PTA fines CM Pak Rs77.8 Million for SIM sales Geo-fencing violation
ISLAMABAD: The Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) has imposed a fine of Rs77.8 million on China Mobile Pakistan (CM Pak) after determining that the operator failed to ensure compliance with mandatory geo-fencing rules governing biometric verification system (BVS) devices used for SIM sales.
The regulatory action followed a field inspection in which the PTA found that an authorised sales representative linked to CM Pak’s Taxila franchise was selling SIMs from a location in Islamabad that fell outside the approved geographical area of the franchise.
According to the PTA’s enforcement order, the inspection was carried out on March 30, 2026. During the inspection, the regulator discovered that a Data Sales Officer (DSO) associated with the Taxila franchise was conducting SIM sales at I-10 Markaz, Islamabad.
The location was not within the authorised territorial jurisdiction or designated geo-location of the franchise. The PTA also found that the sales activity had been conducted without the required Door-to-Door/Kiosk approval from the regulator.
Geo-fencing requirement
The PTA’s regulatory framework requires BVS devices used for SIM issuance to remain within a prescribed distance of the approved sales location. Under the mandatory geo-fencing mechanism, such devices must operate within 100 metres of the designated geo-location of an authorised sales channel.
The purpose of the requirement is to ensure that biometric devices are not moved to unauthorised locations for SIM issuance. The mechanism is also designed to strengthen oversight of SIM sales, prevent misuse of biometric verification equipment and improve the traceability of subscriber registrations.
The regulator made it clear that SIM sales outside an approved geo-location are not permitted unless prior approval has been obtained from the PTA.
CM Pak challenges regulatory action
CM Pak contested the proposed enforcement proceedings, maintaining that the incident was an isolated operational lapse involving an individual DSO rather than evidence of a broader failure in the company’s compliance system.
The operator argued that the SIMs concerned had been issued only after the required biometric verification process had been successfully completed. It further stated that the transactions were properly recorded and remained traceable through the prescribed systems.
CM Pak also maintained that there had been no issuance of fake or anonymous SIMs, no bypass of biometric verification and no failure in the verification process conducted through the National Database and Registration Authority (NADRA).
The company told the regulator that it had taken disciplinary and corrective measures after being informed of the violation. These measures included issuing a show-cause notice and warning letter to the concerned franchise and terminating the services of the DSO involved in the incident.
CM Pak also said it had circulated compliance instructions across its network and strengthened internal monitoring mechanisms to prevent similar incidents in the future.
PTA rejects defence
The PTA, however, did not accept the company’s argument that successful biometric verification should be treated as sufficient compliance.
The authority ruled that biometric verification and geo-fencing constitute separate regulatory requirements. While biometric verification is intended to establish the identity of a subscriber, geo-fencing controls where the SIM sale and verification process can legally take place.
According to the regulator, compliance with one requirement does not eliminate the obligation to comply with the other.
The PTA observed that allowing BVS devices to operate beyond their authorised locations could weaken the regulatory controls established for SIM issuance, regardless of whether the subscriber’s biometric verification was successfully completed.
The regulator also rejected CM Pak’s position that responsibility for the incident could primarily be attributed to the franchise or individual sales officer.
Under the applicable Subscribers Antecedents Verification Regulations and licence conditions, the PTA maintained that the licensed operator carries direct responsibility for ensuring that its authorised sales network complies with regulatory requirements.
Corrective action not enough to erase violation
The authority further noted that steps taken by an operator after a violation has been detected can potentially serve as mitigating factors but cannot remove the violation itself.
The PTA stressed that geo-fencing is a substantive regulatory safeguard rather than a procedural requirement that can be overlooked if other verification mechanisms are functioning properly.
It said allowing subsequent corrective measures to effectively neutralise an established breach could undermine the purpose of mandatory compliance requirements and weaken regulatory oversight of SIM issuance.
After reviewing the show-cause notice, CM Pak’s written responses, compliance report and submissions made during the hearing, the PTA concluded that the operator had failed to maintain adequate supervision and regulatory control over its authorised sales channel.
Rs77.8m penalty imposed
Based on its findings, the PTA held CM Pak liable under Section 23 of the Pakistan Telecommunication (Re-organization) Act, 1996.
The authority subsequently imposed a penalty of Rs77.8 million (Rs77,800,000) on the company and directed it to deposit the amount within 10 days of receiving the enforcement order.
The PTA warned that failure to pay the penalty within the specified period could result in further proceedings or action under the applicable law.
