Senior journalist Najam Sethi has called for the removal of the federal minister for Information Technology and Telecommunication, Shaza Fatima Khawaja, over her role in the controversial Pakistan Telecommunication Reorganisation (Amendment) Bill 2026, a proposed law that has triggered widespread criticism from journalists, legal experts, and members of the public.
The bill became the center of a national debate after journalist Rauf Klasra highlighted provisions that critics claim would have granted telecom companies extensive powers to access private property for telecommunications infrastructure projects. Following public backlash, the legislation faced significant scrutiny, and its progress was reportedly halted.
Speaking during a discussion on the issue, Najam Sethi strongly criticized the proposed law and expressed disappointment with the IT minister. Responding to a question from journalist Syeda Ayesha Naz, Sethi said he would oppose any attempt to install telecom infrastructure on his property under such legislation.
Sethi reserved particular criticism for Shaza Fatima Khawaja, saying he had always considered her an educated and capable minister. However, he said he was shocked that such a bill was introduced under her ministry.
“I am most angry with Shaza Fatima. I considered her an educated woman and never expected her to present such legislation. Did she not realize what she was doing? I am surprised that such a minister exists in the government. Ministers who bring forward such laws should be removed,” Sethi said.
The veteran journalist also credited Rauf Klasra for bringing the issue into the public spotlight. According to Sethi, Klasra’s campaign played a key role in preventing the legislation from moving forward.
“Rauf Klasra raised this issue in such a way that it shook everything and stopped the bill from being passed. I request Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif to remove IT Minister Shaza Fatima Khawaja for introducing this controversial bill,” he said.
Meanwhile, Rauf Klasra has continued to raise questions about the origins of the legislation and the officials involved in its drafting. According to Klasra, the public debate has focused largely on the bill itself, while the individuals responsible for preparing and advancing it have remained out of the spotlight.
Klasra claimed that the principal architect of the legislation was Zarar Hasham Khan, who currently serves as federal secretary in the IT Ministry. He alleged that Khan was brought into government on contract from the private telecom sector and played a central role in drafting and advancing the proposed law.
According to Klasra, the bill would have allowed telecom companies to gain access to private properties for the installation of towers, machinery, and related infrastructure. He argued that citizens who refused access could have faced penalties of up to Rs. 50 million.
“The real architect of this East India Company-style law has remained hidden. Once people understand the background and role of Zarar Hasham Khan, they will understand the entire game,” Klasra said.
He further alleged that telecom companies first managed to place a representative from the private sector within the ministry and then pushed forward legislation that aligned with their interests.
Klasra also claimed that the bill was initially approved by Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and the federal cabinet before being sent to Parliament. According to him, the legislation received cabinet approval, was later passed by the National Assembly, and was subsequently forwarded to the Senate.
The journalist questioned whether government officials had carefully reviewed the contents of the proposed law before approving it. “The question is whether the Prime Minister, ministers, and advisers actually read this extraordinary bill before giving a handful of companies powers over the private property of 250 million Pakistanis,” Klasra said.
Critics of the bill have compared its provisions to the powers historically exercised by the British East India Company, arguing that it could have weakened private property rights in favor of corporate interests. Supporters of the criticism say the controversy highlights the need for greater transparency and scrutiny in the legislative process, especially when laws involve citizens’ property rights.
The government has not publicly responded to several of the allegations made by Sethi and Klasra. However, the debate surrounding the Pakistan Telecommunication Reorganisation (Amendment) Bill 2026 has intensified discussions about telecom infrastructure expansion, property rights, and regulatory oversight in Pakistan.
