What are our sourcing rules?

We publish from primary documents only. If a claim cannot be traced to a document a regulator, court or standard-setter actually issued, it does not go on this site.

Source Status
PVARA official Primary. Cited and linked
SECP notifications and rules Primary. Cited
State Bank of Pakistan circulars Primary. Cited
FBR guidance and ordinances Primary. Cited
Pakistani court judgments Primary. Cited
FATF standards and guidance Primary. Cited
News coverage, social media, forums Not used as a source
Anonymous or unverified tips Not published without a document behind them

Where a source document exists online, we link to it. Where it exists only on paper or behind a portal, we name it precisely enough that a reader can request it.

How is an article checked before it goes out?

Every article passes through the same sequence:

  1. Source retrieval. A researcher obtains the primary document and reads it in full, not a summary of it.
  2. Drafting. The analysis is written against the document, with the relevant section identified.
  3. Legal review. Anything that states how a rule applies is reviewed by the lawyer on the team before publication.
  4. Editorial review. Noor Aslam reviews and approves the piece.
  5. Publication. The article is dated and the author is named.

Do we use AI to write articles?

Yes, in part, and we would rather say so than have you find out.

Drafting is assisted by an AI language model working from a topic and source brief prepared by the research team. Every article is then reviewed by a person before it appears. Nothing publishes without that review.

What AI does not do here: it does not choose what we cover, it does not decide what a rule means, and it does not sign off a piece. Where an article states a legal position, a qualified lawyer on the team has checked it.

We take full responsibility for everything published under our name, regardless of how the first draft was produced.

Who writes here?

Articles are published under Noor Aslam, Chief Executive Officer, who reviews and approves each one. The research behind them is done by the team described on the about page: one qualified lawyer, three regulatory researchers with fifteen years of combined experience, and two operations staff.

We do not publish anonymous analysis and we do not use pen names.

How do we handle corrections?

We would rather be corrected than be wrong quietly.

How do we stay independent?

Sarzif Policy earns money from one thing: when a client appoints a consultant we introduced, that client pays us 20% of the consultant’s fee.

Note the direction. The consultants are not our customers and never pay us anything. That removes the conflict most referral sites carry, because there is no arrangement an adviser could offer us in exchange for coverage.

A conflict does remain, so here is how we contain it:

If we ever write about a firm that is on our panel, we will say so in the article.

What we are not

This site publishes information, not advice. We are not a law firm, not a licensed adviser, and not a substitute for one. Regulatory positions change, sometimes without notice.

Before you act on anything here, confirm it against the official position published by PVARA or take professional advice.

When was this reviewed?

This policy was last reviewed on 7 August 2026. We review it whenever our sourcing, funding or publication process changes, and we date every change.

Questions about any of this: sarzifpolicy@gmail.com.

Last reviewed 7 August 2026. Sarzif Policy publishes information, not legal or financial advice. Always confirm requirements against the official position published by PVARA before acting.