PESHAWAR( The COW News Digital) The National Accountability Bureau (NAB), Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP), has formally launched separate inquiries into serious allegations of corruption and irregularities in two of the province’s high-profile development projects — the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Cities Improvement Project (KPCIP) and the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Rural Accessibility Project (KP RAP).
The move follows reports of financial mismanagement, procedural violations and suspected collusion between contractors and officials in both projects, which are funded through a combination of international loans and government allocations. NAB sources confirmed that the cases were converted into inquiries based on credible evidence and verified complaints. An official of the KP government welcomed the inquiries, stating that the KP government believes in transparency and accountability. If anyone is involved in corruption or corrupt practices, they must be held accountable.
The KPCIP, a flagship urban development project worth approximately Rs97 billion, aims to upgrade municipal infrastructure in several cities across KP, including water supply, sanitation, solid waste management, and urban transport. However, the project is now under scrutiny following the discovery of serious financial and procedural irregularities.
According to initial findings, contracts worth billions were awarded without fulfilling basic legal requirements.
Despite a little to no physical progress, billions were allegedly disbursed based on manipulated progress reports. The provincial Public Accounts Committee (PAC) has also taken notice of the matter. Speaker, KP Assembly, Babar Saleem Swati, summoned key stakeholders for a briefing after media reports highlighted the issue. Simultaneously, NAB KP has opened an inquiry into the KP Rural Accessibility Project (KP RAP), which was intended to improve connectivity and access to remote areas through the construction and rehabilitation of rural roads.
NAB sources claim initial probes have found multiple cases of overbilling, use of substandard materials, and potential favoritism in awarding of contracts. Contractors were allegedly selected without proper competitive bidding, while monitoring mechanisms remained weak or non-existent. There are also reports of duplicate payments and ghost projects that existed only on paper.
