acceptance of premia without reference to the state of insurance policy and inefficiency and mal-governance in the matter. The Wafaqi Mohtasib considered it inconceivable that the Agency would have the license to continue to receive money from people of modest means over such a long period and then suddenly inform their kin in times of distress that all payments made by the insurant were in vain and no benefit could be extended to them. This was considered maladministration at its worst and showed a lack of a friendly culture in the organization. In view of the fact that the payments had been accepted, it was recommended that the death claim should be paid to the complainant and that the Agency should look into its policy and procedures to monitor the receipt of premia and the status of the policy to make a timely detection of payment of premia being continued for the lapsed policies. The organization should provide for a timely warning to the policy holders to avoid subsequent hardship to his heirs.

SELECT FINDINGS OF THE WAFAQI MOHTASIB (OMBUDSMAN) 2007

PTCL NON-TRANSPARENT PUBLICITY AND CHARGES FOR SERVICES PROVIDED BY AGENCIES AMOUNTS TO PERVERSE ACTION HENCE MALADMINISTRATION The complainant pointed out that in August 2007, PTCL had published a package for telephone subscribers in the press media which announced calls anywhere in the world @ Rs.2.00 per minute. The complainant stated that 16 countries including the USA were covered in this package. He made several calls to England but on receiving the telephone bill, he noticed that his calls had been billed @ Rs.15.00 per minute. He approached the Agency which drew his attention to the fact that only 4 countries out of 16 were relevant for calls made between land lines and mobile numbers. In the case of rest of the 12 countries, the rate of Rs.2.00 per minute applied only to calls from land line to land line. The Agency stated that his was given in the advertisement. The investigation showed that the Agency had advertised its services in a manner that was likely to deceive a reader in to getting the impression that the rate of Rs.2.00 per minute was applicable between land line and mobile numbers in all the 16 countries. The Agency while advertising in bold print the rate of Rs.2.00 per minute had put an asterisk against 4 countries (USA, Canada, China and Hong Kong) in very small print which was not likely to be picked up readily by the average reader. The explanation in respect of this asterisk was then given in even smaller print and tucked away on the side margin of the advertisement which made it even more difficult to spot. The Wafaqi Mohtasib determined that this method of publicity amounted to misleading the consumers into using the Agency’s service for which they would ultimately be charged at a rate higher than that appearing on the surface in the advertisement. He therefore termed this practice as perverse and unjust and falling clearly within the definition of maladministration. It was recommended that the complainant be charged according to the rate of Rs.2.00 per minute for the calls he made to any of the 16 countries mentioned in the advertisement and that the Agency should re-advertise the package showing clearly the countries which can be dialed @ Rs.2.00 per minute through land line or mobile and the countries in respect of which this facility is available only if dialed from land line to land line. PAKISTAN RAILWAYS WHERE THE CHARGED SERVICE IS NOT PROVIDED BY THE AGENCY, RETAINING THE CHARGES FOR THE SERVICE AMOUNTS TO MAL-GOVERNANCE The complainant and his family booked economy class seats from Lahore to Karachi in the Karakoram Express which had new Chinese bogies providing more comfortable conditions for travelers. The journey time of the train was also shorter with fewer schedules. For these comforts, the passengers were charged more than the economy class of other trains. The complaint was that the Karakoram Express for which the complainant had bought the tickets was cancelled and replaced by an alternate train to be run as the Karakoram Express. This train which consisted of old bogies with uncomfortable seating, run down conditions of toilets, non-functional fans and broken windows. On approaching the Agency officials, the complainant was told that he could get the tickets refunded at 25% of their value according to the Agency’s rules. Elaborating the rules, the Agency stated that the Railway Administration did not guarantee reserved accommodation by any particular train and admitted no claim for compensation for the inconvenience caused. On the matter being investigated, it emerged that there was a big difference between the economy class coaches of the Karakoram Express and similar class coaches of other express trains. Therefore, the fare for the Karakoram Express was substantially higher. The Wafaqi Mohtasib came to the conclusion that the Agency had failed to provide the service for which it was paid. To any reasonable man, the fair course to be adopted in such an eventuality was to return the consideration taken for the provision of a service which was not provided. The Agency had placed reliance on its rules which did not permit the refund of charges for service not rendered. While this provision may have existed in the policy and rules of the Agency, it was clearly unjust and amounted to extracting more from the customers than the value of the service provided. The Mohtasib accordingly held the policy to be perverse and unjust. He recommended that the Agency should bring about a modification in this policy through appropriate amendment in their rules and regulations to ensure that they only charge tariff strictly in accordance with the service they deliver.

SELECT FINDINGS OF THE WAFAQI MOHTASIB (OMBUDSMAN) 2007

CDNS WHERE A BENEFIT HAS BEEN PROVIDED BY THE GOVERNMENT TO SENIOR CITIZENS, THE AGENCIES CONCERNED SHOULD FACILITATE THE DELIVERY OF THE BENEFIT RATHER THAN INSIST ON INCONVENIENT PROCEDURES TO BE FOLLOWED FOR THE PURPOSE The complainant stated that her late mother had purchased Bahbood Saving Certificates in which she was the nominee. After the death of her mother, the Agency transferred the certificates to her name, but after 15 months, she received a letter from the Agency stating that the transfer in her name was irregular and she would not be paid any interest on the investment. She was advised to disinvest the investment and redeposit it in her own name. The Agency quoted its rule that said that a nominee of a deceased investor was entitled to draw only 6 months profit after the death of the certificate holder. Therefore, profit beyond 6 months would have to be recovered from the complainant. On the matter being investigated, it came to light that the Bahbood Saving Certificate scheme of the Agency was meant for pensioners, widows and senior citizens. The complainant’s mother was a widow and had therefore purchased the Bahbood Saving Certificate. The complainant was a senior citizen and was thus also entitled to invest in such certificates. The Agency was insisting that the complainant should first withdraw the amount in accordance with their rules and then reinvest it in the same scheme which would enable her to the profits under the scheme. The Wafaqi Mohtasib considered that this insistence on the round about method for eligible senior citizens to invest in the schemes in case they were nominees was illogical. If investment was allowed to the senior citizens in the scheme, then it was irrational to insist that, rather than the investment being transferred to their names, if they were nominees, they should first withdraw the amount and then reinvest it in the same scheme. It was accordingly recommended that in cases where senior citizens are nominees and eligible to invest in the Bahbood Saving Certificates, a straight transfer of the investment should be permitted by carrying out appropriate amendments in the regulations of the Agency. ZTBL REVISION IN RATES OF INTEREST SHOULD BE CONVEYED TO THE LOANEE WITHOUT DELAY ENABLING HIM TO TAKE A DECISION ON HIS PATTERN OF FUTURE REPAYMENT”

The complainant obtained a loan from the ZTBL and when intimated the outstanding amount at the end of 31 December 2004, he found it to be higher than what it should have been on the basis of the terms of the loan. While investigating the case it came to light that the rate of interest was revised from time to time but no formal intimation to this effect had been given by the Agency to the complainant. Although the complainant was bound by the agreement wherein a provision existed that he would abide by the changes made in the loan terms from time to time, it was determined that it was bad governance if he was not informed of such change as soon as the new terms were changed. It was recommended to the Agency that the existing procedures, as well as the relevant provision in the loan agreement, should be re-examined and it should be provided that in case the interest rates are revised, the new terms should be conveyed to the loanee without delay enabling him to take a decision to continue with the repayments on the revised terms or to liquidate his loan in a shorter period.

SELECT FINDINGS OF THE WAFAQI MOHTASIB (OMBUDSMAN) 2007 SLIC EVIDENCE OF ACCIDENTAL DEATH CLAIMS SHOULD NOT BE RESTRICTED TO FIRs, POSTMORTEM FINDINGS OR NEWSPAPER REPORTS The complainant stated that her husband had died in a road accident but the agency had not made the payment for the death claim in accordance with the accidental death terms of the insurance policy. The Agency’s position was that the complainant did not provide copies of the FIR and the postmortem report in respect of the accidental death. The investigation showed that the complainant had given a copy of the death certificate and a newspaper report of her husband’s death. This was not acceptable to the agency which insisted on the requirements of an FIR and a postmortem report also. In view of difficulties experienced by citizens in lodging FIRs and getting postmortem reports, as well as ignorance of such requirements by illiterate persons and those living in remote areas, it was recommended that the Agency should not show rigidity or deal with accidental death cases in a mechanical manner. As the ultimate requirement is to satisfy itself about the genuineness of the claim, the agency should exhibit a more citizen friendly and flexible approach by being open to evaluating other evidence offered to substantiate accidental death to satisfy itself that the death was caused as claimed.

AIOU CASES OF HUMAN HARDSHIP SHOULD NOT BE DEALT WITH BY MECHANICAL APPLICATION OF GOVERNMENT NOTIFICATIONS. NATURAL JUSTICE AND EQUITY ARE IMPORTANT CONSIDERATIONS FOR GOOD GOVERNANCE The complainant’s husband was an employee of the Federal Law Commission till the year 1992 and contributed towards the Benevolent Fund. He joined the Federal Judicial Academy thereafter and continued his contribution. The Academy became a body corporate in 1999, and, therefore, a requirement arose that for its employees to continue to be eligible for Benevolent Fund benefits, a notification needed to be issued by the Agency in this behalf adopting the Benevolent Fund & Group Insurance Act, 1969. The notification was issued in December 2005 while the complainant’s husband had died in February 2005. The Agency took the position that as the complainant’s husband had died before the issue of the notification in December 2005, he was not eligible for the Benevolent Fund benefits. The notification was being seen mechanically by the Agency as prospective in operation without taking into consideration that the person who was being denied the benefits had been contributing to the Benevolent Fund uptil his death. This was obviously a case where the Agency’s action amounted to gross injustice. It was recommended by the Mohtasib that the Agency should bring a modification in its notification to ensure that such cases are covered and dealt with fairly and with compassion rather than on a mechanical application of a notification. ARCHAEOLOGY DEPARTMENT

DENIAL OF GP FUND PAYMENT ON THE PLEA THAT THE EARLIER PAYMENT WAS EMBEZZLED ON THE WAY, IS UNJUST. The complaint was that the amount of GP fund due to the complainant was drawn from the Accountant General Revenue of Pakistan but was embezzled by the accountant and cashier of the Agency and not paid to him. The AGPR took the position that they could not once again pay this amount to the complainant as it would amount to double payment. It was determined that the payment of GP fund to a retired employee of the Government was his right. The complainant was not responsible for the embezzlement of his dues by the Agency employees and, therefore, to deny him his legitimate dues on the ground that criminal cases as well as cases for recovery were pending against the embezzlers, and that without this recovery further payment would amount to a double payment, was an unjust stance taken without keeping in view the rights of the complainant. It was recommended that rather than taking a technical objection of double payment, the Agency should take a positive approach and arrange for funds to give the complainant his rightful dues, while pursuing the case of recovery against the offenders.

c. Public Interest Actions

7. A very important and perhaps underused tool for shaping or impacting policies and systems of Agencies is the exercise of powers conferred upon the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman) to take direct cognizance of a grievance which has broad based coverage. This issue has also been discussed earlier and examples of public interest actions taken in 2007 are provided in Box 7 (page 32-33).

d. Agency Interaction and Response

8. A positive aspect of this process of identifying and recommending improvements in the Agency’s policies and systems is the response of the Agency. The fact that only 423 representations against our Findings were made in 2007 by Agencies to the President, testifies to the fact that the Agencies are willing to work with us to provide relief to the public. More importantly, while the time lag in Agency response, both during the investigation process as well as in implementation of recommendations is a concern generally, in cases where the Findings have policy implications, Agencies have been responsive (see box below). With the nomination of Focal Persons by every Agency for dealing with us, our instructions to the regional offices for organizing meetings with Agencies regularly, and the efforts at improving tracking of implementation through the Implementation Wing, we hope to further improve the quality and timeliness of Agency responsiveness.

EXAMPLES OF POSITIVE AGENCY RESPONSIVENESS Central Directorate of National Savings (CDNS) Reduction in Service Charges In March, 2007, the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman) through a Finding, recommended that premature withdrawal of a deposit be allowed without deduction of any service charges, in cases where multiple investments had been made by an individual. The services charges were not dropped completely, but CDNS did reduce them from a maximum of 2% in 2003 to 1% which further go down to as low as 0.25% on premature withdrawal on completion of 3 years. WAPDA/PEPCO Resolution of Contradictory Policy Circulars The Agency’s circular dated 08-06-2004, covering policy of detection billing for consumers having up to 4 K.W sanctioned load, superseded all previous circulars on the issue. This created confusion as the there was no detection policy for consumers having sanctioned load beyond 4 K.W. The circular also did not take care of billing policy where meter was found dead or sticking. Despite the 2004 circular clearly stating that it superseded earlier circulars, field officers were continuing to use a circular dated 15-3-2003, whose provisions were at odds with the 2004 circular as regards period and basis of detection billing. The Agency was asked to resolve the issue which it did and in June 2007, a clarification was issued to both the WAPDA/PEPCO field staff and to the Investigating Officers of the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman)’s Secretariat. SNGPL Removal of Unfair Clause in Contract Document In July 2007, SNGPL was approached about the problem faced by consumers because of installation of gas meter outside their premises and in particular, due to the application of clause 6(a) of SNGPL Contract for Supply of Gas for Domestic Use, which is heavily loaded in favour of the Agency. The Agency was advised that the clause be made balanced and just for the consumers as well as for the Agency. While the Agency provided reasonable justification for placing meters outside the premises, it revised the contract document and Clause 6(a) was replaced as Clause 5(iii)—a fairer clause—in the new SNGPL contract for domestic use of gas.

e. Knowledge and IT-based Tools

9. Empowerment of the IOs through knowledge tools, using research and analysis to inform our work and the automation of processes has been a key theme for planning and implementation at our office during the past year. The establishment of the Research & Analysis and Implementation Wings, the launch of the online complaints MIS, introduction of tools such as online access to key decisions of the President since 2002 and detailed definitions of maladministration have added value to the investigation process. Details of these measures are available in the Management Review chapter. In 2008, we shall build on the strong base laid on these important fronts and use them to enhance our ability to improve public services through quality knowledge products. Of particular interest will be the research study on WAPDA/PEPCO’s systemic issues, which will be jointly carried out with WAPDA/PEPCO, LUMS and will be financed by the ADB.

Disentangling Jurisdictional Overlaps

10. Jurisdictions of the Ombudsmen and other accountability, integrity and regulatory institutions in the country are defined in the respective legislations from which the Ombudsmen draw their legal powers. As was mentioned in the report for 2006 and also in the current report, clarity on our jurisdiction vis a vis that of OGRA and NEPRA was achieved through a reference to the Ministry of Law, Justice and Human Rights, whose opinion clearly stated that the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman)’s jurisdiction supersedes that of other federal institutions in respect of maladministration.

11. However, jurisdictional overlaps continue to exist, both in legislation and practice. For example, the Federal Insurance Ombudsman handles complaints against maladministration in SLIC and PLI, while OGRA received 1,743 complaints in 2006-20073, on subjects such as delays in obtaining gas connections, excessive billing etc.—subjects that we deal with as well. In the interest of the general public, these jurisdictional issues need to be disentangled so that the lines are demarcated clearly and the public can be clearly informed as to whom to approach. This will feature as part of our agenda in 2008, as we intend engaging with all stakeholders to achieve clarity in the public interest.

12. An allied issue, albeit an internal one, relates to grievances against organizations under the Ministry of Defence, or those related to service matters. As regards the former, as has been mentioned earlier in this report, admission of complaints is with the consent of the institutions concerned and all cases are resolved only with the agreement of the complainant and the institution; in relation to service matters, in view of the President’s decisions, where he has reversed the findings of the Ombudsman on jurisdictional basis, it had become necessary to review and clarify the limits of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction in such cases under the law. Accordingly, we laid down the parameters for consideration of such complaints without violating the legal provisions. Such aspects of service matters which can be entertained by the Mohtasib have been confined to

3 OGRA Annual Report 2006-2007

inattention, neglect or delay in respect of a service matter as there is no bar for the Mohtasib to look into these aspects of maladministration, especially when they do not touch the merits of the case.

13. Complaints which clearly relate to decisions of the agency based on service rules, regulations and privileges are being screened out at the level of registration. However, if it cannot be checked at the initial stage, the comments of the agency complained against are sought and if it is not a matter of neglect, inattention or delay, the case is treated as closed for lack of jurisdiction of the Wafaqi Mohtasib. The implementation of this decision and our aim of being flexible within the defined legal parameters is borne out by the statistics relating to complaints on ‘service matters’. Out of the 1509 complaints that we admitted on service matters in 2007, nearly half related to delays in payments of dues, pension, GP Fund, while 18% were due to alleged discrimination in appointments (Table 17). A similar trend is visible for earlier years. The nature of the complaints received thus clearly justifies our decision to admit them.

Table 17 Nature of Complaints in Service Matters

2004 2005 2006 2007 Nature of Grievance

Received Admitted Received Admitted Received Admitted Received Admitted

Delay/non-transfer of G. P. Fund account

210 120 197 140 108 67 111 84

Delay in sanction of EOABI Pension

63 23 9 5 17 13 17 17

Delay in grant/release/revival of Family Pension

101 58 58 29 7 4 54 46

Delay in sanction of Pension/G. P. Fund

642 301 534 255 328 169 635 428

Delay in payment of outstanding Service Dues

260 117 169 63 116 67 345 220

Stoppage of pension/B.F./G. P. Fund

144 64 80 30 36 20 124 44

Delay in reimbursement of Medical Bills

89 42 65 40 36 27 60 46

Discrimination in appointments on first recruitment

613 101 401 77 104 25 454 209

Promotion/Seniority 168 12 138 11 52 11 112 36

Wrong fixation of pay 151 23 108 26 42 15 - -

Allotment of plot/agricultural land

135 7 158 36 67 8 137 75

Allotment of accommodation

402 195 268 146 99 46 205 172

Misc. 33 9 36 16 9 4 347 132 Total 3011 1072 2221 874 1021 476 689 379

14. By the same token, complaints against Agencies under the Ministry of Foreign Affairs or Defence, especially those that provide direct services to the public, such as PIA and CAA, should be admitted, although we don’t do that at the moment.

15. By taking up these issues related to our jurisdiction, we hope to be able to serve those segments of the public that are currently being denied their right to grievance redress.

Chapter 6

International Linkages

As the President of the Asian Ombudsman Association (AOA) and a Director on the Board

of Directors of the International Ombudsman Institute, the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman) plays an important role at the regional and international levels. The year 2007 saw a flurry of activities and the implementation of several plans, particularly through the platform of the AOA.

Focus on Knowledge Management 2. Formed in 1996 to promote the concept of Ombudsmanship and to encourage its development throughout Asia, the AOA is now in its eleventh year of existence. With 23 members from 15 countries, the AOA offers a platform for interaction between members. The institution of the Wafaqi Mohtasib has the unique distinction of being elected as the President of the Association since its inception. In April 2007, the General Assembly re-elected the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman) as President for a four year term. 3. Although the AOA has been in existence for more than a decade, its activities have been limited, partly due to resource availability. With a view to add more value for members, the Board of Directors (BoD) of the AOA, decided in its meeting in December 2006, to move towards enhancing the knowledge management capabilities of the AOA Secretariat. In pursuance of this decisions, improving knowledge management was remained the principal area of focus for the AOA during 2007.

Strategic Plan for Knowledge Management

4. A strategic framework for action was developed for anchoring the knowledge management initiatives. The objective of developing this framework was to enhance the effectiveness of operations of AOA members through effective knowledge management, developing communities of practice (CoP) and capacity enhancement. The framework addresses the issues of improving service delivery and institutional responsiveness by supporting capacity enhancement in member institutions at different tiers of operation, focusing on those members with weaker capacities. By emphasizing transfer and sharing of national and regional best practices, and dissemination of information on these practices, the AOA Secretariat will play an important role in helping member institutions become more effective. Technical and financial support is proposed to be provided in various ways, including needs-based consulting inputs, small projects in relevant areas and financing of research and analysis by members. 5. After the BoD approved the framework in its annual meeting in April 2007, the next step was to identify an appropriate funding source, since the AOA’s own resources were limited. The AOA Secretariat decided to approach the Asian Development Bank (ADB) for two reasons: one, it had been supporting administrative justice reforms in Asia, and provided support to the office of the Ombudsman of the Philippines, as well as the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman) of

Pakistan; and two, 14 of the 23 AOA member countries are also members of the ADB. These two reasons provided a natural fit for identifying ADB as a partner of first choice. 6. In pursuance of this decision, a proposal was sent to the President of the ADB, requesting for financing under a technical assistance program for the AOA. As a follow up to this request, a high-powered delegation of the ADB, headed by the Director General for the Central and West Asia Regional Department, visited the AOA Secretariat for a meeting. Subsequently, meetings and interactions with the ADB have taken place in their Head Office in Manila and through the ADB Pakistan Resident Mission. The Ombudsman of the Philippines, in her capacity as the Vice President of the AOA, played an important role, as she actively canvassed for support within the ADB. 7. As a result of these efforts, ADB has agreed in principle to finance the proposed activities through a Knowledge Management Resource Centre, to be established at the AOA Secretariat.

New AOA Website and Blog

8. In order to promote knowledge sharing and facilitate dissemination of reports, studies, guidelines developed by members as well as non-members, and to create awareness about the AOA and its members through online presentation of information and news, the AOA website was completely redesigned. The new website (www.aoa.org.pk) is not only content-rich, with more than a hundred documents available online, but more user-friendly, as the content is better organized than earlier, and navigation between pages has also been simplified. 9. In addition to the new website, an AOA Blog (http://aoablog.wordpress.com) was also created, as a means of promoting informal discussion on topics of relevance for the AOA members in particular and for people interested in governance, anticorruption and integrity issues in general.

Research Study and Short Studies

10. The BoD of the AOA had decided to encourage members to undertake research on key issues and for subsequently sharing them with members. A list of topics was identified, out of which Pakistan chose to work on ‘The Role of the Civil Society in the Work of the Ombudsman’. This study has been completed and although the decision to prepare was taken at the AOA level, it obviously has implications for the working of our office and its recommendations have already been featured in the Management Review Section. Similarly, members agreed to carry out short studies on operational aspects. The office of the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman) of Pakistan led by example on this front and has developed and published the practice notes on topics such as Legal Instruments of the Ombudsman; Freedom of Information; Improving Advocacy & Outreach; Use of Information Technology to Improve the Ombudsman’s Efficiency; and Measures for Improving Implementation. All of these practice notes are available at www.aoa.org.pk

Fact Sheets

11. Another important initiative undertaken in 2007 in respect of adding to the reservoir of knowledge products of the AOA, was the development of members’ Fact Sheets. The Fact Sheets provide a snapshot of the AOA member institutions, providing concise information on the organizational structure, legal powers, jurisdiction, and steps taken for research and implementation as well as identifying institutions with mandates regarding public accountability, transparency and integrity. A template was developed by the AOA Secretariat and the Fact Sheet for the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman) was shared with members as an example. So far, 13 of the 23 members have finalized their Fact Sheets---available at www.aoa.org.pk –while the rest will likely be completed within the coming months.

News Bulletin

12. A bi-annual News Bulletin is published by the AOA. However, on the initiative of the AOA Secretariat and the subsequent approval of the BoD, the layout and features of the News Bulletin have been completely revamped. To enhance the readability of the News Bulletin, several new content features were added, including Knowledge Briefs to highlight new research by member institutions; guides for Ombudsmen and their staff, developed by members or non-members; and a ‘Spotlight On’ section that focused on a new and innovate project initiated by members. The Bulletin can be downloaded from the AOA website.

AOA Library

13. An AOA Library has been established in the AOA Secretariat, to provide a physical environment for study, referencing and research on Ombudsmanship by providing access to material relating to the member institutions as well as international Ombudsmen. The Library carries annual and thematic reports, articles, newsletters, studies and other documents and also provides internet facilities for research.

Annual Meeting of the Board of Directors 14. The 9th Annual Meeting of the Board of Directors was held in Hanoi, Socialist Republic of Vietnam on 25th April, 2007. The meeting was chaired by the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Federal Ombudsman)/ President of the AOA. Members of the Board of Directors belonging to the Peoples Republic of China, Hong Kong, Islamic Republic of Iran, Japan, Republic of Korea, Macao, Malaysia and Republic of the Philippines, attended the meeting, in which several important decisions were taken, including on the conduct of research and development of other knowledge products such as short studies; establishment of a Knowledge Management Resource Centre in the AOA Secretariat; and the establishment of a print library with allied facilities, at the AOA Secretariat.

15. In conjunction with the BoD meeting, the 10th session of the General Assembly of the AOA was also held on 28th April, 2007, Hanoi, Socialist Republic of Vietnam. Elections of the new members of the Board of Directors were held during this session, and besides the election of the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman) as the President, the Ombudsmen of Hong Kong, Philippines and Korea were elected as the Secretary, Vice President and Treasurer of the AOA, respectively.

10th Conference of the Asian Ombudsman Association (AOA), Hanoi 16. The 10th Conference on Ombudsmanship was also convened from 26th to 27th April, 2007, at Hanoi, Socialist Republic of Vietnam. Mr. Truong Vinh Trong, Deputy Prime Minister, Socialist Republic of Vietnam, was the chief guest of the inaugural session of the conference. Representatives of over 20 Asian Ombudsman offices, supervisory organs, audit bodies, anti-corruption bureaus and inspectorates attended the Conference. The President AOA and Wafaqi Mohtasib Pakistan, was the keynote speaker and delivered a paper on “The Ombudsman’s Role in Good Governance – Issues & Challenges”.

Engaging with the International Ombudsman Institute (IOI) 17. Pakistan has been a member of the International Ombudsman Institute (IOI) since 1984 and a Director from the Asian region on the Board of Directors of the IOI, which also has representation from Africa, Australasia & Pacific, Europe, the Caribbean, Latin and North America.

18. The Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman) participated in the annual meeting of the Board of Directors of the International Ombudsman Institute (IOI) held from 7th to 9th November, 2007, at Sydney, Australia. The Board discussed several important issues, including the proliferation of Ombudsmen and their likely impact on the IOI; relocation of the IOI Secretariat; enhancing the role of the regions; and the opportunity to work with Committee on Rights of the Child.

19. In relation to the issue of proliferation of Ombudsmen, a three member committee of the Board was formed, comprising the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman) of Pakistan, the Ombudsman of Catalonia and the Ombudsman of Alberta. The committee was tasked to study the issue in terms of its scope and implication for the IOI in terms of its impact on voting rights in IOI and to make recommendations to the Board. This office has completed its fact finding, having identified the number of Ombudsman at national, state and local government levels as well as private sector and specialty Ombudsman in Asia.

20. In order to support activities at the regional level, an important decision was made at the meeting to provide funds in the value of CA$10,000 to each of the six regions. The Regional Vice Presidents (RVP) will invite proposals from their members, and identify projects for endorsement to the Executive Committee, who shall grant the financial approval. Since the AOA is the only regional forum for Ombudsmen, it will interact closely with the RVP for Asia, the Ombudsman of Korea, to help ensure optimal utilization of the funds.

WWWooo rrrkkk ppp lll aaa nnn 222 000 000 888

Chapter 7

Workplan 2008

As is evident from our managerial and performance review, 2007 was in many ways a watershed in the history of our organization. Not only did we chart out a strategic vision for the institution, but also began implementation on several fronts, in the face of resource and capacity limitations.

Implementation of the Strategic Vision

2. In 2008, we intend to consolidate our efforts, continue our focus on the three-pronged strategic vision encompassing Business Process Reengineering, Repositioning of the Institution and Improving Advocacy and Outreach. This chapter presents our workplan for 2008, in furtherance of this vision. This implementation phase shall be guided by the following principles:

a. Consolidation of Ongoing Initiatives

As was indicated in the management review chapter, a few interventions, mainly relating to improving our accessibility through use of information technology, such as introduction of Universal Access Numbers (UAN), toll free services for the public and the establishment of a Call Centre, to facilitate access to our services, could not be implemented during 2007. These initiatives will be taken up as a priority in 2008.

Similarly, we will build on efforts made towards introducing a results based management systenm, by further refining the standards set for our performance in 2007 and developing and implementing a Citizen’s Charter to take our service charter to the next level. In addition, there will be continued focus on implementation issues, with the intent of improving our effectiveness in ensuring that the process of providing grievance redress reaches its intended conclusion.

b. Integrate, innovate, internalize, incentivise

As we move along the path towards strengthening our policies, systems and procedures, we will seek to integrate and internalise our new initiatives with existing processes, introduce change where needed in these systems, structure, procedures or policies, remove redundancies and strive to identify innovative solutions for better handling of complaints. Recognising the importance of linking incentives with this change management process, we will further deepen the nexus between performance-driven criteria used for assessing internal performance, with a rewards system that serves to distinguish between good and poor performers.

Focus on Implementation

3. Banking on the experience of 2007 we plan to further improve the implementation system by establishing dedicated Implementation Cells at the regional office level and strengthening the Implementation Wing at the headquarters. Under a revised procedure and assignment of responsibilities, the IOs will be relieved of tracking the implementation of Findings and will be able to devote full attention to their investigation work. As part of a phased program, initially the Implementation Cells will be established in Karachi, Lahore and Peshawar, with each Cell headed by a Director. At the headquarter level, a Director General Implementation and two Directors with supporting staff, will supervise the implementation system. 4. It is also planned to develop an IT-based online system of reporting on implementation. This would greatly facilitate tracking the status of implementation and for better risk management, as it would alert us in a timely manner, to problems related to any particular case or Agency in relation to implementation. 5. The bid to improve the process and pace of implementation of the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman)’s recommendations would be incomplete were it not to include the Agencies themselves. The managerial priority assigned to implementation, putting in place appropriate implementation arrangements and collection of updated data on implementation status are necessary but not sufficient conditions for enabling us to ensure timely implementation of his recommendations. 6. Recognizing the value of engagement with Agencies, we intend to take two critical steps in 2008 that would lead to optimal results: first, we aim to update the list of Focal Persons in every Agency we deal with; and second, we will strive to interact regularly with Agencies and their designated focal persons. 7. Although the challenges faced in improving its ability to both track and actualize implementation are complex and multi-dimensional, the office of the Ombudsman is confident that in overcoming them through its new approach and focus, it will be in a position to improve the delivery of administrative justice services to the public. Building Capacity 8. During 2007, we identified several deficiencies and gaps in our capacity, including in the areas of research, training and organizational structure. Through an organised program, and as part of the drive to focus on key areas such as research, knowledge management and responsiveness to the stakeholders, we aim to be positive and measured in approach to close these capacity gaps. The steps proposed to be taken in 2008 include the conduct of a major research study on WAPA/PEPCO’s systemic issues; development of Best Practice case studies in three Agencies; and training in ADR and other areas directly related to our investigation, implementation and operational management. These initiatives will be carried out in partnership with the ADB and UNDP, under proposed TA arrangements which are at advanced stages of finalization.

Improving Advocacy and Outreach 9. Since improvement in advocacy and outreach is a major area of intended improvement, it shall be the subject of continued attention during 2008. As part of the implementation of the communication strategy developed in 2007, and with the support of the UNDP, we shall undertake a number of initiatives in 2008 that will be geared towards improving our capabilities and performance on this front. The steps we will undertake in 2008 include implementation of the following recommendations of the communication strategy: Ensure credibility of information through rigorous analysis and improving quality of our data

sets and information. Focus on enhanced public disclosure and knowledge management Develop the Ombudsman brand through appropriate advertising Introduce Customer Relationship Management (CRM) for improving our responsiveness to the

public and raising levels of efficiency of our front-office functions Deeper engagement with media to ensure adequate publicity of successes achieved Use IT-enabled outreach through websites, UAN, Toll Free and SMS based services Partner with civil society for extending outreach and advocacy net, especially for creating

awareness about Ombudsman services in rural areas and amongst women and aged Create and sustain engagement platforms for frequent stakeholder consultation Improve internal communication using various instruments, such as a newsletter

10. In addition, we intend to: a. facilitate partnership between Civil Society Organizations, media and our Office by:

b. improve coordination and dialogue amongst oversight and regulatory bodies by:

Establishment of a multi-stakeholder Policy Dialogue Forum (PDF) and support the implementation of the recommendations emerging from the PDF Dissemination of the Forum’s work

Proactive research and establishment of knowledge networks on accountability, transparency and integrity issues as well as on Freedom of Information

11. With the active support of the ADB and the UNDP, and by continuing to provide leadership and commitment for our strategic vision, we are confident of implementing all of these initiatives during 2008.

Establishment of a Civil Society Advisory Committee Establishment of a Special Response Team (SRT), with the involvement of CSOs, for

investigation in public interest issues training partner CSOs in civic engagement and raising public awareness about consumer rights Introduce tools, such as Citizen Report Cards, Performance Review Reports, Customer

Satisfaction Surveys mechanisms, and facilitate their use

Appendices

Appendix 1 Public Feedback

In a large number of cases, the grievances of the complainants are found to be genuine and, consequently, relief is provided. In such cases, quite a few complainants consider it appropriate to express, in writing, their appreciation and gratitude to the Office of the Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman). Some of the letters received from individuals and organisations, acknowledging the efforts made by this Office to provide relief and redress public grievances, have been reproduced in the following pages. This public feedback strengthens our commitment to providing better quality administrative justice services and we aim to be able to provide quick relief to more members of the public in the coming year.

APPENDIX II Our Team Javed Sadiq Malik

Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman) of Pakistan

Head Office, Islamabad Mr. Mohammad Ihtesham Khan, Secretary Mr. Farhat Hussain, Adviser (Appraisal) Syed Shabbir Ahmed, Member/Additional Secretary Mr. Mansoor Ahmed, Adviser Mr. Firoz-ud-Din Khan, Adviser (Registration) Mr. Ali Akbar Bhurgri, Director General Mr. Zafarullah Khan, Director General Brig. (Retd) Ahmad Salim, Consultant Mr. Aftab ul Islam Raja, Director Mr. Farrukh Bashir Moriani, Secretary to HWM Mr. Iftikhar ud Din Ahmed, Director Mr. Muhammad Ashfaq Ahmed, Director Mr. Abdur Rauf, Director (Coord) Mr. Muhammad Ahsan Bashir, Consultant Major (R) Khalid Bilal, Director (PR) Mr. Salamat Ali Beg, Consultant (Admn) Mr. Azmat Hussain Khan, Director Mr. Muhammad Amin, Deputy Director (Accounts) Mr. Umardraz, Consultant (Library) Syed Nabil Shah Gilani, Data Control Officer Mr. Ephraim Qaiser, Care Taker Mr. Muhammad Shabbir, Assistant Director Mr. M.A. Satti, Superintendent Mr. Abdul Waheed, Deputy Registrar Mr. Muhammad Saeed Rana, Assistant Director (G/A) Mr. Javed Barki, Superintendent Mirza Ijaz Ahmad, Dy. Registrar- I Ch. Talib Hussain, Superintendent Mr. Manzoor Masih, Superintendent Mr. Muhammad Fiaz, Dy. Registrar Regional Office, Lahore Mr. Asif Mahmood Malik, Member (Incharge) Mr. Shaukat Ali, Advise Mr. Ali Tahir Zaidi, Adviser Mr. Saleem Sultan Durrani, Director General Mr. Altaf Ezid Khan, Director General Mr. Muhammad Iftikhar Ahmed, Director General Brig. (R) Nisar Ali, Consultant Brig. (R) Shamshad Ali, Consultant Mr. Muhammad Zafar Sahi, Consultant Mr. Aziz ur Rehman Malik, Consultant Syed Azmat Ali Shah, Director Mrs. Sabiha Hamid, Director Mr. Muhammad Usman, Director Mr. Muhammad Yasin Baig, Registrar Mr. Asghar Ali Awan, A.A.O. Mr. F.S. Azad Hussain, Superintendent Regional Office, Karachi Mr. Altaf Hussain Mughal, Director General (Incharge) Mr. Iftikhar Ahmad Khan, Adviser

Mr. Muhammad Mehboob Alam, Adviser Mr. Abdul Sattar, Director General Mr. Nazir Ahmad Khan Swati, Consultant (Admn) Muhammad Anwar Ahmed, Registrar Mr. Muhammad Idris, Assistant Director Mr. Muhammad Tariq Khan, Asstt. Accounts Officer Regional Office, Peshawar Mr. Muhammad Arshad Khan, Director General (Incharge) Mr. Shaukat Hussain, Adviser Lt. Cdr. (R) Sahibzada Saeed Ahmed, Director General Mr. Mirajud Din, Consultant Syed Abid Hussain Bukhari, Consultant Hafiz Abdul Haye, Director (Admnn) Mr. Mashood Ahmad Mirza, Director Mr. Muhammad Naeem, Director Mr. Fawad Hanif, Consultant Syed Ahmad Hussain Shah, Registrar Mr. Pervez Ghauri, Dy. Registrar Regional Office, Qeutta Mr. Farooq Shaheen Gillani, Director General (Incharge) Regional Office, Sukkur Mr. Gul Muhammad Umrani, Director General (Incharge) Mr. Anwar Ali Khokhar, Consultant Mrs. Bilqees Jan, Consultant Regional Office, Multan Syed Inam Abbas Kazmi, Director General (Incharge) Mr. Ahmad Bakhsh Bhapa, Adviser Mr. Muhammad Javed Khalid, Director

Regional Office, Faisalabad Mr. Maqsood Khawaja, Adviser (Incharge) Syed Badar–e-Munir, Consultant Ch. Muhammad Ashraf, Consultant Regional Office, D.I. Khan Mr. Muhammad Saqib Khan, Consultant (Incharge)

APPENDIX III Contact Details

Headquarters

Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman)’s Secretariat, Benevolent Fund Building, Zero Point, Islamabad. Phone: 92-51-9252391-4, Fax: 92-51-9252178 Email: [email protected]

Regional Offices

Regional Office, Lahore State Life Building, 3rd Floor, 15-A, Davis Road, Lahore. Phone: 92-42-9201017-20, Fax: 92-42-9201021 E-mail: [email protected]

Regional Office, Karachi 4-B, Federal Government Secretariat, Saddar, Karachi. Phone: 92-21-9202115, Fax: 92-21-9202121 E-mail: [email protected] Regional Office, Peshawar 1st Floor, Benevolent Fund Building, Peshawar Cantt. Phone: 92-91-9211574, Fax: 92-91-9211571 E-mail: [email protected]

Regional Office, Quetta Barganza Villas, Qaddafi St., Link Zarghoon Road, Quetta. Phone: 92-81-9202679, Fax: 92-81-9202691 E-mail: [email protected]

Regional Office, Sukkur Bungalow No. CS-550/13-B, Behind UBL, Shalimar, Near District Jail, Sukkur. Phone: 92-71-9310007, Fax: 92-71-9310012 E-mail: [email protected]

Regional Office, Multan 23-G, Shah Rukn-e-Alam Colony, Near Underpass, Multan. Phone: 92-61-9220183, Fax: 92-61-9220182 E-mail [email protected]

Regional Office, Faisalabad 98-A, Opp. Parco/Total Filling Station, Jaranwala Road, Faisalabad. Phone: 92-41-9220546, Fax: 92-41-9220545 E-mail: [email protected]

Regional Office, Dera Ismail Khan H. No. 31/4, Quaid-e-Azam Road, Dera Ismail Khan. Phone: 92-966-9280095, Fax: 92-966-9280096 E-mail: [email protected]

Federal Tax Ombudsman

Federal Tax Ombudsman, State Enterprises Complex, 5-A, Constitution Avenue, Islamabad. Phone: 92-51-9211382, Fax: 92-51-9205553 E-mail: [email protected]

Provincial Ombudsman

Provincial Ombudsman, Punjab, 2-Bank Road, Lahore. Phone: 9211773, Fax: 9212069

Provincial Ombudsman Sindh, Shahrah-e-Kamal Ataturk, Opp: Sindh Secretariat, Karachi Phone: 92-21-9211026, Fax: 92-21-9211051.

Provincial Ombudsman, Block No. 10, Civil Secretariat, Quetta, Balochistan.

Ombudsman of Azad Jammu & Kashmir, Mohtasib (Ombudsman)’s Secretariat, Muzaffarabad. (Azad Jammu & Kashmir) Phone: 92-58810-42142, Fax: 92-58810-39108, 9206288.

Index

AIOU, 34 Annual Report, 1 Appraisal, 78 Article, 1, 41

B Balochistan, 79

C Change, 9 Complaint, 12 Complaints, 35, 37, 38, 39

D Delay, 35, 36, 58 Disconnection, 35, 36 Discrimination, 58

E Employees, 11 Establishment, 1 Excessive, 35, 36

F Federal, 79 Findings, 41

G Government, 79 Grievance, 58

I Implementation, 41

J Justice, 11

L Law, 11 Library, 12, 78

M Management Information System, 12 Ministry, 11

O Office, 11, 68, 78 Ombudsman, 1, 79

P Pakistan, 1 Pension, 58 President, 1, 41 Provincial, 79 PTCL, 34 Public, 68 Punjab, 79

R Regional Office, 78, 79 Regional Offices, 79 Registration, 78

S Secretariat, 41, 79 Service, 11, 58 Sindh, 79 SNGPL, 34 Stoppage, 58

W Wafaqi Mohtasib, 1, 11, 41, 68, 79 WAPDA, 34 Wrong, 58

ANNUAL REPORT 2007 - Wafaqi Mohtasib

Documents

Transcript of ANNUAL REPORT 2007 - Wafaqi Mohtasib