Federal SIFC Minerals Act 2025

**Provincial Alliance Forms Against Federal SIFC Minerals Act 2025, Citing Constitutional Violations and Economic Threats**  

*Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan* — A coalition of provincial leaders, legal experts, and local communities in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) has launched a concerted opposition against the federal government’s proposed *Harmonisation Minerals Act 2025*, alleging it undermines provincial autonomy, violates constitutional rights, and threatens the region’s economic and environmental stability. The move signals escalating tensions between federal and provincial authorities over control of mineral resources.  

**Constitutional and Legal Challenges**  
The alliance argues the Act directly contravenes the **18th Amendment (2010)** of Pakistan’s Constitution, which grants provinces exclusive authority over mineral resources under **Article 172(3)** and **Schedule IV**. “This law is a blatant attempt to strip provinces of their constitutional rights,” said a spokesperson for the KP Minerals Department. “The federal government drafted the bill without consulting provincial stakeholders, local communities, or elected assemblies—a clear overreach.”  

Legal experts highlight parallels to past conflicts, such as the **2018 National Finance Commission (NFC)** dispute, warning the Act could reignite inter-provincial tensions, particularly with resource-rich regions like Balochistan and Sindh.  *

Clash with Existing Laws and Economic Fallout**  
The proposed law clashes with existing provincial frameworks, including the **KP Mining Act 2017** and the **Hazara Forest Notification (1973)**, which protects forest lands from mining. A recent conflict emerged in the **Bestway Cement Case (2023)**, where overlapping claims by the Forest and Mining Departments cost KP an estimated **PKR 2 billion annually** in lost royalties.  

**Economic losses are mounting**:  
- Over **15,000 jobs** lost in Hazara Division due to mining bans.  
- **PKR 5 billion** in unrealized royalties in 2022–23.  
- Withdrawal of **3 international companies**, including Chinese investors, from mining projects.  

**Environmental and Community Concerns**  
Local communities accuse the Forest Department of misusing the **Hazara Forest Act** to block development. “They label private lands as ‘protected forests’ to halt projects, leaving us unemployed,” said a representative from the KP Miners Association. Environmental activists, however, warn deregulated mining could accelerate deforestation and water scarcity.  

**Provincial Demands and Next Steps**  
The alliance has outlined a four-point action plan:  
1. **Legislative Resistance**: Pass a resolution in the KP Assembly declaring the SIFC Act unconstitutional.  
2. **Provincial Mining Policy 2024**: Draft laws guaranteeing **25% royalties for local communities** and harmonizing mining and forest regulations.  
3. **Legal Action**: File a constitutional petition in the Supreme Court.  
4. **Inter-Provincial Coalition**: Partner with Balochistan and Sindh to form a united front.  

A **task force** led by KP’s Ministers for Minerals and Law will spearhead efforts, alongside a committee to redefine “protected forests” and a media campaign to rally public support.  

**Federal Response and Implications**  
The federal government has yet to comment, but insiders suggest the SIFC Act aims to streamline mining investments under the **Special Investment Facilitation Council (SIFC)**. Critics argue this centralizes control, marginalizing provinces.  

With KP preparing to challenge the law in court and mobilize public dissent, the dispute risks spiraling into a broader constitutional crisis. Observers warn prolonged conflict could deter foreign investment and destabilize Pakistan’s fragile mineral sector.  

**Attachments Cited**:  
1. Hazara Forest Notification (1973).  
2. KP Mining Act 2017 (excerpts).  
3. Balochistan Assembly’s 2024 resolution against the SIFC draft.  

*— Reported by [ZANOON], Senior Correspondent*  

**Note**: This article reflects community concerns and legal arguments raised by stakeholders. Federal and provincial authorities have been contacted for comment.