Daily Times

ISLAMABAD: The apex decision making body of the civic authority has become a rubber stamp as not a single ‘dissenting note’ or difference of opinion was recorded on behalf of any CDA’s board member in 20 meetings held in 2016 whereas the continuous absence of the Commissioner, Rawalpindi and Chief Commissioner Islamabad, from the meetings also raised legal questions.

The board of the Capital Development Authority (CDA) is the supreme forum to take a final decision on policy matters pertaining to the civic body. A total of 20 meetings was held in the year 2016, in which 159 agenda items and 30 non-agenda items, were discussed.

The Commissioner Rawalpindi and the Commissioner Islamabad, did not attend even a single meeting as ex officio members of the board while a representative of the Commissioner ICT attended five out of a total of 20 meetings last year.

It is pertinent to mention here that apparently the board is being used to provide a legal cover to tainted and complex cases, in some cases the heads of different directorates, to shift their own responsibility on the board’s shoulder forward unnecessary cases for approval.

A well informed source informed that currently the officers were trying to go under the guise of the board’s decision. He briefed further that the board was mandated to take policy level and generic decisions, but now the cases of individual level are being sent to the CDA board. The CDA Board comprises the Chairman, Member Finance & Accounts, Member Administration, Member Planning & Design, Member Engineering, Member Environment and Member Estate while the Commissioner Rawalpindi and the Chief Commissioner Islamabad are also the ex-officio members of the CDA Board.

It is worth mentioning here that not a single member wrote a dissenting note or expressed difference of opinion with a decision over any of the agenda in the entire year. It seems that all matters were approved unanimously in the board meeting, which itself creates the question mark on the transparency of the board’s decisions.

However, while responding to the above mentioned doubts on the board’s performance, its incumbent Secretary Asif Shah Jahan, accepted that the trend of unnecessary agenda items has been increased, which is not a good sign.

He further clarified: “I have sent back several summaries for further working after I found them half-baked whereas sometimes the board also referred back the matters to concerned formations with the directions to take decision on their own level.”

While responding to the members’ dissenting note, he said: “The members defiantly express their difference of opinion, but verbally within a meeting and the final decision is taken after convincing all members.” But, in fact, there is no need of complete consensus by law while taking decisions in the board meetings, but the decisions are supposed to be taken with the vote of a simple majority.

An officer of the Authority said rhetorically: “Unfortunately, the directors and members are not well versed in the civic body’s law and also avoid taking decision so they send cases to the board for approval to save their skin.” He said further: There are no negative intentions in all cases, but these are sent to the board as the officers lack the decision power.”

A former member CDA while talking to Daily Times questioned: “How hundred per cent agreement is possible among board members while taking decisions.” He said; “I am the witness of a dozens of cases where the members had recorded their dissenting note quite wisely in the past.”

Incumbent Member Planning CDA, Asad Mehmood Kiani said; “The board has vast scope in decision making, but such powers should be used in a positive manner as its negative use will be considered as misuse of authority.”