Land as National Capital: From Conflict to Development

(Address at the First National Land Conference)

Keypoints: 

• Land as Capital: Turn disputed land into productive assets to boost food security and reduce imports.
• Rule of Law: Base stability on impartial judicial decisions, not arbitrary force.
• Public Welfare: Put the common good above small-group vetoes.
• Fair Readjustment: Share infrastructure benefits fairly, not by lottery.
• Legitimate Force: Clear obstructions legally and decisively.
• Institutional Unity: Centralize decisions to end bureaucratic gridlock.
• Property Formalization: Legalize informal land, converting dead capital into assets.

Excellency Halim Sahib, the formidable Chief Justice of Afghanistan; Engineer Sahib Mohammad Khan; esteemed members of the Cabinet; Dr. Qayoumi; members of the diplomatic corps; Governor Fedayi Sahib of Logar; Deputy Ministers; members of Parliament; and the affected residents of the Aynak project who are seated in the back—though our primary goal is that people like you gain a voice and that justice is truly implemented. To all sisters and brothers, first and foremost, I offer you the gift of the great leader of humanity: Peace and the blessings of Allah be upon you!

Stability through the Rule of Law

Our people believe in the system, yet they are exhausted by injustice, ambiguity, and instability. You might ask why, in such a difficult security environment, the President of Afghanistan has dedicated two full hours to this conference. It is because God, the people, and the Constitution compel us to envision and secure a bright future—not to surrender to force, money, or corruption.

The fundamental question is how the Cabinet, all state officials, and particularly the judicial and legal sectors can work toward a stable Afghanistan. A major pillar of that stability is the management of land and resources.

I must begin with deep gratitude and congratulations to Mr. Pikar for his healthy and comprehensive leadership of the Land Authority (ARAZI). The volume of reform papers Mr. Pikar has sent me this year likely equals one-third of all reform documents I’ve received. Please, let us give a round of applause for Mr. Pikar. This agency is not just important; it is a model for reform, proving that centralized, principled leadership can drive change. Consequently, the Cabinet has decided not only to increase its authority but also to provide significantly more resources.

I also want to thank Halim Sahib for his close cooperation with ARAZI, as well as the High Council for Land and Water.

Unified Governance: Moving as One State

What is the difference now? Today, we are not just separate ministries or isolated agencies. We take collective decisions for the responsibility of a unified Afghanistan. The necessity of this High Council is to bring coordination. Previously, agencies acted as if they were moving in different directions—like a car with a steering wheel at both the front and the back; if both are active, nothing moves. The "negative power" of our agencies—their ability to say "no"—was, and remains, very high.

Coordination is essential. Like our other High Councils (Security, Economic, Infrastructure), the powers of the Presidency are being delegated to these councils to build principled institutions. I do not deny my authorities, but consultation is the principle, and coordination cannot happen without participation.

Law as the Bedrock of Sovereignty

Stability does not come from the bayonet; it comes from the Rule of Law. What was the difference between us, as a State, and the rebels in Kunduz? The UN Special Representative told the Cabinet that our security forces did not trample on human rights or harm civilians. In contrast, the rebels violated the honor, lives, and property of the people. Such crimes are unacceptable to a state and a society that believes in the law.

But the State itself must first become law-abiding. I have said repeatedly: the day Chief Justice Halim Sahib declares a government decision illegal, I will celebrate. The interpretation of the law lies with the Supreme Court, and I reiterate that all judges have complete freedom and independence. Without this, the Rule of Law is not achieved, and it is only the law that provides certainty and stability.

The Objective of Law: Public Welfare

What is the goal of the law?

1. Prosperity: In the matter of Expropriation (Eminent Domain), we have not yet balanced social welfare with private interest. Public welfare is the primary objective. The rights and duties in Chapter Two of our Constitution must be respected in every law. If a public project is delayed for years because of fifty or a hundred people, it must be weighed against the scale of public interest. Such obstructions have no place in a law-abiding country.

2. Clarity: The boundaries of the law must be clear. Determining these boundaries is a social and political process. Consultation with all stakeholders is necessary. This is why the affected parties are here today—to hear how wide the gap is between the legislator's intent and the actual implementation.

3. Language and Implementation: The language of law is not the language of the commoner. Halim Sahib is the father of Afghan legislation. We must translate the needs of society into the language of the law. Furthermore, every new article added to a law must be costed. We must balance national interest and public resources.

The Legitimate Use of Force

No law is implemented without the legitimate use of force. I request the Chief Justice to grant the executive branch the permission to use force in specific stages. When land grabbing, extortion, and the violation of public interest are at play, the legitimate use of force—after legal due process—is a fundamental right of the state.

Every state is distinguished from a volunteer society by the commands of Islam and the Constitution. Why does the state have the right to take a life (capital punishment)? Because an individual may endanger the public interest. Similarly, show me one country without a law of expropriation. Expropriation is clear in the Constitution. Within the framework of justice, "fair compensation" is required, but the form of that compensation needs better definition. Those who block public benefit must face clear legal stages of force.

Consultation is mandatory, but it has limits. Consultation does not mean a "veto." It does not mean delaying a public project for two years—perhaps twenty days or two months at most. A limited minority cannot negate the will of the majority.

Land as Capital, Not a Barrier

Today, land has become a barrier rather than an asset. Minister Saba noted that while we have land, we do not use it in an integrated way. What is the price of land becoming a barrier? Look at our trade balance. We have at least three billion dollars in food imports. This is a shame—there is no greater shame than importing $3 billion in food while our land and water remain underutilized. This is a national disgrace, alongside narcotics and maternal mortality.

Land management is fundamental. Land is a process of production. In Laghman, a hardworking family can live off two jeribs of land; in other parts, people say they cannot survive on fifty jeribs. The way we use land must change.

The goal of the High Council of Land and Water is to link these two elements fundamentally. If land is to become capital, the farm, the city, and the world must be connected. Yesterday at the agricultural fair, I saw our produce—pears, apples, grapes—it was a joy. But we haven't connected the farm to the city. We import apples while our own rot.

Infrastructure and Expropriation (Eminent Domain)

Until the issue of expropriation is solved, we cannot manage land or water. We want roads and cities, but we ourselves become the obstacles to our own demands. Under Dr. Qayoumi, our infrastructure plan is being integrated.

Currently, our projects are like a lottery. Those who benefit—whose land value jumps fifty-fold because of a new road—get lucky, while those who lose their land fall into poverty. This is fundamental injustice. Projects must move from a "lottery" to a "guarantee of justice."

I suggest that those who profit and those who lose must reach a fundamental agreement to redistribute land among themselves. Japan, Singapore, and Korea did this with great success. Without this, we cannot build the 4,000 km of roads needed to clear Afghanistan of drugs, or the 6,000 km of railway to reach the world. We must see ourselves as partners in these projects, not obstacles.

Dead Land and Islamic Law

Our cities are not yet true cities. Over 70% of land is informal. We must treat the "production" of land seriously. In Islamic culture, land without water is "dead land" and belongs to the state. We have a vast tradition of Sharia regarding land—women's property rights, endowments (waqf), and public ownership.

Even a Mosque, the foundation of our worship, can be moved or altered if it stands in the way of a public road. If the position of a Mosque can change for the public good, how can a private house be an immovable obstacle?

Strategic Instructions

1. Prioritize State Land: In all national projects, state-owned land must be preferred over private land.

2. Define Boundaries Early: Before a project is announced, expropriation limits must be clearly defined to prevent a "rush" on the land. "New Kabul" is a lesson in how not to build a project; we failed to protect public property there.

3. Public Participation: The state is not obligated to build projects everywhere. It is a two-way street. If you want dams, roads, and schools, you must participate. At our current rate, it would take 400 years to build 4,000 km of roads. Together, we can do it in a fraction of that time.

We need a national debate involving the media, scholars, and every Mosque to understand where the national interest lies. If a railway is delayed, what is the cost every three months? If a transit hub isn't built, what happens to our economy?

Look at Herat—international transit is blocked for 18 hours. Calculate the cost of those 17 hours on the price of goods in Kandahar, Kabul, and Jalalabad. We need clear resolve. After justice is served, those who block the way must face force.

Conclusion

I thank Mr. Pikar, the Chief Justice, our international partners, the World Bank, and the ADB. The goal of this conference is of vital importance. If we succeed in this, the dream of every Afghan—to see this nation as a transit and connectivity hub—will come true.

The people are tired of "small projects"; they want "big projects." Minister Zamir was in Parwan recently, and the people told him: "Thank you for what you've done, but we want more." "More" means medium and large-scale projects. Land disputes are the barrier to these projects. The nation must know: we have the absolute political will and the technical knowledge to solve this.

Let this technical knowledge, political will, and public consultation become a circle that brings blessings to all our people.

Long live Afghanistan!