IT ministry says telecom bill does not allow compulsory acquisition of private land

ISLAMABAD: The Ministry of Information Technology and Telecommunication said on Saturday that proposed changes to telecom laws do not permit the compulsory acquisition of private land, amid concerns raised online about provisions linked to telecom towers and other infrastructure.

The clarification came in a detailed statement after the Pakistan Telecommunication (Re-organisation) (Amendment) Bill 2026, moved by IT Minister Shaza Fatima Khawaja, was passed by the National Assembly on June 11 through a majority vote. The bill was later referred to the Senate Standing Committee on IT and Telecommunication on June 15, where it is currently under consideration.

The ministry said the bill’s Right of Way provisions "do not permit telecom operators to enter individual private property without the owner’s permission or due legal process, and do not authorise compulsory acquisition of private land"

The proposed framework was intended to speed up the rollout of telecom infrastructure, improve connectivity and create a clearer legal mechanism while protecting ownership rights. Referring to the planned 5G spectrum auction, the ministry said stronger investment in infrastructure was necessary to provide reliable, affordable and high-speed connectivity.

According to the ministry, property owners would continue to have the right to reply to requests, negotiate terms, seek compensation where relevant, raise objections and settle issues such as route alignment, timing and access. If an owner did not respond despite reminders, the matter would be sent to the appropriate government authority for resolution while preserving constitutional and legal protections for citizens.

The ministry further said operators would not be able to force entry onto private land while such a matter remained under review. Where any infrastructure work was carried out, the executing organisations would be required to restore the property to its original condition and avoid permanent damage.

Ministry explains purpose of amendments

The statement said penalties mentioned in the bill relate to cases where a property owner has already entered into a contract and later backs out of its terms, which the ministry said harms investment.

Explaining the rationale for the amendments, the ministry said Pakistan’s internet services had suffered because of underinvestment in telecom infrastructure, which it linked to a fragmented Right of Way approval system. Arbitrary charges and differing requirements had slowed network expansion, raised deployment costs and affected service quality for users.

The ministry said the amendments are aimed at addressing barriers to fibre deployment and wider telecom investment by establishing what it described as a clear and transparent legal structure covering public property, organised private developments such as housing societies, and individual private property, while safeguarding citizens’ rights.

The proposed provisions had already gone through a detailed legislative review in the National Assembly Standing Committee on IT, where lawmakers from different parties examined the bill’s objectives, scope, implementation methods and safeguards for citizens and property owners before finalising the clauses.

The ministry said it remained committed to a consultative and inclusive legislative process as the bill is now before the Senate committee. The proposed reforms are meant to reduce delays in telecom infrastructure deployment so citizens can benefit from better telecom services, improved internet quality and stronger digital connectivity across the country.

What the bill proposes

The bill proposes amendments to the Pakistan Telecommunication (Re-organisation) Act, 1996, including revised definitions, a complete replacement of Section 27A dealing with Right of Way, and the insertion of a new Section 27B on enforcement.

Among the key definitional changes, the term federal government would no longer refer specifically to the Ministry of Information Technology and Telecommunication Division, but instead to the federal government as defined in the Constitution.

The term Private Right of Way would be replaced with private access for telecommunication infrastructure, while Public Right of Way would become public access for telecommunication infrastructure. Under the bill, private access for telecommunication infrastructure would cover land, premises or property owned, managed, maintained or repaired by any person or entity other than a public authority and usable by a licensee for purposes set out in Section 27A. The definition would also explicitly include collective or organised ownership arrangements such as private housing societies, cooperative housing schemes and residential or commercial estate management entities, whether registered or not.

Public access for telecommunication infrastructure would refer to property owned or maintained by a public authority. The existing definition of Right of Way would also be changed from a right to pass over another person’s land to provide telecom services to access by licensee for telecommunication infrastructure, defined as a licensee’s right to enter, use or pass over land, premises or property, whether public or private, for the installation, deployment, operation or maintenance of telecom systems, ICT infrastructure, optical fibre cables, telecom towers and related equipment and services, in accordance with Section 27A.

This revised definition introduces a right to enter or use premises rather than only passing over land.

Under the proposed new Section 27A, every licensee would have the same rights of access or usage provided under the relevant clauses of Section 2, despite any conflicting law, regulation or contract, in order to install or maintain telecom systems, towers, ICT infrastructure and fibre optic cable. The bill also states that no owner, lessee, tenant or public or private entity shall hinder or abridge these rights.

The process outlined in the bill requires a licensee to seek approval from the owner, lessee or tenant. If there is no response within 15 days, a mandatory reminder is to be sent. If there is still no reply after 30 days in total, the outcome would vary by the type of property. For land owned by a public authority, approval would be deemed to have been granted. For privately owned property, the dispute could be referred to the appropriate government for resolution. For collectively held property, including housing societies, cooperatives and estate management bodies, whether registered or not, non-response would also amount to deemed approval.

However, in the case of collectively held property, the owner, lessee or tenant may place conditions on the timing or manner of execution of the licensee’s access, and the licensee would not be allowed to interfere with the owner’s, lessee’s or tenant’s own use of or access to the property.