The Drug Regulatory Authority of Pakistan (DRAP) has decided to fire a whistleblower who previously expressed concerns about anomalies inside the institution.
This is the second time in less than three years that a DRAP officer has been fired as a result of charges of corruption and irregularities inside the organization.
According to an official notification acquired by Dawn, Deputy Director Dr. Mohammad Aleem Akhtar has been removed of his duties for misconduct in accordance with the 2020 Efficiency and Discipline (E and D) Rules.
The announcement stated that Dr. Akhtar had addressed 44 letters to several major offices, including the President and Prime Minister of Pakistan, as well as the National Accountability Bureau (NAB), alleging unfounded allegations of DRAP malpractice.
These letters purportedly caused DRAP and Pakistan’s whole pharmaceutical industry great humiliation. Dr. Akhtar was also accused of utilizing DRAP’s official letterheads for his correspondence without permission.
When a show-cause notice was issued, he requested a personal hearing, and when that was granted, he requested another with the DRAP Policy Board. Following a thorough review of the entire circumstances, the appointing authority decided to terminate his job.
Dr. Akhtar wrote letters in May of this year saying that the CEO of DRAP was running a ‘benami’ pharmaceutical company, implying an obvious conflict of interest. He also stated that the CEO had been involved in a number of violations since his employment as BPS-18’s deputy medicines controller in 2002.
Dr. Akhtar contended that government officers were not permitted to take study leave until they had completed five years of service, yet the CEO went to the United States for a study leave to pursue a PhD just two years after his appointment in 2004, in violation of the Civil Servant Study Rules of 1996.
In a previous case, Dr. Obaid Ali, a grade-18 officer, was fired in 2020 after making public claims of misconduct inside DRAP and the ministry.
The officer alleged that his removal violated established norms and occurred without adequate cross-examination of the issues he raised. However, the ministry insisted that all relevant procedures had been satisfied prior to his dismissal.