The present politico-legal landscape of Pakistan has brought into sharp focus the concept of ‘conflict of interest’, which is comparatively new for most people including those who are connected with the legal profession. This may be due to the fact that in Pakistan, no litigation has ever been brought against the wrong caused by a ‘conflict of interest’. It is not without surprise that there is no law preventing conflict of interest at the federal level in Pakistan, though legislation has recently been passed by the Provincial Assembly of KP Province. However, the concept ‘conflict of interest’ wherever used in our judicial precedents seems to carry only a moral force without being legally binding. All laws are essentially based on the rules of prudence. In an organised society, prudent behaviour is not possible unless it is enforced by the sanction of the state, which is necessary to compel obedience of an individual to the kind of behaviour which the society desires. Without the elements of force and deterrence, the rules of prudence do not go beyond the principles of ethics, which experience shows, are daily thrown to the winds. A conflict of interest is a situation in which a person has a private or personal interest sufficient to appear to influence in the exercise of his or her official duties. The personal interest may be financial or otherwise, but that interest always works to the advantage of the person exercising such powers. As a public official or a professional, one is required to do one’s duties freely and independently in public interest or the interest of one’s employer or client. In doing so, one incurs an obligation towards the institution or the person whose interest one is serving. If factors like private or personal interest interfere or appear likely to interfere in the due discharge of duties, then it amounts to a conflict of interest, which must be avoided at all cost. As a matter of public policy, such situations are more likely to affect public interest sooner or later, and therefore, should not be allowed to occur. So it is always important to avoid apparent and potential as well as actual conflicts of interest. An apparent conflict of interest is one in which a reasonable person would think that the professional’s judgment is likely to be compromised. A potential conflict of interest involves a situation that may develop into an actual conflict of interest. It requires some skill and good judgment to recognise that one is in a conflict of interest situation. This is because private and personal interest can cloud a person’s objectivity. But if one is headed into a situation of conflict of interest, then the best course is that one should voluntarily get out of such situation, or if one cannot do so, then the second best course is that one must make it known to all affected parties of one’s private interest. These responses will preserve the trust essential to professional objectivity. It is an irony that a situation of conflict of interest has the ingrained potential to cause mischief sooner or later, and to think or suppose otherwise amounts to stretching human limitations beyond their capacity, especially in a society like ours. It may not be without surprise that despite the enormity of complications that situations involving a conflict of interest can cause, it still largely remains a moral or ethical question in most countries of the world, without having an actual legal sanction. Canada is the only country where the question of conflict of interest has been enforced on a country-wide basis through legislation making it a penal offence on all types of activities. In the US, too, the law relating to conflict of interest is duly codified, and enforced by providing penalties on public office-holders for their various acts. In the UK, the conduct of lawyers and solicitors only has been regulated by the creation of a statutory body known as ‘Solicitors Regulation Authority’ (SRA) which has the authority to take cognisance of all matters involving a conflict of interest. Surprisingly in India, being the largest democracy in the world, there is no law governing conflict of interest, and like our public office-holders and ministers of the government, they freely indulge in nepotism and all kinds of other malpractices. The recent Lalit Modi controversy is a case in point where Sushma Swaraj, the present Minister for External Affairs of India, in a situation of conflict of interest was much criticised for helping the cricket tycoon (being her husband’s employer) in procuring travel documents for him. This row has sent a wave of outcry all over India demanding the government to give a legal effect to situations of conflict of interest. In an environment in which a conflict of interest is treated as a moral issue rather than a legal one, without incurring a criminal liability, it is not surprising that we see blatant violations of this kind every other day. Our society is no less different than that of India. Our Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Province has recently taken a unique and bold step in unanimously passing the ‘Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Prevention of Conflict of Interest Act 2016,’ which aims at preventing and minimising the possibility of conflicts between private interests and official duties of public office-holders in the province. Following the Canadian model, it envisages the establishment of an independent commission with the mandate to determine the measures necessary to avoid conflict of interest and to determine whether a contravention of this Act occurred, while also encouraging experienced and competent persons to hold positions of public office. The Act devises a procedure for submission of signed summaries, recusals, and compliance by all public office-holders to the directions of the commission to prevent situations of conflict of interest. The Commission has the powers to inquire into incidents of contraventions of the Act. Penalties of criminal and departmental actions and a fine up to Rs. 500,000 is also prescribed. But more important than the penalties is the real purpose of the Act which is to afford a chance to the conscientious office-holders to recuse themselves from the awkward situations of conflict of interest and by duly registering themselves with the commission to avoid future embarrassments. The Commission also acts as a conduit to public complaints to enable itself to act in time where situations of conflict of interest are likely to arise. The Act was tabled in June 2014, and after prolonged deliberations by the House and the Select Committee, it was passed in August 2016. There is no doubt about the intentions of the provincial legislators to meet head-on the festering and hidden evil of conflict of interest in matters of public importance, but the real challenge to the government would be in the honest and effective implementation of this legislation. There is virtually no hindrance for other provinces to following this line. The writer is a former member of the provincial civil service and can be reached at zafar.aziz.ch@gmail.com