The Pims fire safety inquiry ordered by Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif will examine why senior officials at the Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences allegedly failed to act on fire safety deficiencies after a fire at its nursing hostel in July.
The prime minister, acting as the competent authority under the Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 2020, has set up a three-member inquiry committee to determine responsibility, Dawn reported. The team has been told to complete its proceedings within 60 days, unless an extension is granted, and to submit its report within seven days of completion.
The report must give clear findings on whether the charges have been proved and recommend exoneration or penalties. If the charges are established under the relevant rules, the proceedings could result in disciplinary penalties, including dismissal from service.
Commerce Secretary Jawad Paul heads the committee. Education Secretary Nadeem Mahbub and Human Rights Secretary Abdul Khaliq Sheikh are its other members. Joint Secretary (hospitals) Mohammad Bakhsh Sangi has been nominated as the departmental representative.
Pims fire safety inquiry: what the charge sheet alleges
The charge sheet says the administration was put on notice about a fire at the Female Nursing Hostel on July 6, but deficiencies relating to fire causation, evacuation and emergency response were not adequately addressed. Officials failed to initiate, recommend and ensure reasonable safeguards after the first fire, it says.
That failure, the charge sheet alleges, showed the absence of an effective, documented and verifiable system for reducing fire and life-safety risks. It also states that timely corrective measures could have prevented a second fire in August in which 14 newborn babies died. That claim about the August fire is the charge sheet’s allegation, and the inquiry will test whether it stands.
Health Minister Mustafa Kamal, speaking to the media after the August incident, had claimed that he was kept in the dark about the nursing hostel fire. The inquiry will now establish who knew what, and when, across the two fires.
Eight officials named in the case
The charge sheet has been served on eight Pims officials. They are former Executive Director Prof Dr Rana Imran Sikander, Joint Executive Director Ch. Waris Ali Raza, Director Mother and Child Health Centre Prof Dr Nosheela Amjad, Dr Mutahir Shah, Head of Neonatology Prof Dr Sadia Riaz, Dr Aneza Jalil, Dr Nagham Nawaz and security official Mohammad Usman.
In the case of Dr Aneza Jalil, who was performing charge as Deputy Executive Director, the charge sheet specifically alleges that she failed to exercise adequate administrative diligence after being alerted about the July fire. It says she did not ensure reasonable safeguards while corrective measures were still pending. She has been given 14 days to submit her written reply.
What happens next
The committee’s findings will decide whether any of the eight officials face penalties or are cleared. The 60-day clock, the seven-day reporting deadline and the 14-day reply window give the process a fixed shape, but the substance will turn on the record of what happened between the July fire and the August fire.
Feature Pakistan has also reported on safety gaps exposed by the Peshawar school collapse, another case where the question after a tragedy was whether warnings had been acted on in time. The Pims inquiry will answer that question for one of Islamabad’s largest public hospitals.
Frequently asked questions
Who heads the Pims inquiry?
Commerce Secretary Jawad Paul heads the three-member committee, with Education Secretary Nadeem Mahbub and Human Rights Secretary Abdul Khaliq Sheikh as members.
What penalties could the officials face?
If the charges are established under the Civil Servants (Efficiency and Discipline) Rules, 2020, the proceedings could result in disciplinary penalties, including dismissal from service.
What did the charge sheet allege about the July fire?
It alleges that, despite notice of the July 6 fire at the Female Nursing Hostel, deficiencies in fire causation, evacuation and emergency response were not adequately addressed, and that timely action could have prevented the August fire.
