Will CCP survive without Khalid Mirza?

One of the most resounding names in the countrys financial journalism these days is the Competition Commission of Pakistan.
The commission just wrapped up a two-day national conference in Karachi that discussed various case studies related to competition and anti-trust issues while promoting its image as a body that fosters competition than preventing it.
But CCPs presence in the limelight isn just because of fancy media campaign. Spearheaded, by a former World Bank employee, Khalid Mirza, whom it seems his team adores, the regulator has accomplished many landmarks in a very short time.
It has issued orders against a wide variety of businesses and institutions involved in cartelization, misrepresentation and abuse of dominance in one way or another.
It has also issued policy notes to the State Bank and the government, advising them to avoid colluding with trade associations; product pricing issue in case of the former and sugar pricing in case of the latter. Not surprisingly, the work of Mirza and his team has been widely acknowledged.
"Cases of market failure are best handled through effective reforms and strengthening institutions like the Competition Commission of Pakistan," so observed the central bank in its first quarterly issued on Tuesday, while commenting that excessive government involvement in commodity trade/finance, and the interference in market price setting, can be counterproductive and should be avoided.
This reception echoes in the halls of the World Bank and OECD. The global lender has reportedly appreciated the commissions recently released banking sector study which analyzes the industrys vulnerability to cartelization and abuse of dominance, while the OECD, which is the standard setter of competition, has invited CCP chairman to preside over a session of its conference on Corruption and Collusion in Public Procurement to be held in Paris soon.
But, alas, there are threats to this winning streak as the contract of CCPs chairman expires on July 2010, following which he can be nominated due to retirement-age limitation as specified by the law - unless the government opts for a way out such as presidential deviation.
Clearly, the man has delivered and, thus, should be retained for at least another term so that the transition from the old laid-back bureaucratic styled MCA to a strong and efficient watchdog is smoothly completed.
One might cite the wisdom of Peter Drucker, the father of modern management, who said that
o institution can possibly survive if it needs geniuses or supermen to manage it. It must be organized in such a way as to be able to get along under a leadership composed of average human beings.
But when the management has shown its passion and commitment to change and institutional building, there is indeed an exception to Druckers rule of thumb. There is no need changing horses mid-stream, is it? Not especially, when the waters are gushy and troubled.