KARACHI  - PR  - PIA clarifies a news item appeared in a section of press titled: “SHC reinstates PIA Director Marketing”, on 21 January 2014.

The news story is an attempt to distract readers from the performance of the national flag carrier. PIA would like to clarify the news for the information of valued readers.

The story pertaining to the court case and news heading “SHC reinstates PIA Director Marketing” shall be replied properly in the court after receipt of the court order. However, the allegation that the Accountability Committee has been established to tighten the screw of the so-called disgruntled officials is not correct. The fact remains that the Accountability Committee has been established to investigate different contracts and deals executed and made by PIAC. It was established during the time when prominent leaders of the then opposition parties i.e., Ms Marvi Memon and Iqbal Zafar Jhagra filed applications in the Supreme Court of Pakistan. The suo-moto case relates to the irregularities into PIA. It is surprising that when PIAC has itself initiated a process of in-house accountability, allegations as mentioned in the news item under reply surface to sabotage the process of accountability and to encourage the corruption and corrupt practices of officials of PIAC.

The allegations of obtaining kickbacks in the wet-lease of the aircraft, is whole unfounded. The reality is that PIAC had been suffering from fleet constraints i.e. aircraft availability to meet demand and maintain its flight schedule. As acquiring aircraft on permanent basis is expensive and a time consuming exercise, hence aircraft have been obtained on wet-lease through a transparent process as prescribed under PPRA Rules 2004. Moreover all four aircraft were not obtained from a single source rather acquired from two different companies of world repute. The allegations of lease extension are also unfounded. All the formalities have been evaluated by Secretary Aviation. This deal has been approved by the Economic Coordination Committee of the Federal Cabinet.

The deal with M/s. TWA for purchase of spare parts was not executed in his time, rather Chairman PIA is the one who presented the issue before the Board of Directors of PIAC and took decision in the best interest of PIAC. It is also to be mentioned that Chairman was the one who referred this case to FIA for an impartial inquiry which is under investigation. All the contracts including the contract of PIA Call Center etc. shall be validated strictly after evaluating all the legal formalities. Furthermore, the allegation of signing of agreement with M/s Aviation Plus for cargo space is completely unfounded. It is vehemently denied that the present management has embarked on the mission of disposing of properties of PIAC although PIA is suffering from huge losses, yet it is endeavoring to enhance its assets. It is also denied that Chairman’s brother is involved in any way with PIA properties.