Advancing his arguments, Kanrani contended that the 1993 contract between BHP Billiton and Balochistan Development Authority (BDA) was violative of the constitution and Balochistan Government Rules of Business 1976. He clarified that contract approval was not obtained from the Governor and the Cabinet while authentication of such contracts always required Governor's approval, subsequent to which the law department issued the terms and conditions of a contract.
Kanrani further told the bench that a total of 13 rules were relaxed in the instant matter while some provisions of Mining Rules/Rules of Business were violated. He asserted that BHP Billiton failed to pay annual prospecting licence rent levied at the rate of Rs 5 per acre for a total area of 3.34 million acres (1354574.304 hectares).
In response to a query from the bench, Kanrani said the government of Balochistan never issued a work order to BHP Billiton but only an offer letter whose conditions were not fulfilled by the company. Hence, he maintained, retaining PL-14 (978 kms) by the company was not valid. During the course of proceedings, Ahmer Bilal Soofi, the counsel for Balochistan government, told the bench that he had told ICC in London that only the apex court of Pakistan - where day to day hearing is being conducted since November 12 - was competent to decide the legality of the Chaghai Hills Exploration Joint Venture Agreement.
He further said that ICC had reserved its judgement on provisional measures' application argued by all the parties on December 4 in London. Subsequently, the bench adjourned the hearing of case, directing the top legal officer of Balochistan to resume his arguments on Friday (today).