A political storm is brewing across Pakistan as the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) government pushes forward the Mines and Minerals Act 2025, recently approved by the provincial cabinet and now tabled in the KP Assembly.
Drawing comparisons with similar legislation in Balochistan, many expect the bill to be swiftly passed — but not without controversy.
The proposed Act has triggered concern among political parties, civil society, and even members of the ruling Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) itself, who argue that it undermines provincial autonomy and clashes with the 18th Amendment. While media discussions have explored various aspects of the bill, one critical area remains under-addressed: environmental impact.
Also Read: Peshawar Tandoors Defy Orders as Lighter, Costlier Bread Continues to Burden Public
KP is among the most climate-vulnerable provinces in the country, yet the environmental safeguards in the new mining legislation remain vague in terms of enforcement. Though the Act mandates environmental management plans and approvals from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), questions persist about how rigorously these requirements will be implemented — especially in remote tribal districts.
Under the Act, no mining license can be issued without prior EPA approval, and companies must submit environmental management plans to receive a No Objection Certificate (NOC). Four types of licenses, two lease grants, and two permits will be issued, all requiring EPA vetting. License holders must also submit annual environmental reports consistent with the 2014 Environmental Protection Act.
The EPA’s role is embedded at both provincial and district levels, but a significant concern is its limited presence — it operates only up to the division level, with tribal areas like Khyber district having minimal coverage. This raises serious questions about oversight, especially for larger-scale mining operations, which require on-ground EPA presence for waste management through Tailing Dams.
These dams, essential for safely disposing of leftover materials from mining, must be in place before operations begin — a requirement the EPA is responsible for monitoring. However, without a physical EPA presence in these sensitive areas, enforcing these provisions may prove impossible.
The Act classifies minerals into ten categories, ranging from gemstones and construction materials to strategic and rare earth minerals. With such a broad scope, the lack of infrastructure and institutional support becomes even more critical.
Adding to the complexity, KP’s 2014 Environmental Protection Act lacks finalized Rules of Business, making enforcement patchy at best. While a new committee has been formed to address this legislative gap, progress remains slow.
The region’s climate vulnerability was highlighted in the 2022 Climate Change Policy, which incorporated tribal districts into KP’s framework. The plan emphasized the need for environmental profiling in newly merged areas — a task still incomplete.
As the KP Assembly deliberates this bill, the key question remains: Can the province strike a balance between economic development and environmental responsibility — or will regulatory gaps expose communities and ecosystems to irreversible damage?
