Dr Syed Akhtar Ali Shah.
The introduction of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Mines and Minerals Bill 2025 has evoked emotional discussion across all spectrums of the society in Pakistan and in particular Khyber Pakhtunkhwa . At the centre of this debate lies a deeply rooted concern: that the proposed legislation encroaches upon provincial autonomy, particularly of resource-rich but historically marginalized provinces like Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP).
Critics view the bill as a veiled attempt to centralize control over natural resources, opening the door for multinational corporations to exploit KP’s rich mineral wealth, bypassing both provincial authority and local stakeholders. These apprehensions are not new; they stem from a legacy of perceived economic exclusion and federal overreach in resource governance.
Proponents, however, argue the bill introduces long-overdue regulatory reform.
According to them, the new framework will help modernize mining operations, introduce transparency through competitive bidding, and curb illegal extraction that has long plagued the sector. They claim the legislation will ultimately benefit provinces by increasing revenue and attracting foreign and domestic investment.
But a closer look at the constitutional framework and the structure of the bill raises serious questions about its legality and intent.
The bill is widely perceived to violate the Eighteenth Amendment of the Constitution of Pakistan, which devolved greater legislative, financial, and administrative authority to the provinces.
Under Article 97, the federal government’s executive authority is clearly limited to matters within the jurisdiction of Parliament. It explicitly states that this authority shall not extend into areas where the provincial assembly has exclusive powers, unless expressly permitted by the Constitution or federal law. This article acts as a safeguard against federal intrusion into provincial domains, such as mines and minerals.
Moreover, the distribution of legislative authority under the Constitution confines the federal government to matters listed in the Federal Legislative List. Residual matters, including mineral rights within provincial borders, fall exclusively under provincial jurisdiction.
Articles 158, 161, and 172 of the Constitution provide further clarity: Article 158 grants priority to the province where a natural gas well-head is located, allowing it to meet its own needs first. Yet, many regions of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa continue to suffer from gas shortages and load shedding, in defiance of this provision.
Article 161(a) mandates that excise duties and royalties from natural gas and oil must be paid to the province of origin. Despite this, long delays and arrears persist, hampering socio-economic development.
Article 172(2) and (3) distinguishes between ownership of offshore and onshore resources. While resources within the territorial waters belong to the federal government, ownership of mines & minerals, outside the continental shelf and seas vets in the provinces, oil and gas within provincial boundaries are jointly owned by the provinces and the federation, with the province having significant control.
These provisions form the basis of argument of the almost all parties including many of the PTI’s members of the Parliament and the provincial assembly that the bill infringes upon constitutional guarantees and undermines the spirit of devolution.
The bill introduces concerning ambiguities, particularly in the definition of “rare earth minerals.” Under the 2017 Act, rare earths were treated as part of general mineral classifications. However, the proposed bill allows the government to declare or remove any mineral as “rare” through notifications, without requiring legislative oversight. This opens the door to arbitrary reclassification, potentially restricting provincial control over lucrative resources.
Critics argue this mechanism could be used as a coercive tool, effectively taking high-value minerals out of provincial jurisdiction. A clear and consistent definition of rare earth minerals within the bill’s framework is urgently needed to avoid exploitation and legal uncertainty.
The bill also proposes the establishment of a Mineral Investment Facilitation Authority (MIFA), with intrusive role of Federal Mineral Wing, which critics see as a federal-dominated body that centralizes decision-making. This is viewed as a backdoor to federal control over provincial mining operations, contradicting the autonomy guaranteed by the Constitution.
Equally troubling is the apparent bypassing of local consultation. The bill lacks mechanisms to ensure participation by local communities, indigenous populations, and small-scale miners. This absence is viewed as a violation of constitutional principles of inclusivity and participatory governance.
Without legally mandated consultation and benefit-sharing provisions, the bill risks disenfranchising communities that have traditionally depended on these resources for their livelihoods.
The debate has also exposed a significant gap in provincial capacity. One critical question remains unanswered: What is the true commercial value of KP’s mines and minerals? Shockingly, even the Mines Department lacks precise data on this issue.
Currently, KP earns around Rs. 10 billion annually from its mining sector. Yet, estimates suggest the actual value of licensed mines could run into trillions of rupees. Consider this: A single truckload of Ziarat marble can sell for Rs. 2 million.
Nephrite, a semi-precious stone, can fetch up to Rs. 40 crore per truck in international markets.
Such numbers reveal a staggering disconnect between resource wealth and revenue generation. Without proper valuation, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa is negotiating from a position of weakness, which only exacerbates concerns over
external exploitation.
There is no denying the need for regulatory reform in Pakistan’s mining sector.
However, reform must be grounded in constitutional compliance, transparent governance, and respect for provincial rights.
In view of the above observation, it is recommended to withdraw the bill and make necessary amendments that aligns with the Constitution and provincial autonomy, define rare earth minerals clearly within the bill to prevent arbitrary classification, ensure local consultation through legally binding mechanisms, empower constitutional forums like the Council of Common Interests (CCI) and National Economic Council to resolve resource disputes and development while ensuring regional equity, invest in geological surveys and resource valuation to strengthen provincial negotiating power, establish provincial geological survey directorate, ensure corporate social responsibility, enhance duties on transportations and lenience’s on the basis of commercial value for enhanced revenues .
—
The Mines and Minerals Bill 2025 represents a critical juncture in Pakistan’s federal-province relations. It offers an opportunity to either deepen mistrust and inequality or to build a framework for equitable and constitutionally sound resource governance. The choice lies in how the legislation is revised—and whose voices are heard in the process.
