Land Reform Act 2025; Should it be Contested?
By Imdad Hussain
The Gilgit-Baltistan Land Reforms Act, 2025 aims to grant proprietary rights to the people of Gilgit-Baltistan over common partible land, ensuring equitable land distribution and legal ownership. It establishes land apportionment boards, defines Haqdaran-e-Arazee (rightful landowners), and introduces mechanisms for land allocation. The act should be celebrated instead of contesting at any level. There are various reasons for celebrating it. Societies are becoming a complex phenomenon owing to the increasingly growing urbanization, the distinction between rural and urban areas is diminishing over time. Given the growing characteristic of urbanization in the region, there must be an efficient and effective structure in place to cater the needs of urbanization. Importantly, the structures and legal modalities restrict individuals from carrying out arbiter actions that might destroy natural landscape of the region. The enforcement of this land Act bars individuals from taking such measures that fuel communal unrest, conflict between stakeholders and government and locals. Let’s explore the positive facets of the bill keeping in view the concerns of the local people.
The first point is granting of proprietary rights to the local people. How could this provision empower the local common people of the region? According to cornel’s law dictionary, Proprietary rights, also termed property rights, are the rights that accompany legal ownership of tangible or intangible property; rights over or in respect of property. In the aforementioned Act, proprietary rights are established over common land, which included both impartible and partible land, defined in Chapter III, Section v sub-cluse III. The confusion has been created by the word impartible land, some have misconstrued it as the land that would be untouchable and rights over the said land would be established by the government of GB. The ambiguity is owing to misinterpretation of Section VI wherein it bars apportionment to any individual. This needs to be understood; no individual but Haqdaran e Arazee and the village will continue to exercise their collective rights over the land. The interpretation must be taken in good faith. When I say in good faith, it means the land is being protected from occupation; influential and well-connected people in the past have been exercising clandestine ownership to accrue individual benefits. This particular clause creates uniformity within the given jurisdiction and ensures equitable land distribution and collective legal ownership. In addition, for the first time the government has taken into consideration the sustainability aspect. GB is the most climate vulnerable region in Pakistan having profound impacts of climate change. The restriction in place would serve as climate friendly and ecological habitat will be protected in future.
Second important point is declaration of Hadaran-e-e Arazee in Section XI of chapter III. Accordingly, the share of entitlement will be determined by the village verification committee (VVC) under the auspices of customary laws. Customary laws are the fundamental sources from where municipal and public international laws have been derived. This section bounds the VVC to verify Haqdaran Arazee in the light of Customary laws. This further consolidates the rights of local people on the land and over the people of the specific region. This provision in toto complies with the norms of democracy where people are considered as sovereign and laws are made to serve the governed not the governors. However, nomination of people in the VVC can be a debatable point. In order to make it more effective, the committee must be comprised of educated people along with the elders of the village. The concerned Tehsildar, who is in charge or administrative authority should keep in mind the above-mentioned concern while nominating the members.
The third important point is of the mechanism of land allocation. The Act provides for formation of three regulatory bodies in general to decide the whole process from declaration of Haqdaran Arazee to partible and impartible land and to partition of the land. The institutional bodies viz. VVC, District Land Apportionment Board (DLAB), and the GB Land Apportionment Board (GBLAB). The Later is the final authority head by the chief executive of the province, the chief minister (CM). This Act has made it crystal clear that the say of the CM will be the final verdict to decide the fate of a piece of land and ownership rights of the people over the common land. The three long stages introduced in the bill guarantee, transparency, good faith and welfare of the people. It must be reminded to the people in opposition and treasury benches that it is not the persona or personality that matters but institutions. The stronger the institutions, the more transparent will be the mechanism of partition and apportionment of the land.
Now, here comes the role of civil society, opposition members and the common masses to develop a consensus to make institutional bodies involved transparent, effective and efficient. The lawyer community must sensitize the public about importance of legislation and their significance for a society. Laws are passed and implemented to uphold social order in a society. Unfortunately, we as a nation are averse to change and Litigium. Of course, it may be because litigation is cumbersome process that require prudent minds and able litigants to decode the phrases and simplify the terms for a better understanding of a common man like myself. We expect prudent minds, irrespective of party affiliation, to come forward and debate the bill to sensitize the public of its very importance and identify the lacunas to revamp the bill in a next episode. A good beginning is always a half done.
In the end, I as son of soil appreciate the efforts of those who were on the driving seat, those who proposed the idea of land ownership for a decade, within and outside the assembly. There may be shortcomings in the bill, and there are few, all these discrepancies can be removed through mutual consultation and debate. But it is unfair to reject and oppose the landmark achievement of the elected representatives on the basis of few shortcomings. I must suggest the opposition to propose amendments once the bill becomes law and is practiced. The amendments must be incorporated on the basis of its consequences for the society and people. We as a nation must learn to move forward positively in order to be at par with other nations across the world. Criticism for the sake criticism must be shunned but optimism must overcome the pessimism. We must remember that there is always a silver lining at the end.
