PIC’s Controversial Decision Raises Concerns Over Transparency and Access to Public Records
ISLAMABAD: The Pakistan Information Commission (PIC) has once again come under scrutiny after disposing of an appeal in a manner widely described as controversial, raising fresh questions about its credibility and commitment to the Right of Access to Information Act, 2017.
The latest decision relates to a request filed by journalist Saddia Mazhar, who, on September 15, 2024, formally sought information regarding the number of inquiries conducted by the Prime Minister’s Inspection Commission (PMIC) from January 2023 to date, along with copies of the completed inquiry, investigation, and inspection reports.
In its written response dated June 2, 2025, the Prime Minister’s Inspection Commission acknowledged that it had completed 11 inquiries during the requested period and submitted them to the Prime Minister for further directions. However, the body argued that the reports contained “sensitive and secret information” and would only be released after authorization by the Prime Minister.
Challenging this stance, Mazhar objected before the PIC, maintaining that once an inquiry is finalized, it becomes public record under the law. She contended that since the PMIC itself admitted that 11 inquiries had been completed and submitted, those reports were no longer in progress and therefore must be disclosed to the public. Under Section 5 of the Right of Access to Information Act, 2017, public bodies are legally bound to proactively publish finalized inquiry reports on their websites without requiring approval from any higher authority.
Despite these arguments, the PIC, in its order dated September 10, 2025, sided with the PMIC. It stated that since the decision of the Prime Minister on the authorization of disclosure was still pending, the reports could not be shared with the appellant. The Commission further held that an inquiry or inspection would only be considered final once it received approval from the head of the public body, which it defined as the Prime Minister.
Legal experts and civil society activists have criticized this interpretation as fundamentally flawed and contrary to the law.
The Right of Access to Information Act makes no provision for the Prime Minister’s authorization, nor does it define the Prime Minister as the head of the PMIC. In fact, the Commission is legally headed by its Chairman. Critics argue that PIC has effectively undermined the very spirit of transparency enshrined in the 2017 Act.
This is not the first time the PIC has faced backlash over its rulings. Under the leadership of Chief Information Commissioner Shoaib Ahmad Siddiqui and Information Commissioner Ijaz Hassan Awan, the body has repeatedly been accused of issuing biased and unlawful decisions that create obstacles in the public’s right to access information.
Civil society representatives have long complained that such practices weaken transparency, shield government institutions from accountability, and erode trust in the Commission itself.
The controversy highlights a growing concern over the enforcement of Pakistan’s Right of Access to Information law, which was designed to empower citizens and journalists to hold institutions accountable.