In a first, Sindh to launch performance audit of university VCs
The Sindh government has decided to conduct a performance audit of vice chancellors of public universities across the province, following a recommendation by the Sindh Higher Education Commission (HEC). This initiative marks the first time such a measure is being implemented in the academic history of Pakistan, including Sindh.
The Chief Minister of Sindh, who also serves as the controlling authority for public universities in the province, has approved a summary submitted by the Sindh HEC titled "Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for Senior Academic and Non-Academic Positions in Public Sector Universities." With this approval, the decision to conduct performance audits of key university officials, including vice chancellors, has taken immediate effect. From now on, the performance of vice chancellors will be directly linked to a reward and accountability system.
According to the approved summary, the performance audit will not be limited to vice chancellors alone. Other key university officials-including pro-vice chancellors, directors of finance, deans of faculties, registrars, heads of departments, directors of ORIC and QAC, and controllers of examinations-will also be evaluated. Sindh HEC has developed specific KPIs for each of these positions, which have also received formal approval.
According to details obtained by The Express Tribune, the Sindh HEC has shared this new monitoring and evaluation framework with the higher education authorities in the other three provinces as well as with the Federal HEC. This opens the possibility for other provinces and the federal body to adopt a similar system if they choose.
It is worth noting that the Search Committee Act governing the appointment of vice chancellors in Sindh was passed three years ago. The Act includes a legal provision that allows the Search Committee to evaluate the performance of vice chancellors. The recently approved summary formalises this process, stipulating that the performance of vice chancellors and other key officials will be reviewed by the Sindh HEC and the Search Committee every two years.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Express Tribune
12 hours ago
- Express Tribune
HEC, Sindh HEC at odds overVCs forum in Morocco
A dispute has emerged between the Higher Education Commission (HEC) and the Sindh Higher Education Commission (Sindh HEC) over the participation of university vice chancellors in an upcoming international forum scheduled to be held in Rabat, Morocco. HEC has invited vice chancellors from across the country to attend the forum, asking universities to cover the travel expenses themselves. However, the Sindh HEC has refused to allow universities in the province to use provincial grants for this purpose. Sindh HEC Chairman Dr Tariq Rafi has issued an advisory to the heads of all public sector universities advising them not to undertake foreign trips using public funds, with a warning that any such cases will be reported to the Chief Minister, the Chancellor or Controlling Authority of Universities in Sindh. "The Sindh government provides grants to universities strictly for academic and research purposes. These funds cannot be spent on foreign trips," said Rafi. He added that while vice chancellors are free to attend the forum at their own expense, they are not permitted to use university or government funds for the trip. Sindh HEC reminded that it was difficult for many public sector universities in Sindh to even pay salaries of the teachers and staff. Even essential expenditures were covered by loans, he said. If such expenditures for international travel is of dire need, then they can only be incurred after approval of the same has been given by the Chief Minister. The Sindh HEC quoting the existing policy of the Universities and Boards Department of Sindh says, that the leave notifications issued for foreign tours explicitly mention that the expenses of such tours will not be borne by the Government of Sindh or university funds. The Vice Chancellors' Forum was originally planned to be held in Islamabad last month, but it was relocated to Rabat due to escalating tensions between Pakistan and India, sources said. Sindh HEC emphasized that most universities in the province are already facing financial deficits, and spending scarce resources on international travel would be irresponsible.
Business Recorder
14 hours ago
- Business Recorder
PECA Act: Respondents asked to submit comments
ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) gave a deadline to the respondents to submit comments in the petitions challenging amendments in the PECA Act. A single bench of Justice Inaam Ameen Minhas on Wednesday heard the petitions of Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists (PFUJ), anchors association and Islamabad High Court Journalists Association (IHCJA). In the petition, counsel of the journalist body adopted the stance that the PECA (Amendment) Act is unconstitutional and illegal; hence, the court should conduct judicial review on it. The petition said the PECA (Amendment) 2025 increased the government control and restrictions on freedom of speech. It said the PECA law violated Article 19 and 19(A) of the Constitution as well. Therefore, it pleaded, the law should be suspended. PECA amendments challenged in SC During the hearing, Advocate Imran Shafiq and other lawyers appeared in the court on behalf of the petitioners. Advocate Shafiq said the federal government has filed its reply only through the Ministry of Interior and the Ministry of Information while the Ministry of Law and Justice, Parliamentary Affairs and the PTA have not submitted any response yet. He informed the bench that the federal government has raised a question on the jurisdiction of this court. He added that the federation has stated that after the 26th Constitutional Amendment, only the Constitutional Bench of the High Court can hear this case. The lawyer said the second objection was raised while giving a reference of a Quranic verse that before spreading the words, do research. The lawyer said the FIRs are being registered against people and the court should hear this case soon. The IHC bench asked whether there is no news going on? Is someone preventing news from being given or published? Riasat Ali Azad advocate prayed the court to issue a stay order that there will be no FIR or arrest against the journalist for reporting the news. He said that the parties are not submitting a response and are taking time from the court. Journalist Mazhar Abbas said that an atmosphere of harassment has been created in the media industry and the journalists are being summoned and harassed by the FIA. The petitioner's lawyer said the parties should be directed to file their replies and provide a copy of the replies to the petitioners in advance before the next hearing. Justice Inaam remarked that even if the response is not filed, the hearing will still be continued. He said that this case would take a long time and therefore, it will be scheduled after Eid. Later, the court deferred hearing of the case till the second week of July. The PFUJ said in the petition that the law infringed international human rights as well as digital rights in Pakistan. The petition read: '…a writ may be issued declaring that the Prevention of Electronic Crimes (Amendment) Act, 2025 is unconstitutional, being violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution, due process, fair trial, and the concept of regulatory independence, as well as the doctrines of fairness, proportionality, reasonableness, and constitutional limitations or restrictions, hence void, and liable to be struck down.' Therefore, the PFUJ prayed that the respondents may be restrained and prevented from employing the coercive powers under the Prevention of Electronic Crimes (Amendment) Act, 2025, in general, and against the journalist community, in particular till final disposal of the instant petition. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Business Recorder
2 days ago
- Business Recorder
Corporate board elections
Introduction: A reform that misses the mark In July 2023, the Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan (SECP) amended the Code of Corporate Governance through S.R.O. 906(I)/2023, introducing a new regulation (7A) that mandates separate, category-wise voting for director elections in listed companies. Ostensibly designed to streamline compliance with board diversity requirements—such as the presence of female and independent directors—this amendment has produced the opposite of good governance. Rather than fostering inclusion or transparency, these reforms have imposed severe procedural limitations on minority shareholders, undermining the time-tested cumulative voting method enshrined in the Companies Act, 2017. As a result, the amended framework risks institutionalizing majority dominance and relegating shareholder democracy to a symbolic formality. The case in point: an unwinnable election In 2024, a minority shareholder controlling 12.51 percent equity in a listed company prepared to contest upcoming board elections under Section 159(3) of the Companies Act. With seven board seats available and the company's free float limited to 25%, the shareholder aimed to secure one board seat —an achievable strategy under the earlier cumulative voting framework that allowed aggregation of votes to elect at least one director. However, the company's new voting process, aligned with Regulation 7A, subdivided the election into three separate categories: female, independent, and other directors. Critically, it rigidly allocated voting rights to each category based on the number of seats designated for that group. For the 'Other Directors' category — where the minority nominee had filed — this meant that a candidate needed at least 20.10 percent of the total votes to win a single seat. In a company where the controlling shareholders held over 75% of the voting power, the outcome was a foregone conclusion. Even with controlling 12.51% equity, the minority shareholder found the contest practically unwinnable. Facing a futile effort, the nominee withdrew his candidacy. The company subsequently announced that all remaining candidates stood unopposed — rendering the election process an administrative formality. The problem: a procedural lockout This episode is not an isolated event, but a clear illustration of the deeper structural flaws introduced by the 2023 reforms: — Voting power is fragmented: By dividing voting into fixed categories, Regulation 7A prevents shareholders from strategically allocating their full voting strength—effectively neutralizing minority influence. — Cumulative voting is undermined: While the Companies Act guarantees cumulative voting to empower minority blocs, the new mechanism bypasses this intent by introducing category-based segmentation, which is arguably inconsistent with Sections 159 and 166 of the Act. — Uncontested elections are now the norm: The separation of ballots makes it easier for controlling shareholders to fill reserved seats (e.g., for female or independent directors) without competition, thereby complying with the letter of the law while violating its spirit. — Independence is compromised: Directors elected with majority backing, regardless of being labeled 'independent,' are unlikely to offer meaningful dissent or oversight — defeating the very purpose of their designation. Global best practices: where Pakistan falls short Across jurisdictions, mechanisms like cumulative voting or slate-based minority representation are considered essential tools for equitable corporate governance. For example: — The OECD Principles of Corporate Governance recognize cumulative voting as a legitimate and effective way to ensure minority shareholders have a voice in the boardroom. — Italy and the UK have adopted dual-voting or slate-voting structures that guarantee at least one board seat to the non-controlling shareholders. — Saudi Arabia and China require cumulative voting in listed companies to prevent entrenchment of control. Pakistan's shift to a segmented voting framework moves away from these norms, replacing proportional representation with category-specific majoritarianism. In practical terms, this means the controlling shareholders not only dominate the board but now do so with the veneer of compliance and procedural legitimacy. Recommendations: restoring balance and credibility To preserve the integrity of corporate governance in Pakistan and re-empower minority shareholders, the following reforms should be considered: Restore cumulative voting across a unified slate: Reinstate the cumulative voting method as originally provided in the Companies Act, allowing shareholders to allocate votes freely among all candidates. Introduce reserved minority representation: Mandate at least one board seat to be filled exclusively through votes cast by non-controlling shareholders, ensuring true minority representation. Enhance transparency through vote disclosure: Require companies to disclose, in advance, the vote thresholds typically needed to win a seat under the new system. This would help shareholders make informed decisions and organize support. Strengthen oversight and post-election review: SECP should introduce a mandatory review of election results, including unopposed outcomes, to assess whether procedural reforms are delivering on their governance objectives. Conclusion: a call to rebalance power The intention behind SECP's 2023 amendment may have been noble—ensuring compliance with board diversity mandates. But in its current form, Regulation 7A disables one of the few levers minority shareholders have to assert their rights. The cumulative result is a system where even a shareholder with controlling 12.51% equity cannot credibly contest an election, and where the majority's grip on governance is quietly tightened. Pakistan must not let formalism replace fairness. Regulatory reform must advance both diversity and equity. Otherwise, shareholder participation risks becoming an illusion—legally permitted, procedurally blocked, and practically futile. It is time to revisit these reforms—not to abandon them—but to realign them with the foundational principles of transparency, inclusivity, and balance that underpin good governance worldwide. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
