PESHAWAR – Serious irregularities have reportedly been identified in billions of rupees worth of gold mining contracts awarded during the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) government in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, with the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) raising significant objections to the auction of placer gold deposits along the Indus and Kabul rivers.
According to an official report dated October 2024, four mineral blocks along the Indus River were auctioned for a combined amount of approximately Rs4.93 billion.The reported findings have raised serious questions about the auction process, the determination of base prices, compliance with mining regulations, and allegations that certain bidders may have received undue advantages.
The four contracts were awarded to different private companies.Block A, valued at Rs1.25 billion, was awarded to Globa Core (Private) Limited; Block B, worth Rs1.261 billion, went to Majko (Private) Limited; Block C, valued at Rs1.305 billion, was awarded to Himalaya Earth (Private) Limited; and Block D, worth Rs1.1111 billion, was awarded to Shakardara Minerals (Private) Limited.
NAB reportedly raised objections to the determination of the reserve prices for the mineral blocks, particularly the alleged disregard of a 2015 geological study.Questions were also raised over the fixing of auction prices without an accurate assessment of the quantity and potential value of the available gold deposits, potentially affecting the transparency and financial returns of the process.
The reported findings also point to alleged violations of the Mineral Auction Rules 2022 and irregularities in the procedures followed for awarding the contracts.The circumstances surrounding the suspension of geological mapping, which reportedly began in February 2022 but was halted in November 2023, have also come under scrutiny.
Further questions have emerged over the issuance of allotment letters despite the reported failure to complete the relevant agreements within the stipulated 14 day period.The circumstances in which the contracts were finalised, and whether all mandatory legal and procedural requirements were fulfilled, remain important areas requiring clarification.
One of the most serious issues concerns reports that mining activities continued in November 2024 despite a stay order issued by the Peshawar High Court.The reported continuation of operations has raised questions about the legal basis for allowing mining to proceed during the period covered by the court’s order and the responsibility of the officials concerned.
NAB’s reported objections also include allegations that mining activities continued without the necessary environmental approvals and mandatory mining plans.The reported presence of more than 1,500 excavators operating in the relevant areas has further intensified concerns about regulatory oversight and the enforcement of mining laws.
According to the reported findings, leaseholders were allegedly collecting between Rs500,000 and Rs700,000 per week from excavator operators. Estimates of weekly revenue ranging from Rs750 million to more than Rs1 billion have also emerged in connection with alleged unauthorised subleasing arrangements.These figures require independent verification, including clarification of the number of operating machines, the nature of the payments and the actual financial proceeds generated by mining activities.
Questions have also been raised over the failure to provide a complete record of gold production and sales.Without comprehensive production data, sales documentation and independently verified accounts, it remains difficult to determine the actual quantity of gold extracted, the revenue generated and whether the government received the full amount due under the relevant contracts.
The reported objections have placed the spotlight on the roles of the officials and departments responsible for approving, supervising and enforcing the terms of the mineral contracts during the PTI government’s tenure.The central questions concern whether the auctions were conducted transparently, whether the government obtained the appropriate financial return from public mineral resources, and whether the relevant companies complied with the legal conditions governing their leases.
Former Khyber Pakhtunkhwa chief minister Ali Amin Gandapur had defended the auctions, maintaining that the government secured higher prices than previously offered and that the legal requirements had been fulfilled.His position contrasts with the reported objections concerning the valuation process, contractual formalities, mining operations and regulatory compliance.
The matter highlights the importance of transparent mineral auctions, scientifically established reserve prices, strict enforcement of environmental safeguards and effective monitoring of public resources.Given the substantial financial stakes involved, a comprehensive examination of the contracts, geological assessments, allotment records, production figures and revenue receipts would be essential to establish the facts.
However, the reported objections and allegations do not, by themselves, establish criminal liability on the part of any company or individual.The allegations require verification through the relevant official records, responses from the companies concerned and findings of the competent investigative and judicial authorities.
