Business Recorder Editorials 17th September 2026

Relief on petrol price

EDITORIAL: The Economic Coordination cabinet has approved a 75 billion-rupee relief package for three months (24.6 billion rupees per month) proposed by the petroleum division that envisages providing 100 per litre to 11.8 million - owners of two wheelers, three wheelers and cars up to 800cc.

The maximum monthly relief is estimated at 2000 rupees with the two and three wheelers eligible for up to 20 litres a month while cars up to 800cc will be eligible for 30 litres per month. This proposal, as per the Minister for Petroleum Pervaiz Malik, was formulated on the instructions of the Prime Minister and post-dates the submission of proposals by the Jammat-i-Islami, to the Ministry of Planning, Development and Special Initiatives on 11 September that sought a reduction in the petroleum levy to 5 to 10 rupee per litre, budgeted to generate 1.67 trillion rupees in the current year, and its replacement with the following: an increase in existing taxes on imported luxury consumer items, higher income tax on income above one billion rupees, interest rate reduction, withdrawal of exemptions, agriculture income tax, increase in carbon levy on corporations and businesses, wealth tax, and retail sector brought into the tax net.

There are major constraints facing the government in terms of implementing its own relief package as well as in the Jamaat-i-Islami proposals. Shortages of petroleum and products in the international market are rising with each passing day as conflict in the Middle East is continuing and widening (reference to the stepped up Houthi attacks on Saudi Arabia) – a factor that compelled the government to announce on 17 July this year that it has shifted to a daily pricing mechanism for oil and products replacing the fortnightly pricing mechanism. With no end in sight of the conflicts in the Middle East as well as between Russia and Ukraine the package may not be adequate well before the three-month period of its application is over.

The package, though well intended appears to have been offered for optics to convey the government’s concern for the ever-increasing burden on the masses. It, however, misses the point that a vast majority of people belonging to the poorest segment of the country cannot even own motorcycles. They are largely dependent on public transport, i.e., buses that run on HSD and there is no respite in its cost. It would have been far more effective if the petroleum levy had been slashed on petrol and HSD by reducing its collection target by 75 billion rupees.

One way to create space for itself that can be passed onto the consumers is for the government to cut its own current expenditure that continues to comprise 93 percent of total budget outlay and includes a downward revision in mark-up payments (through a reduction in the policy rate though it is doubtful if the Fund would approve it given the rise in inflation), outlay for pensions rising to 1.16 trillion rupees (indicative of reforms still pending), and raising wages for those who draw their salaries at the taxpayers’ expense.

It is also relevant to note that the incumbent government’s strategy to usher development in the country was premised on higher direct investment from friendly countries. In this context it is pertinent to note that the Middle East conflict has severely compromised the surplus of the Gulf countries: Saudi Arabia suffered a deficit of over 9.1 billion dollars in the second quarter of this year and is in early talks to raise at least 8 billion dollars in a new bank loan to manage financial pressures from the regional conflict with Iran, and Saudi Aramco is holding separate early stage loans talks; and the United Arab Emirates requested a financial lifeline from the US after its oil sales plunged due to the conflict.

Possession, nine-tenths of ownership?

EDITORIAL: It turns out that more than 3,000 government houses in Karachi are under illegal occupation, an audit objection concerning them has remained pending for over two decades, and the problem itself has apparently persisted for around 40 years.

That combination says considerably more about the state’s inability to protect public property than the number of houses alone. The Public Accounts Committee subcommittee has now been told that 925 houses have been vacated and that recoveries are due from occupants. The remaining cases must be resolved according to law, because allowing illegal possession to mature into an entitlement would establish a precedent far more damaging than the original encroachment.

The suggestion before the committee that regularisation or transfer of the properties to occupants might offer a way out deserves particular caution. Some occupants reportedly claim ownership and possess documents whose validity is disputed, and genuine legal claims must obviously receive due process. But valid title and illegal occupation are fundamentally different matters. Where ownership can be established lawfully, it should be recognised. Where government property has simply been occupied without legal authority, handing it over because possession has continued for years would effectively reward the failure to enforce the law.

That is precisely the danger highlighted by the PAC subcommittee. Once illegal occupation becomes a possible route to eventual ownership, every encroachment acquires an incentive to endure. The housing secretary’s description of the matter as a political problem is revealing. Attempts to vacate the properties reportedly bring occupants onto the streets and attract support from elected representatives. Such pressure may explain why the issue has survived for decades, but it cannot determine the ownership of public assets. Elected representatives are entitled to defend constituents against arbitrary action; they cannot reasonably demand that unlawful possession be converted into property rights merely because enforcement has become politically inconvenient.

The fact that the problem has remained unresolved for so long also raises serious questions about successive administrations. Government housing is a public asset maintained for public purposes, and the state has an obligation to know who occupies it, under what authority and on what terms. An audit objection remaining alive for more than 20 years suggests prolonged administrative failure. The involvement of NAB, which is conducting an inquiry, should now help establish how the occupations occurred, whether officials facilitated them, what dues remain outstanding and where responsibility lies.

This cannot be treated as Karachi’s problem alone. Encroachment on public land and property is a recurring governance failure across the country, and provincial governments must cooperate with federal authorities wherever enforcement requires their administrative or policing support. A consistent approach is essential. Selective eviction in one jurisdiction alongside political regularisation elsewhere would only reinforce the perception that possession, connections and pressure ultimately matter more than title.

Forty years is already an extraordinary amount of time for the state to decide who owns its own houses. Allowing another generation of illegal possession to settle the question would turn administrative failure into government policy.