QUETTA: Balochistan Chief Minister Sarfraz Bugti has criticised the Frontier Works Organisation (FWO) over the condition of roads built under its supervision. But the controversy surrounding the Turbat-Mand Road project raises a more pressing question: did the chief minister’s own team provide him with the complete facts before he took aim at the organisation?
Speaking on the floor of the Balochistan Assembly, Bugti expressed dissatisfaction with FWO’s work, saying roads in areas where it had carried out projects were in poor condition. “Our experience with FWO has been very bad,” he said.
However, the Turbat-Mand Road controversy cannot be settled through criticism alone. The crucial questions concern who built which sections of the road, who awarded the contracts, which departments supervised the work, and who was responsible for ensuring quality.
Did the team briefing the chief minister present a complete breakdown of the project before he addressed the assembly? If different companies worked on different sections of the 115-kilometre road, were their names, contractual obligations and responsibilities clearly documented and communicated to him?
These are basic questions that the chief minister’s advisers and the relevant officials should have answered before the matter became a subject of public criticism.
If multiple contractors were involved, responsibility for defective work cannot be established simply by naming one organisation. Each section must be examined separately, with contracts, payments, inspection reports and completion records made available for scrutiny.
The question is not whether FWO should face criticism where warranted. It is whether that criticism is based on a complete, verified account of the project—and whether every other responsible party is being held to the same standard.
Bugti should demand answers from his own team. Where is the complete record of contracts, payments and supervision? Which company was responsible for each section? Which department monitored construction quality? Were deficiencies identified during inspections, and what action was taken?
If the briefing provided to the chief minister was incomplete, the public deserves to know why. If the relevant records were available, the government should make them accessible so that responsibility can be established on the basis of evidence rather than competing claims.
Development projects in Balochistan must not be governed by personal preferences, selective criticism or incomplete briefings. Transparent contracting, effective supervision and accountability for public spending are responsibilities of the provincial government and its administrative machinery.
