The Gen-Zs and the Cockroach Party (CJP)

I recently completed the AI, Justice, and the Rule of Law course, developed by the Saïd Business School at the University of Oxford in collaboration with UNESCO. The course was designed to equip legal professionals, judges, policymakers, researchers and justice sector practitioners with a comprehensive understanding of how artificial intelligence is transforming legal systems and the administration of justice while safeguarding the rule of law. Artificial intelligence (AI) is no longer a future possibility but an integral part of modern justice systems. A UNESCO survey of judicial operators from 96 countries found that 44% already use AI in their daily work, while only 9% have received formal AI training. AI is already being used in courts across more than one hundred jurisdictions to support legal research, document review, transcription, translation, case management, document summarisation, and drafting assistance. However, AI should not be viewed as a single technology; rather, it should be understood in terms of the specific task it performs within the judicial process. This functional approach is essential because the legal implications of AI depend on where and how it is used. Different categories of AI create different opportunities and risks. Administrative AI is primarily used for case management, transcription, translation, and other routine functions that improve court efficiency. Research and analytical AI assists legal professionals in identifying relevant legislation, precedents, and legal principles. Decision-support AI helps analyse patterns and provide recommendations, while generative AI produces summaries, drafts legal documents, and generates text. Each category presents distinct legal, ethical, and governance challenges, requiring different levels of scrutiny and oversight. A central theme in the course was that AI should support judicial work rather than replace judicial decision-making. Judicial authority must always remain with human judges, who retain ultimate responsibility for interpreting the law and deciding cases. AI can assist by improving efficiency and providing analytical support, but it cannot substitute independent legal reasoning or judicial discretion. The principle of Human-in-the-Loop (HITL) is emphasized, under which meaningful human oversight remains essential whenever AI influences legal processes or outcomes. There are considerable opportunities AI presents for improving justice systems. AI can significantly accelerate legal research, improve case management, automate transcription and translation, summarise lengthy legal documents, and reduce the administrative workload of judges and court staff. By automating repetitive tasks, AI enables judges to devote more time to hearings, legal analysis, and reasoned decision-making. AI has the potential to improve access to justice by making legal services faster, more efficient, and more accessible. Alongside these benefits, there are risks associated with AI in the justice sector. Generative AI may produce hallucinated legal authorities, inaccurate citations, or misleading legal analysis. Algorithmic bias may reinforce existing inequalities, while automation bias can encourage users to place excessive trust in AI-generated outputs without independent verification. Other important concerns include the lack of transparency in ‘black box’ algorithms, risks to privacy and confidentiality, and the possibility that excessive reliance on AI may gradually erode the professional skills and independent judgment of legal practitioners. The responsible adoption of AI requires governance rather than simply introducing new technology. Effective implementation depends upon institutional AI policies, comprehensive risk and human rights impact assessments, pilot testing before deployment, continuous monitoring and evaluation, transparency, explainability, and accountability. The importance of multidisciplinary oversight involving judges, technologists, policymakers, and civil society to ensure that AI systems remain trustworthy and aligned with the principles of justice and the rule of law. Another important aspect of the role of AI is in promoting access to justice. AI-powered legal assistants can help self-represented litigants understand legal procedures, prepare legal documents, translate court materials into different languages, and support mediation and dispute resolution processes. These applications have the potential to make legal information and services more accessible, particularly for individuals who face financial, linguistic, or geographical barriers in accessing justice. However, the ethical and professional responsibility always remains with human legal professionals. Regardless of how sophisticated AI systems become, judges remain accountable for their decisions, and lawyers remain responsible for the accuracy, quality, and integrity of their work. AI cannot replace professional ethics, judicial independence, impartiality, or the duty to provide transparent, reasoned, and legally sound judgments. Overall, AI should be viewed as a powerful judicial support tool rather than a judicial decision-maker. Its responsible use depends upon understanding the function of each AI system, maintaining meaningful human oversight, safeguarding fundamental rights, ensuring transparency and accountability, and adopting strong institutional governance so that technological innovation strengthens, rather than undermines, the rule of law.

A rare photograph can sometimes preserve more history than an official archive. The one below brings together six extraordinary men. In the front row, from left to right, stand Zafar Iqbal Mirza—our beloved ZIM—Shafqat Tanvir Mirza, Dada Ameer Hyder and I.A. Rehman. Behind them are Major Ishaq Muhammad, remembered for the Rawalpindi Conspiracy Case, and Professor Amin Mughal. None sought celebrity. Together, they represent a moral and intellectual republic that Pakistan never formally acknowledged. An extraordinary assembly of Pakistan’s progressive tradition. Front row, from left: Zafar Iqbal Mirza (ZIM), Shafqat Tanvir Mirza, Dada Ameer Hyder and I.A. Rehman. Second row: Major Ishaq Muhammad and Professor Amin Mughal The photograph is remarkable not because all six belonged to a single organisation or followed an identical political line. They did not. Its power lies in the coexistence of different traditions of resistance: the revolutionary organiser, the dissident soldier, the journalist, the editor, the defender of human rights, the custodian of Punjabi language and the teacher who connected all these worlds through conversation. Amin Mughal, standing quietly in the second row, provides the key to reading the photograph. His position is almost symbolic. He does not occupy the centre, although he belonged at the centre of the intellectual relationships represented in it. He appears as he lived: present, observant and connected to everyone, without needing to establish precedence over anyone. Much has already been written after his passing in London on August 12, 2026. A chronological retelling of his life—his teaching, political activity, imprisonment, journalism and exile—cannot explain what made him exceptional. His real contribution lay in creating intellectual continuities. He connected the organised Left of Dada Ameer Hyder and Major Ishaq with the democratic journalism of ZIM and I.A. Rehman, the linguistic and cultural resistance of Shafqat Tanvir Mirza, and younger people like me who entered journalism without fully comprehending the inheritance placed before them. I worked with Amin Sahib at the weekly Viewpoint between 1979 and 1984. Its modest premises at 4-Lawrence Road, Lahore, were my real university. As recalled in “Remembering Viewpoint & its stalwarts” [Minute Mirror, March 23-24, 2026], Mazhar Ali Khan had gathered people for whom journalism was an ethical commitment rather than a route to influence, wealth or political patronage. Amin Mughal belonged naturally to that environment. He did not separate editing from teaching, political analysis from literature, or intellectual disagreement from personal affection. The men in this photograph remind us that the Left was once far more than an electoral label. Dada Ameer Hyder had travelled the world as a worker and revolutionary before most Pakistanis had encountered the language of globalisation. Beginning as a coal-boy on a ship, Dada experienced labour, empire and racial hierarchy directly. His memoirs, Chains to Lose, reveal a world stretching from Bombay and Moscow to New York, Shanghai and Buenos Aires. He organised workers across borders long before international solidarity became the vocabulary of funded conferences. I had the rare honour of meeting Dada at Viewpoint. He carried no theatrical aura of revolutionary greatness. His authority arose from struggle endured, not status claimed. Official histories largely excluded him because he challenged both colonial power and the class order that succeeded it. The state could accommodate elite leaders of independence; a worker who asked what independence had delivered to other workers remained dangerous. Major Ishaq represented another uncomfortable history. A soldier capable of thinking beyond military obedience, he was implicated in the Rawalpindi Conspiracy Case and repeatedly imprisoned. After Hasan Nasir’s death in custody, he pursued the matter when silence would have been safer. Major Ishaq later organised peasants and workers, treating revolution neither as romance nor slogan but as the slow construction of collective capacity. Even paralysis could not end his political work. His life contradicted the convenient division between soldier and dissident, patriot and critic. Shafqat Tanvir Mirza—STM—resisted through language. Journalist, trade unionist, historian and scholar, he understood that the marginalisation of Punjabi was not a literary accident. It reflected the estrangement of a people from their own cultural memory. STM’s  scholarship on Punjabi literature, history and the Sufi poets restored dignity to a language spoken by millions but frequently denied serious institutional space. His commitment earned imprisonment and professional hardship, but never displaced his willingness to engage in dialogue. ZIM embodied another form of courage: fidelity to professional standards when both censorship and commercialisation encouraged surrender. In my tribute to him, I recalled him as my teacher and mentor. He was a master sub-editor, stylist and conversationalist. When Mazhar Ali Khan, I.A. Rehman and Amin Mughal were arrested in 1981, ZIM helped ensure that Viewpoint appeared without interruption. His authority came from mastery of craft joined with an unshakable belief in free expression, equality and human dignity. I.A. Rehman carried those commitments into the organised defence of human rights. His life demonstrated that opposition to injustice need not produce bitterness. He spoke softly, listened patiently and remained firm. At a PIDE memorial, I recalled that he spoke the truth although it sent him to prison twice. Rehman sahib, as we all call him with respect and affection, suffered without complaint because, for him, sacrifice was the natural cost of professed principles. His advice that the struggle for human rights was “a marathon, not a sprint” remains essential in an age addicted to instant victories and equally instant despair. What, then, distinguished Amin Mughal among these giants? He was the interpreter between their worlds. From Dada and Major Ishaq came the imperative of structural change; from STM, the inseparability of culture and emancipation; from ZIM, professional integrity; from I.A. Rehman, the defence of every person’s dignity. Amin Sahib absorbed these traditions without turning any of them into dogma. Amin Mughal possessed a rare capacity to disagree without diminishing another person. His questions could dismantle a weak argument, but never the dignity of the person making it. For younger colleagues, this was an education in democratic conduct. He taught us that progressive politics without intellectual honesty becomes another orthodoxy,

By Saman Aftab Since the world has deliberated a lot to find a workable solution of plastic pollution, it is imperative to underscore the significance of most promising eco- friendly solutions to curb the plastic menace. The non-degradable nature of synthetic plastics is contaminating terrestrial and aquatic eco systems. Moreover, the disastrous effects of microplastics (extremely tiny plastic pieces) on human nervous system development, hormonal balance and reproductive system are becoming evident with scientific research. Hence, plastic pollution has become a grave concern not only for the environment but also for human health. It is a well-documented fact that the current strategies to deal with disposing of synthetic plastic are not sufficient to get rid of this man made pollution. Landfilling is littering the water bodies as the leachate escaping from the landfills causes the contamination of water. Similarly, incineration (burning of plastic waste) leads to air pollution in turn causing several health hazard in the surroundings. Even, recycling of plastic seems to be highly expensive when dealing with enormous amounts of mix plastic wastes in developing countries like Pakistan. However, as a bioremediative strategy, biodegradation holds promising prospects. Biodegradation of plastic simply means the use of microorganisms (including bacteria and fungi etc.) that have the capability of degrading petroleum based plastic in such a manner that would render the synthetic plastic degraded in the environment. Such microbial strains are present ubiquitously in those environments where plastics are dumped such as landfills. The researchers have not only isolated such strains but also managed to produce genetically modified bacteria/fungi capable of easily degrading synthetic plastics. Even the microbial enzymes of such microorganisms have been employed for such purposes as to study the intricacies of the biodegradation process only to make it more effective in the future. Pakistan is one of the countries where the use and misuse of plastic allows the environment to host such microbial strains capable of decomposing plastic in abundance. Having keen interest in this topic, I myself have isolated and identified several bacterial and fungal strains in my research work of MPhil titled “Biodegradation of plastics by locally isolated microorganisms”. Moreover, I have contributed a chapter on “Role of microbes in microplastic removal and its health effect on human health” in a book titled “Advanced treatment technologies for the removal of microplastics in wastewater”. Similarly, I have authored another chapter on “The role of microbial enzymes in the degradation of plastics- a sustainable tool for waste management” in an Elsevier book titled “Plastic waste valorization”. Hence, in my humble opinion, the optimization of biodegradation process can be exploited in an industrial setup where synthetic plastics would be degraded in the same manner as biological/microbiological systems are used to treat industrial wastewater. The scientists around the world are working day and night to come up with innovative strategies of plastic waste removal without deteriorating our environment. China, for example is working to convert mix plastic waste into hydrogen fuel but that is too expensive for the time being. In our country we hear about the banning of single use plastic specifically polyethylene shopping bags from our policy makers on and off. However, its enforcement never takes into effect. In fact, since hundreds and thousands of people are associated with the industry of plastic production, it is not wise to disrupt this supply chain abruptly without providing people with other feasible options. The introduction of biodegradable plastic as an alternative is overrated. The biodegradable plastic has shown to last much longer in the environment than what it promises and its production cost makes it too expensive to replace conventional plastic in the market. Whereas, Biodegradation of plastic still offers much hope to tackle plastic pollution. The dearth of resources and governmental assistance is the only hindrance, otherwise Pakistan has the potential to streamline an effective plastic waste management plan pivoted around biodegradation and become a global leader in this regard. I request the authorities to pay attention and incentivize researchers to explore this area of research for national good in particular and international benefit in general. Even if the unlikely consensus on plastic production cap is reached, still the world will need to streamline the process of plastic waste management. And, out of all plastic waste management techniques including incineration, landfilling and recycling, biodegradation is the most ecofriendly process of getting rid of hazardous plastics. The governments all across the globe must encourage their researchers to explore plastic degrading microorganism and optimize the process of biodegradation to get effective outcomes. The writer has done MPhil in Microbiology from GCU Lahore

The previous part VIII of this series concluded that a just tax system must satisfy more than the requirements of arithmetic. It must rest upon legislative competence, representative consent, rational classification, due process, protection against arbitrary deprivation, transparent expenditure and effective remedies. Parliament, while levying taxes cannot constitutionalise injustice merely by enacting it. Pakistan’s fiscal crisis will not be resolved by asking citizens to finance an unreformed state through increasingly coercive instruments. A recent book by Dr Hafiz A. Pasha, Fatima Malik and Hafsa Tanveer, Pakistan: Reforming an Inefficient and Inequitable Tax System, provides an appropriate opportunity to carry that argument forward. The volume is ambitious, data-rich and deserving of serious attention. Few recent studies attempt, within a single work, to map federal and provincial taxation, estimate tax gaps through different methodologies, examine incidence across income groups and sectors, evaluate fiscal incentives and finally present a quantified reform programme. Its central diagnosis is familiar but supported by extensive empirical work. Pakistan combines high statutory rates with a low tax-to-GDP ratio, excessive dependence on indirect taxation, pervasive evasion, severe sectoral disparities and weak provincial revenue mobilisation. The authors propose reforms that, in their estimation, can increase the national tax-to-GDP ratio by approximately three percentage points by 2027–28. The principal difficulty lies not in what the book measures. It lies in what the framework of measurement necessarily leaves outside its calculations. The usefulness—and limits—of the tax-gap lens The organising idea of the book is the tax gap. Through cross-country regressions, a representative-tax-system approach, monetary estimates of evasion and bottom-up calculations, the authors conclude that Pakistan possesses the potential to collect approximately three percent of GDP more in taxes. This is analytically valuable. It also risks converting a constitutional and political problem into an accounting exercise. A tax gap is not necessarily a reservoir of revenue waiting to be collected. Parts of it may reflect privileges protected by influential groups. Other parts arise from low productivity, fragmented enterprises, unemployment, weak financial inclusion and the regulatory costs created by the state itself. Informality is not always a voluntary choice made for the purpose of evasion; it can also be a survival strategy in an economy where formalisation invites multiple taxes, withholding obligations, inspections and compliance costs without ensuring reliable public services. Citizens also judge taxation in relation to expenditure. Their reluctance cannot be understood solely as non-compliance when additional revenue appears likely to finance debt servicing, administrative expansion, elite concessions, loss-making state enterprises and politically negotiated subsidies rather than education, healthcare, transport, security of property and equal economic opportunity. The decisive question is consequently not only how much more can be collected. It is who controls the state, who bears its burdens, who receives its rents, and why technically sound reforms repeatedly fail. Public finance asks how the gap should be closed. Constitutional Political Economy asks why the beneficiaries of the existing arrangement would permit it to be closed fairly. The selective fiscal state The book repeatedly recognises the presence of powerful vested interests. It identifies the under-taxation of property, agriculture, wholesale and retail trade, real estate and parts of the services sector. At the same time, it finds a disproportionate burden upon large-scale manufacturing, banking and formal businesses. Its estimate that industry bears taxes equivalent to 23.8 percent of its value added, with the incidence on large-scale manufacturing exceeding 36 percent, is particularly revealing. These figures demonstrate that Pakistan does not suffer from a uniformly low-tax equilibrium. Pakistan has created a selective fiscal state: coercive towards visible and organised taxpayers, accommodating towards politically protected or administratively difficult constituencies. This conclusion should change the design of reform. Where political influence determines the tax structure, another catalogue of proposed rates and bases cannot alter the equilibrium by itself. Reform must address the rules through which fiscal choices are made, concessions are granted and enforcement is selectively applied. A technically perfect proposal remains politically irrelevant when those who must enact it derive power from the arrangements it seeks to dismantle. Withholdingisation is not income taxation The book correctly notes that withholding and advance taxes generate overwhelming part of total income-tax revenue and have failed to eliminate evasion. It also recognises the distortions created by presumptive/mimum taxation and the fragmentation of income into separately taxed blocs. The consequences are more serious than those of an imperfect collection technique. Withholdingisation represents the gradual abandonment of income taxation as a levy on net accretion to economic power. Banks, utility companies, telecom operators, employers, import authorities, registrars and purchasers have been converted into unpaid tax collectors. Gross transactions are taxed without determining actual income, allowable expenditure, losses or the taxpayer’s real capacity to contribute. The revenue authority obtains money without developing the institutional capacity to examine accounts, conduct intelligent audits and establish taxable income. Compliant businesses suffer liquidity costs and wait for adjustments or refunds, while informal and influential sectors remain beyond meaningful assessment. The reform of income taxation must restore the return, assessment and audit as its foundations. Withholding should remain confined to situations where it is a genuine advance payment—principally salaries, dividends, profit on debt and payments to non-residents (mostly covered under tax treaties). It should remain fully adjustable against the final liability. A system based upon extracting money from every visible transaction may achieve collection targets. It cannot be described as a coherent income tax. Contradictions within the reform programme The book advocates broad-basing and criticises presumptive taxation, but later recommends restoration of a one-percent fixed tax on export proceeds. It supports neutrality while proposing a general five-year tax holiday for investment, enhanced deductions for energy costs and other selective allowances. These proposals arise from genuine concerns. Pakistan’s investment rate remains dangerously low, exporters face high energy and financing costs, and industry competes under an unstable exchange-rate and tariff environment. The proposed remedies nevertheless risk recreating the same exceptionalism that has made Pakistan’s tax system discriminatory, unpredictable and vulnerable to lobbying. A fixed tax on export proceeds is not a tax on income. It taxes turnover

By Muhammad Imran, Staff Member, SAHSOL-LUMS and Asma Rahmat, Final Year Law Student, SLC Superior University and Wafa Sarfraz, Law Student, SAHSOL-LUMS   Introduction: Article 10 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan enshrines the fundamental constitutional safeguards against arbitrary arrest and detention, thereby giving concrete procedural effect to the broader guarantee of personal liberty contained in Article 9. Rather than leaving these protections to ordinary legislation—such as Sections 60, 61, and 81 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.)—the Constitution elevates them to the status of entrenched fundamental rights. Consequently, these guarantees cannot be diluted or abrogated through ordinary legislative enactments, and any executive action or statutory provision inconsistent with Article 10 is liable to be declared void under Article 8 of the Constitution. Structurally, Article 10 establishes two distinct constitutional regimes. Clauses (1) and (2) prescribe procedural safeguards applicable to ordinary arrests and detention, whereas clauses (3) to (9) regulate the exceptional constitutional framework governing preventive detention. Therefore, the Honorable Mr. Justice Fazal Karim (Late) in his magic book for district judiciary practice, ‘Access to Justice in Pakistan’, described it as a Mini-Criminal Code, and has rightly described it so. Interplay with the Constitutional Scheme of Fundamental Rights: Article 10 does not operate in isolation; rather, it forms an integral part of Pakistan’s constitutional framework for the protection of liberty, dignity, and due process. Read together with Articles 9, 10A, and 14, it establishes a comprehensive constitutional guarantee against arbitrary deprivation of liberty. Article 9 guarantees that no person shall be deprived of life or liberty except in accordance with law, while Article 14 protects the inviolability of the dignity of man. Article 10 operationalizes these guarantees by regulating the manner in which the State may lawfully arrest and detain individuals. Consequently, arbitrary arrest, unlawful detention, and custodial abuse constitute violations not only of Article 10 but also of Articles 9 and 14. The relationship between Article 10 and Article 10A is equally significant. Introduced through the Eighteenth Constitutional Amendment, Article 10A constitutionalizes the rights to due process and a fair trial. Jurisprudentially, Article 10 governs the investigative stage by ensuring lawful arrest, prompt notification of the grounds of arrest, immediate access to legal counsel, and judicial supervision within twenty-four hours. Article 10A, by contrast, safeguards the adjudicatory process through guarantees of an impartial tribunal, equality of arms, open justice, and procedural fairness. Together, these provisions establish a continuous constitutional guarantee of due process extending from arrest until the conclusion of criminal proceedings. Constitutional Safeguards under Clauses (1) and (2): Clauses (1) and (2) prescribe the minimum constitutional standards governing every lawful arrest. An arrested person must be informed, as soon as may be, of the grounds of arrest in a manner sufficient to enable an effective challenge to the legality of detention. The Constitution further guarantees an unfettered right to consult and be defended by a legal practitioner of one’s own choice, thereby ensuring meaningful legal assistance from the earliest stage of criminal proceedings. Additionally, every arrested person must be produced before the nearest Magistrate within twenty-four hours of arrest, excluding the time reasonably required for the journey from the place of arrest to the court. Continued detention beyond this constitutional period is permissible only upon the authority of a Magistrate through a valid judicial remand order. Collectively, these guarantees subject executive power to immediate judicial scrutiny and minimize the risk of arbitrary or prolonged detention. Implied Constitutional Rights under Article 10: Apart from its express guarantees, Article 10 also incorporates several implied constitutional rights arising from constitutional principle, comparative jurisprudence, and judicial interpretation. The obligation to communicate the grounds of arrest necessarily presupposes that lawful and objectively justifiable grounds must exist before an arrest is effected. Accordingly, an arrest cannot lawfully be undertaken on mere suspicion or with reasons manufactured retrospectively. This reflects the common law doctrine of reasonable or probable cause and has been affirmed by the Supreme Court of Pakistan, particularly in Mst. Sughran Bibi v. The State, which held that mere nomination in an FIR does not, by itself, justify immediate arrest. Similarly, the constitutional right to “consult” legal counsel necessarily extends beyond representation during trial. It attaches immediately upon arrest, including during police custody, investigation, and interrogation, thereby ensuring legal assistance at the earliest and most vulnerable stage of the criminal process. Preventive Detention: The Constitutional Exception: Although Article 10 principally governs ordinary arrests, clauses (3) to (9) establish a distinct constitutional framework for preventive detention. Preventive detention differs fundamentally from ordinary criminal detention. It is preventive rather than punitive, aiming to avert threats to national security, public order, or defence rather than punish past conduct. Recognizing the extraordinary nature of such detention, the Constitution subjects it to stringent procedural safeguards. The detaining authority must ordinarily communicate the grounds of detention within fifteen days unless disclosure would be contrary to the public interest. Furthermore, detention extending beyond three months requires approval from an independent Review Board comprising serving or former Judges of the High Court or Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has consistently held that the executive’s “satisfaction” justifying preventive detention is not immune from judicial review. Rather, it must be supported by objective and relevant material establishing a reasonable apprehension of harm. Preventive detention therefore remains subject to constitutional principles of legality, proportionality, and procedural fairness. Constitutional Remedies and Judicial Enforcement: The principal constitutional mechanism for enforcing Article 10 is the jurisdiction of the High Courts under Article 199. The writ of habeas corpus provides an effective constitutional remedy where an individual is unlawfully arrested or detained. If a detainee is not informed of the grounds of arrest, denied access to legal counsel, or detained beyond twenty-four hours without judicial authorization, the High Court may require the production of the detainee and determine the legality of the detention. Upon finding a violation of Article 10, the Court may order immediate release and grant appropriate constitutional relief. Except where expressly suspended during a constitutionally proclaimed emergency under Part X

A great game changer, the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), which was launched in its first phase in 2013, has since emerged as a flagship initiative of strategic significance, fostering regional connectivity, economic growth and socio-economic development while reinforcing the enduring partnership between Pakistan and China. Over the past decade, CPEC has transitioned from a vision of connectivity into a comprehensive development framework, delivering tangible progress across key sectors and contributing to Pakistan’s economic transformation. After the quite successful completion of the first phase, brisk preparations are underway in Beijing and Islamabad at the appropriate high levels, under the leadership of Chinese President Xi Jinping and Pakistani Prime Minister Muhammad Shehbaz Sharif, for formally launching CPEC 2.0 during 2026. According to the information gathered from the official sources concerned, on the Long-Term Plan, the 14th ICC formally agreed to review the CPEC Long-Term Plan (2017-30) in the light of the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on alignment of the CPEC five corridors with the National Economic Transformation Plan (URAAN Pakistan) and the action plan to foster an even closer China-Pakistan community. The 14th ICC had further directed the adoption of the action plan for fostering an even closer China-Pakistan community with a shared future in the new era (2025-2029), signed in September 2025. The 14th ICC had also further directed the adoption of the action plan as the guiding document for CPEC 2.0, and an action matrix accordingly has been prepared by the official quarters concerned and shared with the ministries and divisions of the Federal Government. Inter-agency consultations on the revised Long-Term Plan (LTP) were underway. As regards socio-economic development, about 15 out of 17 approved projects have since been quite successfully completed, while two remaining projects were reported to be at an advanced stage of execution and were expected to be finalized soon. Furthermore, seven new development initiatives have been proposed under the third batch and submitted to the China International Development Cooperation Agency for consideration and approval. These projects include the provision of modern agricultural machinery and equipment for agro-mechanization, the supply of fiberglass fishing boats to coastal communities, the construction of a fish-landing jetty at Gwadar to strengthen the fisheries value chain, the establishment of integrated cold-chain systems for horticulture and perishable products, and other livelihood-oriented interventions aimed at enhancing local productivity, food security, employment generation, and export potential in underserved regions. During the year, efficiency improvement measures were taken in the power sector for enhancing operational performance, improving grid stability, and optimizing the utilization of existing generation and transmission infrastructure. Stakeholder consultations were also conducted for addressing issues related to bulk electricity supply for Special Economic Zones (SEZs), aimed at facilitating industrialization and investment under CPEC 2.0. A major achievement of the sector was the continued utilization of indigenous Thar coal resources, which contributed towards reducing dependence on imported fuels, strengthening energy security, conserving foreign exchange reserves, and ensuring reliable base-load electricity supply for industrial and domestic consumers. As regards transport infrastructure, the upgradation of the Main Line-1 (ML-1) railway project, spanning approximately 1,872 km from Karachi to Peshawar, remained a strategic priority under bilateral cooperation. During the reporting period, third-party financing discussions by the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) advanced for the Karachi-Rohri section, while detailed financing and implementation proposals were also developed for the remaining sections up to Peshawar in close coordination with the Chinese side. Once completed, ML-1 was expected to substantially enhance Pakistan Railways’ operational efficiency by increasing train speeds from 65-105 km/h to nearly 160 km/h, improving freight-handling capacity, reducing transit times, and strengthening north-south economic connectivity across the country. Significant headway was also achieved on the Realignment of Karakoram Highway (KKH-Phase II) Project under the Government-to-Government (G2G) framework. Both sides have operationalized a phased implementation strategy and reached broad consensus on an 85:15 financing ratio. In Gwadar, the operationalization and consolidation of strategic infrastructure projects continued to gain momentum. The East Bay Expressway, a 19-kilometre, six-lane corridor connecting Gwadar Port with the Makran Coastal Highway, continued to improve port accessibility, reduce cargo transit time, and enhance logistics efficiency for commercial and port-related traffic. Further progress has also been achieved on Phase-II initiatives aimed at connecting Gwadar Port with the New Gwadar International Airport, including discussions on grant financing modalities and finalization of the draft Framework Agreement to strengthen integrated sea-air connectivity among Gwadar Port, Gwadar Free Zones, and the airport. Gwadar Port and the Free Zones have made further progress toward operational maturity through improved infrastructure provision, enhanced utilities connectivity, investor-friendly fiscal incentives, and continued policy facilitation measures by the Pakistan Government. Increased focus has also been placed on attracting industrial relocation, export-oriented manufacturing, warehousing, fisheries processing, and logistics-related investments in Gwadar Free Zone. Parallel progress has also been achieved on multiple road infrastructure projects, including strategic expressways and motorways, through the mechanisms of the Joint Working Group (JWG) on Transport Infrastructure and the Joint Technical Working Group (JTWG), thereby reinforcing Pakistan’s long-term objective of developing an integrated multimodal transport and logistics network under CPEC. Mining cooperation has also emerged as a major new pillar of CPEC 2.0, thereby reflecting the shared commitment of both countries to unlock Pakistan’s vast untapped mineral potential through bilateral cooperation, technology transfer, industrial cooperation, and investment partnership. During the period under review, both sides agreed to undertake a joint feasibility study for the proposed Mining Corridor connecting Nokundi with Gwadar Port. The proposed initiative was expected to substantially reduce transportation costs, improve supply-chain efficiency, and facilitate large-scale movement of copper, gold, rare earth elements, chromite, and other strategic minerals. The corridor would also complement ongoing developments in Reko Diq and other mining regions, while also laying the foundation for transforming Balochistan into a major mining, processing, and export-oriented economic hub. The last year has also witnessed quite significant progress in industrial cooperation under CPEC, with continuous development of Special Economic Zones (SEZs) and expeditious provision of basic utilities, especially electricity. Phase-1 of Rashakai SEZ has been successfully operationalized, while