Reko Diq: Another financial worry?

Reko diq, on remains of volacano where a controversial mining project erupts every now and then;
 giving us financial fret

It was highly likely that the judgement of the tribunal in the Reko Diq case would go against Pakistan, especially when presiding tribunal had already judged that Pakistan has violated several of clauses in its treaty with Australia (TCC is originally incorporated there). Now, penalty has been slapped on Pakistan which furthers our financial worries. Decision is right or wrong but we have to blame our system at least for some part.

A thought must be given how our system of awarding contracts works. 

The awarding of projects, leases, tenders and contracts in Pakistan have been problematic and recent Reko Diq case has shown what major loss, the errors in awarding can cause. The problem is that in most, if not all, cases the three parties are involved politicians, bureaucrats and businessman (applicant). Bureaucrats are on same side with or are manipulated to be brought on same side with businessmen and politicians. No technical man is in this chain at top; hence, feasibility is nonexistent or exists in term of money rendering these contracts or projects a mere deal between businessmen and influential people without any of technical repercussions. 

The agreement, since, its inception had accusations of shady deals, alleged corruption, bribes and kickbacks from foreign investors, which clouded the future of Reko Diq project.

Excerpt from dawn 15 July 2019

Technical basis or technical survey by government officers was not present at the time of agreement, nor, at the time when government of Balochistan rejected the leasing to TCC, so, it was not a much difficult task to accurately guess the result  of arbitration tribunal of the World Bank’s International Centre for Settl­ement of Investment Disputes. Now again mining experts are missing in committee formed by Prime minister to investigate on Reko Diq. Remaining technical aspect was destroyed by violating mineral rules and granting unfavourable concessions. Without relevant expertise, how can Pakistan fight its case in international court? Though, financial experts and are necessary but equally important are technical experts to make point for acceptance or rejection of agreement.
Balochistan government says, it rejected on the basis that for, exploration they paid most of the sum but had only 25% share.  It was alleged that other parties to the joint venture acquired 75 per cent rights in the project without paying anything to the governments of Pakistan and Balochistan (It was transferred by Australian company, previously in agreement, to Antofagasta and Barrick Gold, without taking Balochistan government in confidence.)

TTC, after the ICSID's decision, has offered to negotiate with Pakistan to carry out the project and agree on some new terms, so far, that looks reasonable in Pakistan's condition in this scenario, so, with the help of experts in mining, engineers and any other relevant field Pakistan should reach an agreement which is in interest of country and instead of financial doom, if technically handled, this project can be a boon. 

This project is mainly technical in nature and, thus, agreement need to be handled by technocrats/experts with relevant expertise.

In this contract, Pakistan should make company agreed upon where metal should be supplied to smelters throughout the world after facility at the gwadar port for storage (as agreed); As along with lower mining and processing unit costs diplomacy in these cases is equally important.
Though, turning this fiasco in advantage is a colossal task but desperate and sincere effort will be key to success.