Pakistan’s Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi has stated at the Pakistan Economic Summit held on 29-30 July in Islamabad that Pakistan’s governance structure has ‘failed’ to deliver. Naqvi had been the caretaker chief minister of Punjab, the largest province of the country, in 2024, and is a federal minister for the last two years. His words and observations cannot be ignored.
The author in his lecture on December 16, 2021, when Imran Khan’s government was in power, at the Hamdard University Karachi, which was publicized heavily by PML(N) media, had stated that ‘Pakistan is not a going concern’. This has now been repeated by an incumbent federal minister of the PML(N) government. The gist of both statements is the same. The present apparatus of governance in Pakistan is anti-people in every sense. However, it has taken over 70 years for the ‘intelligentsia’ of Pakistan to accept the obvious reality.
Whenever the matter of failure of the system is examined and is taken up, a premature conclusion is made that the continuation of the structure as laid down in 1973 with four (4) provinces, their assemblies and their respective shares in the National Finance Commission Award is to be changed. This may be one of the conclusions; however, it is the author’s view that the problem is deeper than just the administrative restructuring.
In this Part 1 of a series of articles only the subject of administrative units has been discussed. The following parts will discuss other issues.
In this country any discussion on realignment of the present status of administrative units and their roles is considered taboo. It is assumed that the 1973 Constitution is sacrosanct in this respect. The Constitution can be conveniently amended to split the Supreme Court. However, how ironic it is that a small portion of a province cannot be carved out. This is not the correct approach at all. There is a need to academically and dispassionately study the subject. An attempt has been made in the following paragraphs:
History and culture and basis of division
It is the author’s view that present areas of Pakistan are a cultural unity. This area is an identified geographical entity distinct from the Gangetic Basin. India, before 1947, included both. It is a singular unit representing the Indus Basin. The binding link is the geography and demography, not the religions of the people living in the area.
The area may have different demographics; however, all the parts are inseparable for the reason that the main source of water and energy is the River Indus. There is no need to find another binding factor. The region is one as being North West of the Indian Sub-continent. One does not find any line of demarcation when one travels from Karachi to Landi Kotal.
The author is of the view that linguistic and cultural differences in the real sense are illusions, wrongly exemplified illustrations and incorrectly bracketed objectives. For example, the people of Lyari, a very old neighbourhood of Karachi, have nothing in common with those living in Nawabshah or Larkana, whereas it has strong commercial, political, cultural and linguistic relations with those living in Hub, Gadani and Windhar. Similarly, people of Dera Ghazi Khan have more in common with those in Baluchistan than in Punjab. Pishin has nothing in common with something cultural in Turbat and Makran. It is close to Peshawar culturally.
From a broader cultural perspective, there is a cultural harmonization between the regions now under Sindh and Punjab. There were two states of Khairpur and Bahawalpur in between, which acted as transitional merging points of one area into another. Though being a small state, Khairpur has 11 percent of the total area of Sindh at present.
Sachal Sarmast’s poetry in Sindh is almost similar to the poetry of Sufi saints of Uch Sharif in Punjab. The Bhuttos are Arians by caste from Rajasthan and almost all the proponents of Sindhism are either Baloch or Syed migrants. Mian Nawaz Sharif is a mixture of Kashmiris settled in Amritsar having no relation with areas that now constitute Pakistan.
This diversity is on account of the reason that the areas that constitute Pakistan have been the most fertile and livable places in the world for centuries, and there has been continuous migration and settlements. Most of the people are migrants; however, the timings of their arrival are different. The ‘Awan’ tribe of Attock in Punjab claims to be the descendants of Hazrat Abbas (AS), the brother of Imam Hussain (AS). It means that they came to this area in the 7th or 8th century.
History
Pakistan, a state which came into existence by way of an act of British Parliament, which stated the following:
Be it enacted by the King’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:
- 1.-(i) As from the fifteenth day of August, nineteen hundred forty-seven, two independent Dominions shall be set up in India, to be known respectively as India and Pakistan.
In the dominion of Pakistan, on August 15, 1947, there were five administrative units being (a) East Bengal, (b) West Punjab, (c) Sind (later Sindh), (d) North West Frontier Province and Chief Commissioner Baluchistan. There were some independent states which opted for Pakistan such as Bahawalpur, Khairpur and Kalat.
In 1948, Karachi was separated from Sind and was turned into a Capital territory.
East Bengal had a population of 55 percent of Pakistan’s total population. However, their seats in the constituent assembly were 44 percent out of the initial 100 members. It was so it represented the Members from the areas which came in Pakistan. From 1947 to 1969, East Bengal, which had 55 percent of the population, never had seats in the assembly in accordance with their population. This was an injustice and it sowed the seeds of discontent, which culminated in 1971.
The absurd concept of ‘one unit’ was created, manufactured or engineered to kill that 55 percent majority of the then Pakistan.
This injustice was cured in 1969 when seats were given in the ratio of population. However, it was too late and Pakistan was effectively split into two following the general election in 1970. The moral of the story is that ‘disproportionate representation’ of a province can lead to disastrous results. We are there again after 1969 in the reverse order when the province of Punjab alone has more seats in the National Assembly than all other provinces combined.
In 1961, Karachi was made the part of ‘one unit’ and the capital was moved to Rawalpindi through a Martial Law order. In the Constitution of 1962 ‘one unit’ system continued.
This shows that the present provinces in West Pakistan are not old. Sindh province came into existence in 1936 when it was separated from Bombay. Punjab is only West Punjab with Bahawalpur State. Punjab never had Bahawalpur as its part. It is 22 percent of the total area of Punjab. Bahawalpur State joined Pakistan on the condition that it would be made a separate province. This promise was not fulfilled in 1969 and that injustice continues. Independent states in Baluchistan had over 65 percent of the total area of present Baluchistan when the province was made. The Pushton part of Baluchistan had been governed differently for over a century.
The present KPK, the new name of NWFP, includes the tribal areas which were federally administered in the past. These areas were part of the Sikh empire and the British snatched them from Sikhs. In 1901, the separation of areas now in KPK from Punjab was carried out simply for administrative reasons as the Hazara has nothing in common with the rest of KPK.
Absurdity
In 1969, Martial Law order abrogated the 1962 Constitution when President General Yahya Khan dissolved the ‘one unit’ administrative scheme via the Legal Framework Order. The present structure is the product of Martial law.
This led to the formal dissolution of West Pakistan as a single province and the restoration of the original provinces on July 1, 1970. Balochistan was elevated and constituted as a full separate province alongside Punjab, Sindh, and the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP). Former states like Bahawalpur became divisions in Punjab. Khairpur joined Sindh and Swat and Dir became parts of the NWFP.
The states in Baluchistan were absorbed directly into the newly-formed Balochistan province which included a differently administered area having a Pashtun population. No consent for merger was ever taken from the people of Bahawalpur, Kalat or Khairpur for their integration as the case may be.
Whilst creating or reinstating provinces, as were prior to 1956 Constitution (one-unit scheme) a primary error was made. One province, Punjab, was given over 55 percent of seats in population and a similar proportion of seats in the National Assembly that elect the Prime Minister. Furthermore, the most important document being the Money Bill is only required to be passed by the National Assembly.
The author has reviewed the governance system of the whole world and has not found a single case where one federating unit is larger than all others combined. In other sense this is not a partnership; it is a Hindu Undivided Family where the senior-most member is the ‘Karta’ for all others.
Whilst undertaking the creation of provinces in 1969, the old West Punjab was revived after adding Bahawalpur without taking into account that the Province of the Punjab, in undivided India, was a small fraction of total Federation of the United India. In 1969, the absurdity was not obvious for the reason that as at that date East Pakistan was the part of Pakistan and Punjab only represented around 34 percent of total Pakistan at that time. The absurdity emerged after the fall of East Pakistan when that 34 percent became 55 percent. The readjustment was required after 1971; however, Bhutto having a majority in Punjab was not interested to correct the mistake and an obvious absurdity was created through the 1973 Constitution. Whatever may be the answer, the present position is not amenable to any federating scheme. This scheme can never breed trust between brothers.
In India, the state (province) of UP is huge but still is not more than 16.51 percent of India’s population and 14.73 percent of the current Lok Sabha seats. Punjab has 52.89 percent of Pakistan’s total population (according to the 2023 census) and holds 141 general seats out of 266 (or 173 total seats out of 336 including reserved quotas) in the National Assembly of Pakistan. This is not a workable basis.
The issue of governance, trust and equity exists on account of the status of Punjab and Balochistan in the federation because the sheer size of former’s population and latter’s size of area. Sindh and KPK are, in principle, not absurdities. Accordingly, whilst deciding the matter, Punjab and Baluchistan must be taken up in the first phase and Sindh and KPK kept in the present form.
‘Uncrowned kings’
Under the present system there are four Chief Ministers in the country. These Chief Ministers are virtually the kings in their territories. They dole out a huge sum given to them under the NFC. The person spending the money does not at all have any responsibility for the quality and quantity of the collection which is so distributed. The whole politico-socio-economic structure that has emerged after the 1973 Constitution is anti-people and anti-growth. The primary problem is lack of trust amongst the federating units. The realignment is not a problem; however, it disturbs the status quo and suits the elitist mind-set which has prevailed over the time.
From the fiscal viewpoint it is an absurd system. For example, out of the total budget in the hands of the Chief Minister of Punjab over 80 percent is the amount given by the Federal government. The sum at present is Rs 5.6 trillion or $ 20 billion per annum being equal to one-fifth of Pakistan’s total foreign currency loan.
There has never been a study whether this huge expenditure has resulted in any tangible benefit to the people of the province. The results are obvious. There are over 15 million children in Punjab who do not go to school. India and Sri Lanka, however, have high enrolment rates. There is, therefore, no point in increasing the number of kingdoms. The solution lies in delivery to the people at large.
This author served as caretaker Finance and Revenue Minister in the province of Sindh in 2013 and has the personal experience that there is no shortage of funds. At the provincial level, the real question is delivery.
(To be continued tomorrow)
Copyright Business Recorder, 2026
Comments