Opposition Demands Shaza Fatima’s Removal Over Telecom Bill That Could Force Towers on Private Property

A bill that was framed as a technical fix for Pakistan’s fiberisation and telecom infrastructure challenges has rapidly become one of the most politically charged legislative controversies of the current parliamentary session. What began as amendments to a 1996 telecommunications act is now a demand for a minister’s head, an inquiry committee with disputed composition, and a public debate about whether the government tried to quietly pass a law that could strip citizens of their property rights.

What the Bill Does, and What the Opposition Claims It Does

The Pakistan Telecommunication (Re-organisation) (Amendment) Bill 2026 proposes changes to the 1996 Telecommunication Act, including a redefinition of Right of Way provisions. The existing definition of Right of Way under Section 2qb described it simply as a right to pass over land or property to provide telecom services. The amendment replaces this with a broader concept, recast as “access by licensee for telecommunication infrastructure”, and introduces new sections 27A and 27B covering right of way and its enforcement.

The critical shift in language is this: where the old definition covered passing over land, the new one introduces the right to enter or use premises. That distinction, between passing over and entering or using, is at the centre of the political storm.

Opposition alliance Tehreek-i-Tahafuz-i-Ayin-i-Pakistan spokesperson Akhunzada Hussain Ahmad Yousufzai has made the most alarming reading of that language explicit. He alleged that under the bill, telecom operators would have been legally enabled to install cell towers on private properties anywhere in Pakistan. The property owner, he claimed, would have no right to object, and any owner who refused to comply would face a fine of Rs50 million regardless of the value of the property.

We oppose this draconian law as it breaches the fundamental right of the citizen as envisaged in our constitution. It restricts constitutional property rights and encroaches upon the privacy of a citizen.

The Bill’s Journey, and Where It Was Stopped

The bill was tabled by IT Minister Shaza Fatima Khawaja and approved by the National Assembly on June 11 by a majority vote. It was then referred to the Senate Standing Committee on IT and Telecommunications on June 15 for review before final Senate passage.

That is where it was stopped, at least temporarily. TTAP’s spokesperson credited the Senate committee chairperson with intervening and objecting to what he characterised as anti-people legislation, preventing the bill from moving directly to a Senate floor vote without further scrutiny.

The opposition has framed this intervention as proof that the bill was being rushed through parliament without adequate review. Yousufzai alleged the bill was initiated and passed by the National Assembly without meaningful consultation, a procedural failure he said reflects badly on both the ministry and the legislative process.

He further alleged that the IT minister had herself acknowledged a misstep in proceeding without proper scrutiny, a claim that, if accurate, would represent an unusual admission. The TTAP spokesperson used it as evidence of what he called “incompetence, unprofessionalism and total indifference” toward legislation affecting ordinary Pakistanis.

PM’s Inquiry Committee: Acknowledgment or Damage Control?

Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s decision to set up an inquiry committee to review the proposed legislation has not quietened the controversy, if anything, it has added fuel.

TTAP has characterised the PM’s move as an implicit acknowledgment that the legislation was poorly drafted, calling it “in itself an acknowledgment of poor legislation.”

The opposition has also taken issue with the committee’s composition. TTAP says the inquiry committee consists only of government representatives and is therefore structurally incapable of producing an impartial finding. The alliance is demanding that opposition members be included to ensure the review process has credibility.

The demand is politically straightforward but practically significant. An inquiry committee that recommends the bill proceed, without any opposition participation, will face immediate accusations of whitewashing. The government’s handling of the committee composition question will shape how the controversy plays out in the coming days.

The IT Ministry’s Defence

The IT ministry has pushed back firmly against the opposition’s characterisation. In an official statement issued on Saturday, the ministry stated that the new 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 ministry stressed that the provisions are “designed to accelerate telecom infrastructure deployment, improve connectivity for citizens, and establish a transparent legal framework while fully safeguarding private property rights.” It framed the amendments as a necessary response to the challenges hindering fiberisation in Pakistan, pointing specifically to the recent 5G spectrum auction in which 480 megahertz of spectrum was sold for $507 million, arguing that infrastructure investment at scale requires a clearer legal framework for deployment.

The ministry’s position is that the opposition is misreading or misrepresenting the bill’s intent and effect. The opposition’s position is that the language itself, regardless of intent, creates legal exposure for private property owners that should not exist.

TTAP’s Core Demand: Remove the Minister

Beyond the bill itself, TTAP has directed its sharpest demand at the minister responsible for it. The spokesperson called on Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif to immediately remove Shaza Fatima Khawaja from her position as IT and Telecom Minister.

The demand is politically motivated, TTAP is an opposition alliance, and minister removal demands are a standard tool of parliamentary opposition, but the underlying substance of the complaint is not entirely without merit. Passing significant legislation through the National Assembly without adequate committee review, then facing an inquiry committee after Senate pushback, is not a sequence that reflects well on the ministry’s legislative management regardless of the bill’s actual content.

The allegations of corruption raised by some journalists, which TTAP referenced in its statement, have not been substantiated publicly. But their mention in an official opposition statement ensures they will remain part of the political conversation around this bill.

What Happens Next

The bill currently sits before the Senate Standing Committee on IT and Telecommunications. The PM’s inquiry committee adds a parallel process that could recommend amendments, a withdrawal, or a redrafting of the contentious provisions before the bill moves further.

The government has a legislative majority and the ability to pass the bill in its current or amended form if it chooses. But the political cost of doing so without resolving the private property concerns, whether those concerns are based on an accurate or an exaggerated reading of the bill’s language, has risen considerably since the opposition went public with its removal demand.