Delhi | 25°C (windy)

National Carrier's Future Up in Air as LHC Takes On Privatisation Challenge

  • Nishadil
  • January 04, 2026
  • 0 Comments
  • 3 minutes read
  • 11 Views
National Carrier's Future Up in Air as LHC Takes On Privatisation Challenge

The Fate of Pakistan International Airlines Hangs in the Balance After Legal Challenge in Lahore High Court

The Lahore High Court has taken up a petition challenging the government's controversial plan to privatise Pakistan International Airlines, raising serious questions about national interest and legal procedures.

Well, it seems the government's ambitious plans to privatise Pakistan International Airlines (PIA) have hit a rather significant roadblock, at least for now. Just recently, the Lahore High Court stepped into the fray, taking up a petition that squarely challenges this controversial move. It's really thrown a spanner in the works, hasn't it?

The individual behind this legal challenge is Barrister Javed Iqbal Jafri, and he hasn't minced words about his concerns. His petition, filed under Article 199 of the Constitution – which, for those unfamiliar, deals with the writ jurisdiction of the High Court – argues quite passionately that PIA isn't just another company. Oh no, he insists it’s a strategic national asset, something far too important to simply be sold off.

Think about it, he posits, our national airline has historically played a crucial role, especially during times of conflict. During wars, for instance, PIA aircraft were often repurposed to serve vital national security needs. To him, divesting such an entity would be nothing short of a serious blow to national interest, perhaps even jeopardising our country's defence capabilities down the line. It's a powerful argument, evoking a sense of national pride and caution.

But his objections don't stop at the strategic level. Barrister Jafri also raised a rather significant legal point, suggesting that the entire privatisation process might be fundamentally flawed from a procedural standpoint. He highlighted that the Privatisation Commission Ordinance 2000, which presumably underpins such initiatives, has actually expired. If that's the case, then any actions taken under it, including the current push to privatise PIA, could very well be deemed illegal or at least operating on shaky ground.

Furthermore, he brought up PIA's considerable assets, and let's be honest, they are quite substantial. We're talking about valuable land holdings and even hotels, both here and abroad, that belong to the national carrier. The barrister expressed a deep worry that these prized possessions might be sold off at throwaway prices, or worse, in a manner that doesn't truly benefit the nation. It's a concern many citizens likely share, wondering if the public's assets will truly be protected in this whole affair.

So, what did the court do in response to these rather compelling points? Well, the honourable Lahore High Court, after hearing the initial arguments, has taken the logical next step. They've issued notices to all the key players involved: the federal government, the Privatisation Commission itself, and, of course, Pakistan International Airlines. All parties are now expected to furnish their replies to the petition, laying out their side of the story. This means the legal battle has officially begun, and we're all waiting to see how this unfolds.

This legal challenge, ultimately, isn't just about a single airline; it's a significant chapter in the ongoing, often heated, national debate surrounding the future of Pakistan's beleaguered national carrier. For years, PIA has been grappling with massive debts and operational challenges, leading many to believe privatisation is the only viable path forward. However, this petition serves as a stark reminder that such a path is fraught with complex legal, strategic, and emotional considerations. It's a high-stakes game, and the future of our national skies hangs precariously in the balance.

Disclaimer: This article was generated in part using artificial intelligence and may contain errors or omissions. The content is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute professional advice. We makes no representations or warranties regarding its accuracy, completeness, or reliability. Readers are advised to verify the information independently before relying on