By Aziz Khatri
KARACHI: Questions had been raised over why no action had been taken so far against contractors and the relevant engineers, and whether responsibility could simply be avoided by installing a panaflex banner.
A recent incident at Karachi Zoo had once again raised serious questions over administrative incompetence and poor construction standards. According to sources, after the glass used in a modern enclosure built for lions broke, an unusual step had been taken to conceal the issue.
Reports suggested that the senior director of the zoo had arranged for a panaflex banner featuring an image of a lion to be placed over the broken glass. This move was allegedly described as an attempt to hide the reality, and it had come under heavy criticism from citizens and social media circles, who called it an effort to mislead the public.
Experts had warned that the use of substandard materials in such sensitive and potentially dangerous projects could pose risks not only to animals but also to human lives.
The modern-style enclosure for lions at the historic Karachi Zoo, which was reportedly constructed at a cost of around ten crore rupees, had now come under intense scrutiny. Public concern had grown over whether the project had truly been designed for the safety of animals and visitors, or whether it had simply been another attempt to showcase paper-based development.
Sources indicated that former municipal commissioner Afzal Zaidi had taken a particular interest in and provided oversight for the project, while approval and supervision from the current mayor had also been under discussion. However, despite the large amount of money spent, serious questions had been raised about the quality and safety of the enclosure.
Experts stressed that enclosures built for wild animals, particularly lions, should meet strict international standards, be constructed with highly durable materials, and include complete safety arrangements. If glass or other materials had been used, their strength and installation quality should never have been compromised.
Citizens had argued that if the enclosure was indeed built with substandard materials, it could pose a threat not only to the animals but also to visitors. Questions had also been raised about whether any independent technical inspection had been carried out, and if so, where its report was.
The incident was seen as more than just a problem with one enclosure, and had instead raised broader concerns about the performance of the system as a whole. People had questioned whether public tax money would continue to be spent in this way, and whether those responsible would ever be held accountable or if the matter would once again be buried in official files.
