The Islamabad High Court (IHC) has reaffirmed the authority of the Competition Commission of Pakistan (CCP) to investigate deceptive marketing and anti-competitive conduct within the telecom sector, dismissing multiple petitions filed by leading operators including Jazz, Telenor, Zong, Ufone, Warid, PTCL, and Wi-Tribe. Justice Inaam Ameen Minhas, in a comprehensive 19-page judgment, ruled that CCP had acted within its lawful jurisdiction under the Competition Act 2010 by issuing show-cause notices to telecom companies over misleading advertising and hidden charges levied on prepaid users.
According to the judgment, the CCP’s statutory mandate extends to all sectors of the economy, including telecommunications, and operates concurrently with PTA. The petitions challenged CCP’s show-cause notices issued between 2013 and 2014 against cellular operators accused of imposing concealed “service maintenance” or “recharge” fees on prepaid cards, which the Commission classified as deceptive marketing under Section 10(2)(b) of the Act. PTCL and Wi-Tribe had separately contested notices related to their “unlimited internet packages” that were actually subject to fair usage policies, which CCP deemed misleading to consumers. In another connected case, PTCL sought to halt an inquiry by CCP over alleged discriminatory pricing practices in fixed local loop (FLL) services.
The telecom firms argued that PTA held exclusive powers to regulate the sector, including competition-related matters. However, the IHC disagreed, holding in paragraph 22 of the judgment that CCP possesses overarching jurisdiction across all economic sectors, including telecommunications. Justice Minhas clarified that CCP’s functions are not confined to general regulation but extend to the prevention of anti-competitive behavior, abuse of dominance, collusive arrangements, and deceptive marketing practices. The court stated that both the Telecommunication (Re-organization) Act 1996 and the Competition Act 2010 operate in distinct yet complementary spheres. While PTA oversees the technical and operational aspects of telecom services, CCP has the authority to address issues involving market competition and consumer protection.
The judgment also highlighted that CCP’s jurisdiction encompasses regulatory entities such as PTA, based on Section 2(1)(q) of the Act, which defines “undertaking” to include any governmental or regulatory body. Justice Minhas noted that the show-cause notices in question were procedural in nature and not final orders, observing that the petitions were premature since the companies had adequate statutory remedies available before the Commission, its appellate bench, and the Competition Appellate Tribunal. Intervening at this stage, the court added, would obstruct a statutory body from carrying out its lawful duties and undermine the intent of the legislature behind the Competition Act 2010.
By dismissing all seven petitions as not maintainable, the IHC reaffirmed CCP’s authority to pursue investigations into deceptive and anti-competitive conduct in the telecom industry. The judgment is seen as a key validation of CCP’s mandate to ensure fair market practices and consumer protection, setting a precedent for the Commission’s oversight role across all economic sectors, including telecommunications.
Follow the SPIN IDG WhatsApp Channel for updates across the Smart Pakistan Insights Network covering all of Pakistan’s technology ecosystem.
