Islamabad High Court suspends order for disclosure of cricketers’ salaries, perks

The Islamabad High Court has halted an order that would have forced the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) to publicly release sensitive financial details. The Pakistan Information Commission (PIC) had previously directed the PCB to disclose annual budgets, audit reports, player and selection committee remuneration, and expenditures related to the T20 World Cup 2026.

“

The impugned order was passed in excess of jurisdiction and in violation of the Right of Access to Information Act, 2017.

A single-member bench, led by Chief Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar, issued notices to the respondents and suspended the PIC's July 9 ruling. This action came after the PCB filed a writ petition, arguing that the PIC order exceeded its jurisdiction and contravened the Right of Access to Information Act, 2017. The PCB contended that the Commission failed to differentiate between information requiring proactive disclosure and that protected by statutory exemptions, such as personal privacy and commercially sensitive data.

“

The Commission had failed to distinguish between information liable to proactive disclosure under Section 5 and information protected under statutory exemptions relating to personal privacy, confidential contractual arrangements, commercially sensitive data, and third-party interests.

The PCB emphasized its financial model, which relies heavily on commercial activities rather than government funding. The board argued that the requested information extended beyond institutional spending to include private financial details of individuals. This distinction, the PCB stated, was crucial as it highlighted the difference between institutional transparency and the privacy of personal financial affairs. The board has faced ongoing scrutiny regarding its financial transparency, particularly since Chairman Mohsin Naqvi's appointment in 2024, which saw a discontinuation of detailed financial statements being posted online, a practice that had drawn criticism from transparency advocates.

“

The PCB, which generates its revenues primarily through commercial activities rather than government funding, maintained that the information sought extended beyond institutional expenditure to personal financial details of identifiable individuals, without recognising the distinction between institutional transparency and private financial affairs.