The media report that a provincial autonomy package is ready and would be placed before the National Assembly during the next session as a Bill for constitutional amendment, spells no surprise. But it is intriguing indeed for its timing, given that neither the government has the required two-third majority to pass a constitutional amendment, and nor is there a political consensus on the text and the scope of the proposed legislation.
Provincial autonomy has been a perpetually hanging fire issue that has the potential to precipitate intense national debate any time, is that why the official publicity managers feel the autonomy Bill would steal some spotlight from the judicial crisis?
Spelling out a few salient features of the proposed constitutional amendment, Minister for Inter-Provincial Coordination Salim Saifullah said that the Bill envisages handing over to the provinces 22 of the 47 items on the Concurrent Legislative List. It also stipulates enhancement of the Senate's powers in money matters, including the federal budget, and appointments to top-level positions in the government.
Some more details of the proposed amendment would be made available early next month when the government would host a seminar on this subject in cooperation with an NGO. The Salim Saifullah Bill is supposed to be based on the draft that the parliamentary sub-committee headed by Senator Mushahid Hussain Syed had firmed up at the direction of the Senate when the Balochistan situation dramatically deteriorated in the wake of military operation in 2005.
The government did not endorse his report but said that all important recommendations of the report were being implemented. The other sub-committee, headed by Senator Wasim Sajjad, was to recommend legal and constitutional measures to meet the demands of the people of Balochistan, but it could not because the nationalists refused to sit with him. The task was then entrusted by the PML (Q) leadership to Salim Saifullah, then newly-appointed minister for inter-provincial coordination.
Settling the issue of provincial autonomy is the toughest task that any government of Pakistan would face. To some extent, it was resolved by the 1973 Constitution when in addition to Federal and Legislative Lists the framers of that consensus law agreed to introduce the Concurrent Legislative List subject to the condition that it would be "revised" after 10 years.
That was never done, breeding a clash of interest between the Centre and the provinces. By 1999 when General Pervez Musharraf took over, provincial autonomy was already a burning issue. Putting it among his seven-point agenda he promised to resolve it but failed for a number of reasons. In fact, the issue became more serious when troops were moved in Balochistan to tame Nawab Akbar Bugti and started snowballing in the wake of schemes like privatising Pakistan Steel, Gwadar port and other mega projects and military action in tribal areas.
The government's failure to streamline the working of National Finance Commission and Council of Common Interests added fuel to the protests by the three smaller provinces for ensuring provincial autonomy. Almost all the political parties have taken clear positions with respect to this issue, of course, with varying ideas of division of subjects. Most of the nationalists and the MQM are for a much leaner centre as compared to mainstream parties. The MQM, a part of the ruling coalition, has made it clear that it is not a party to the Salim Saifullah Bill, as it has submitted its own bill for constitutional amendment on provincial autonomy.
In the run-up to Independence, while the Congress advocated a strong centre, the 1940 Pakistan Resolution talked of autonomous and sovereign units. But after Independence efforts were made to centralise power and weaken the units, which cost as highly as breaking away of East Pakistan. Once again, various developments have put Pakistan in a position where provinces are demanding maximum autonomy so that they can make their own decisions and benefit from their resources.
Though the federal government has yet not been able to do much in this respect, there is no resistance to it either. That calls for an open-minded approach on the part of opposition to the government proposal for a constitutional amendment, even when it may be a false hope kicked up for some other purpose.
DECISIONS HAVE TO BE MADE SETTLING THREE IMPORTANT ASPECTS OF THE ISSUE: One, the Concurrent Legislative List should be abolished, and if the Centre still insists that it should have something out of that, that should be specifically declared as part of the Federal List.
Two, the Centre should have only Defence, Foreign Affairs, Foreign Trade, Communication and Currency and the Interior only to the extent that covers immigration and terrorism. Financial Award should be revised for 50-50 centre-provinces share in the divisible pool during the next year and thereafter a measured increase be made in the share of the provinces. Three, the Centre should drastically cut down its bureaucratic expenditure by winding up ministries and departments which are supposed to be involved with education, health and such other subjects that fall in the purview and jurisdiction of provinces.
The Ministry for Provincial Coordination should have focal-point desks to help provinces, if and when they need, in establishing industries, investment and health facilities. A fuller debate between various segments of society and parliamentary stakeholders can help further brush up a workable framework to fully operationalise provincial autonomy.
BUT THE QUESTION REMAINS: Why now at the fag end of the National Assembly's five-year term the government has decided to table the Bill for a constitutional amendment to resolve the issue of provincial autonomy?