Pakistan: More Provinces; Good Or Bad?
Posted on 28. Apr, 2010 by Jeff in World News
PROVINCES ON ADMINISTRATIVE AND NOT ON ETHNIC GROUNDS
By Yasmeen Ali
Proposed Provinces
Looking into the very concept of decentralization, history proves, this has been a popular concept, well applied by earlier civilizations.
As early as 200 B.C., the Greeks found city states as more democratically manageable and administratively effective. An example in the recent past is the breaking away of the states from the USSR. In the context of families, we are witness to the movement from the large to nuclear families.
In a decentralized system, there is no single centralized authority that makes decisions on behalf of the provinces. Instead local representatives, make local autonomous decisions towards achievement of its local goals aimed to culminate into national good.
It is a fact that the administrative units in Pakistan (the 4 provinces besides FATA), are too large to be managed efficiently. There is a huge disconnect between the rulers and the ruled. Try seeking an audience with the MNA or the MPA of your area without a facilitator and you will learn to your sorrow that it is not possible. His constituency is too large for him to attend to individual problems. Further, the impact of steps taken by the government hardly trickles down to the grassroots level. The participation of locals in development efforts is minimal. Priorities of the central government in addressing issues of the people are more often than not, way out of sync with the actual ground realities, to say the least.
The grievances of the people are genuine. For the common man, there are hardly any affordable health facilities, inflation has sky rocketed, education that even if they can afford, offers, few lucrative job opportunities owing to the plum jobs going to the degree holders from the elite institutions, power breakdowns, problems with availing other basic amenities of life, lack of any constructive and positive avenues of entertainment and promotion of healthy activities for the youth like games, population explosion, the list is long and unending. When the leadership leans heavily towards promoting “favorites” and denies equal opportunities, people’s frustration will find a channel to vent itself. This will invariably be negative. We have seen its negative impact in the form of militancy. It can also manifest itself in demands seen as a panacea for their all ills. Like the quest for more provinces.
Distribution of funds and their allocation to different account heads, so the benefits accrue to the locals, is absolutely decisive. More often than not, we see that funds are purportedly used, without a visible indicator of them being used as claimed, or, not to the degree publicized. This creates further disenchantment amongst the people and erodes the feeling of nationhood, sinking us even further and deeply into the black hole of ethnicity.
As a result of genuine need felt, political expediency, or serving of vested interests, on various different occasions, there have been voices raised, in favor of more provinces. There was a demand for Seraiki Province. This was followed by one member of the previous Parliament raising a demand for the Bahawalpur Province, more recently, changing the name of NWFP to Pakhtunkhawa Khyber sent waves of protests in the province. Needless blood was shed in the unrest that followed. And now, there is a movement for a Hazara Province.
The major question that confronts us is, should these divisions be on the basis of ethnicity or language or tribal loyalties? Let us assume, the government gives in to the demand of a Hazara Province. Will we not be frittering our problems to ethnic levels thereby driving in the schism between different ethnic races even deeper than already exists? Will this not lead to a demand by other pressure groups for a province of their own? Pakistan came into being as an ideological state. Will more provinces born out of ethnicity tear it apart? Will this destroy, even more, the concept of one nation? All these and many more questions rear their ugly heads like Hydra, the mythological many-headed serpent. I do not question the genuine grievances of the people leading to the demand. I do, however, question their creation as demanded, on ethnic basis. Creation of more provinces on the basis of ethnicity, will only acerbate the feeling of isolation. This is a self-destruct tendency. We have witnessed this feeling and the havoc it created, in 1971. In the absence of a strong leadership to act as a bonding force, a sense of depravation, created unbridgeable wedges resulting in tearing one of them apart from the motherland.
Does the creation of more provinces, or Administrative Units that I would rather call them, allow them to generate and collect revenues at the local levels? Along with it or even without it, the authority may also be given singly or in combination, of developmental planning, implementation, administration and management.
Will creation of more Administrative Units result in better management automatically? Whereas, this may bring the rulers and the ruled closer together, whereas, it will make those governing more accountable, and whereas, the issues besieging the people, may have a better chance of being addressed in a timely fashion, the fact remains, that this step must be based on honesty of purpose .If appointments on merit become the rule rather than an exception, any system, can achieve an unprecedented success rate as merit would, nay, should, deliver. Bifurcation into smaller units without a will to serve the people honestly will be of no use. It will not ensure an end to corruption and bad governance. This task if undertaken diligently, will be a stepping stone towards solving the multitudes of problems faced by the masses. It should be a means to an end, and not the end itself.
At the end of the day, it all boils down to the will and vision of our country’s leadership, to deliver. No system can succeed and no country can progress without its leaders subscribing to the thought of FDR, when he said, “There is no higher calling than public service”.
The writer is a lawyer currently teaching in the Mass communications Dept. of Beacon House National University 
.Yasmeen is a regular contributor to Opinion Maker. She also owns and moderates her blog pakpotpourri
loading...
18 Responses to “Pakistan: More Provinces; Good Or Bad?”
Leave a Reply
Donations
Join Us
 |
| Subscribe to Opinion Maker |
| Email: |
Tanvir Ahmed Siddiqui
29. Apr, 2010
In Principle there ofcourse should not be any reservation and apprehension about decentralisation, delegation and de-regulations of powers for the administration and mangement of national wealth & resources on the basis of fair distribution. Be it through further segregation of provinces or districts as long as every aspect of local independence remains intact and commited to overall harmony, soveriegnity, unity and cohision of Pakistan. Whenever whatever division possible that should be primarily in the interest of the unity and soveriegnity of Pakistan as a nation state.
But still i hv a reservation that why such demands do not come to surface so effectively and assertively especially during dictorial regimes. If you notice that Mr. Durrani of Q League who is now an active and very assertive frontline stalwart yelling under screaming banner of Saraaeki / Bhawalpur Province had been a mainstream crony of General Mushurruf for complete 9 yrs. I dont recall even once ever in those 09 yrs that Mr. Durrani once voiced for Bhawalpur province in front of his pay master the than. Same is the case for Chaudhrees of Gujrat who are now so assertively sponsoring movement for Hazara Provice. They both kept on enjoying their time in the lap of Mushurruf for 09 yrs but never heard to be talking about their ambition for Soobah Huzara in those days of hunk dorry.
To my understanding all this sudden hue & cry for more provinces is basically and primarily to subdue the populous political effect & hold of PML N especially in Punjab. The Pain and suffering in stomachs of all those now showing off their crocodile tears in the name of more provinces is actually the reason of their personal dislike and hatered of the general popularity and effect of MIan Brothers.
Farooq
04. May, 2010
Very Logical and Intelligent analysis of the pseudo-concerns of the likes of Durrani and Chaudries of Gujrat…
Ijaz Khan
29. Apr, 2010
Tanveer yShb. you have hit the nail on the head. It is to dent PML N that this is being geared.To cut off the nose to spite the face.I agree with Yasmeen Sahiba, that Administrative Units have all the points in favour BUT very realistically,it IS the will to deliver that matters.In the current state of affairs, any step taken will not work. Simply because the present leadershop is focused on passing a day as it comes with no vision or planning.short or long term. They are focused in looting as much as possible.This INCLUDERS PML N by the way.
Ijaz
Laila Isphandyar
29. Apr, 2010
Mr Mahmud Durrani was till recently in employment of Bhawalpur Walas. He is trying to kiss the hand that feeds him.
Laila
Rizwan Beg
29. Apr, 2010
These are all vested interests at play here. The sooner we realise this, the better.
Well exposed Ms Ali.
Best
Riz
Usama Nizamani
29. Apr, 2010
The solution to this problem doesn’t lie in creation of more provinces on the map either on the administrative or ethnic basis.
Creation of more provinces will not ultimately lead to welfare for people, a more evident example of such claim remains to be Afghanistan, where there remain 34 provinces in the country. However, the decades of wars can’t be ruled to dismiss Afghanistan as a legitimate example.
Moreover, the fundamental and core issues of lack of welfare imparted to public by the state is the continuation of the lack of administrative structure and institutional maturity in the civil services of Pakistan. The institutions remain ineffective with an absolute inefficient and incapable workforce in the first place, which has neglected the values of merit to induct the right people to do the job, instead always selected the undesirable and the otherwise, which results merely not in the failure of the institutions rather in the state’s.
There is a dire and urgent need of reevaluating our current policy for civil institutions and drastically implement a modified plan which is more efficient, effective, scientific, humanistic and welfare oriented which is second to none in the world. Unfortunately, to add to our dilemmas there is no component of “motivation” found among the public sector organization work-force in Pakistan which perpetuates an image of “bodies with no soul” in the employees/civil servants.
Beyond all there seems nothing close to trust and confidence between the state’s institutions and the public, which is an invisible force which leads in strengthening relations between the state and the public. The absence of the above- mentioned in the institutions leads to a sense of complete deprivation (from the part of the public) and abuse of “bureaucratic ritualism” from the public sector employees. Thus, resulting in various forms of corruptions including the monetary and nepotism that we see today in Pakistan which was a part of recent News in Pakistan in which Supreme Court declared the promotion of 54 Officers as Null & Void which was a reflection of Nepotism from the top leadership of the Executive in Pakistan.
Furthermore, lack of execution of substantial basic resources to the public in Pakistan is another reason to the addition of misery of the public which are being exploited and manipulated continuously, which has resulted in declination of the confidence of the public in the state and its institutions. a dilemma of this remain Baluchistan’s and rural Pakistan’s public who feel completely alien to our Urban Society and Population.
Specifically with respect to Hazara, I believe it is an utter injustice to name a province without seeking the consent and confidence of the Hazara’s Public and take an action which is inconsistent to their collective wishes and is completely against the Republic and legitimate Democratic values. In addition to this emergence of new provinces will result in social instability and anarchy in diverse areas of Pakistan including Sindh, Baluchistan and Punjab too, since there is no concrete basis of creation of new provinces in Pakistan other than the ethnic lines and this would inevitably result in utter resistance from public as masses remain uncertain in midst of crises of basic needs.
Sohail Parwaz
04. May, 2010
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa…………… I’m happy folks have the name of a province (ultimately) but Khyber is yours and Pakhtunkhwa is yours as well. Where is my representation?
Sohail
Darvaish, Hazara
Ijaz Khan
05. May, 2010
Administrative units MUST overlap overriding ethnic lines.Mahmud Durrani is a useless bum serving current master(whoever it may be).
Sohail Parwaz
21. May, 2010
@Ijaz Khan,
Administrative units MUST overlap overriding ethnic lines….. very true but where on earth its happening, Sir? Sindh, Balochistan or NWFP???
Sohail Parwaz
21. May, 2010
@Ijaz Khan,
http://www.dailyausaf.com/edi_detail.php?id=2295&art_id=60
Tanvir Ahmed Siddiqui
05. May, 2010
Sohail Parwaz Sb: DARVESH HAZARA
Yes you are right..if the division is to be on ethnic and lingusitic miles of ground than every 10 Km should be given their proper & local identification and representation….and this will be a never ending story..that is the reason why we should consider all divisions amicably on the soul basis of Share & Care of needs & requirement..
Sohail Parwaz
21. May, 2010
@Tanvir Ahmed Siddiqui,
Yes, its the begining of a never ending story that I always hated. Blame those who opened the doors for it. As far as I am concerned I was always for a One Unit, but that was a sore finger for many.
Tanvir Ahmed Siddiqui
05. May, 2010
All such MOVEMENTS with help of emotional and sentimental exploitation of poors are infact initiated / aggrevated and then sponsored by same lot of VADERAAZ / JAAGIRDAARS / CHAUDREEZ / MALAKS /KHANS / MEERS and what nots..they do so basically not in the interest of commoners and downtroddens but merely in their own vested interests. That main interest of gaining even more controls on resources & power..look what has happened in trumpeted GILGIT BULTISTAN..more or less same bunch of local influncials have gained even more independence for even more exploitation of poor commoners and downtroddens. Its all a ball game of making RICH even more RICH and POORS evenly POOREST
Ijaz Khan
05. May, 2010
Well said Tanvir Siddiqui.Its a game of bloody vested interests.
Pakistan: Do we need more provinces « Wonders of Pakistan
19. May, 2010
[...] Source: Opinion Maker [...]
Pakistan: Do we need more provinces | Tea Break
19. May, 2010
[...] Source: Opinion Maker [...]
Sohail Parwaz
21. May, 2010
http://www.dailyausaf.com/edi_detail.php?id=2295&art_id=60
Fardad
07. Aug, 2011
The present strife in the country over demand for new provinces is understandable as the ongoing system is not delivering. It is indeed a burden on the country's exchequer and a cause of problems more than solution to problems.
First of all there is no justification for having only four provinces in a 170 million populated country , Why not fourteen or twenty four or thirty four or for that matter none. Four is neither this way nor that way.
The period of maximum stability and progress in the country was 1958- 1969 when there was a presidential form of government in the country. Rest of the time whether before or after this period, the country's affairs have been in a turmoil. The change needed to be brought about at this ripe time is to adopt a presidential form of government with the districts acting as basic units (we can call them district provinces) Thus Pakistan will have 107 provinces. The elected governors of these district provinces will by virtue of their office be members of the senate also, so that there is equal representation of all the federating units in the senate and (of course} no need to have separate senate elections aka auctions.
No need for any national assembly as basic issues would be dealt at the district provincial assemblies level which would have been given requisite authority and resources. Bigger issues or those requiring federal approval would be passed on to the senate. A strong ministry of provincial coordination at the center headed by the vice president would ensure cohesion and coordination between the district provinces. Ministers should be nominated from technocrats and experts in their fields not necessarily politicians. A very virile and effective accountability institution overseen by the judiciary be in place to check any corruption in the federal ministries. A similar institution should be working at the district level..
This system of government if adopted will reduce 80 percent of the present avoidable riff raff and nuisances, not to talk of the huge financial savings, and the government thus set up would function efficiently by default. The presidential form of government as envisaged here if adopted would also lay the foundation stone for the system of 'Meritocracy' which is the eventual system the world will have to adopt in order to survive.