By Haroon Khawaja
- The need of time is to empower people of Pakistan
Pakistani politics is an epitome of power struggle. The political leadership does not seem inclined to understand the demands of a heterogeneous society. The country is considered to be a transitional democracy and an evolving federation undergoing teething problems. Can an improved institutional arrangement transform Pakistan into a more “democratic society”? The answer in theory is fairly obvious: the diffusion of power to grass root level. A high degree of autonomy for localities and groups within the state is essential for freedom within a democracy.
In an attempt, based on an understanding between the major political parties, to create the impression that devolved autonomy is being enhanced, the 18th amendment became an act of parliament on April 19, 2010. This amendment introduced changes to about 36 percent of the 1973 Constitution of Pakistan. 102 out of 280 Articles of the Constitution were amended, inserted, added, substituted or deleted. 292 of the 342 members of the National Assembly voted in favour of the amendment. The amendment turned the president into a ceremonial head of state and transferred power to the prime minister. Reformers have touted the measure as a necessary shift to a more federal system. The cynics regard it as a step to weaken the federation and, therefore, jeopardise the country’s security and homogeneity.
Autonomy is all about control over power and resources. The amendment has redefined the structural contour of the state through a paradigm shift from a heavily centralised to a predominantly decentralised system
With eight years of hindsight since the birth of 18th amendment, there are certain lessons to be learnt and conclusions to be drawn. The amendment, while necessary to devolve power to epicenters closer to the grass roots, has raised some grave concerns about how political compulsions can result in unintended outcomes.
Autonomy is all about control over power and resources. The amendment has redefined the structural contour of the state through a paradigm shift from a heavily centralised to a predominantly decentralised system, but has failed to address the consequences of the failure of provinces to devolve power and resources down the chain. Though the amendment mandates the establishment of local governments in all four provinces, it provides little clarity on which administrative or financial powers are to be delegated to them. The trickle-down effect of this vertical devolution has not been equitably distributed to the lower tiers (districts, tehsils, union councils, and villages) by the provincial capitals. The amendment does not in any way guarantee people’s control of police, finance, revenue and other related departments. This has resulted in an increase of ethnic divide based on provincialism in addition to provincial governments becoming strong and rich enough to compete with and insubordinate the federation.
The amendment also eliminated the “Concurrent List”, an enumeration of areas where both federal and provincial governments may legislate but federal law prevails. Laws governing marriage, contracts, firearms possession, labour, education, health, environment, bankruptcy, and 40 other diverse areas were devolved to the provinces and each provincial assembly was given the power to draft its own laws on these issues. This has generated concerns about the ability of the constitution to create a homogeneous society. Provinces have since challenged the national accountability law (to suit the needs of provincial leaders). There is no longer a nationwide legislation to ensure that high-quality and safe drugs and medicines are prescribed. The question of environment and ecology which is so vital to the development of a green economy also does not have a harmonious direction in the country. Without a standardised curriculum being taught throughout the country, our students are likely to lose a common link so vital in binding them as one nation. This has started to promote regionalism instead of nationalism. In an already bitterly divided society, such distinctions can become a recipe for disaster in times to come.
The federalist and devolutionary paradigm introduced by the 18th amendment has been swinging between narratives of “too little too late” and “too much too soon”
On the security front, while the amendment has devolved law and order as a provincial subject, it is in direct conflict with Article 148 of the constitution (which makes it the responsibility of the federal government to ensure provincial security). While the Council of Common Interests sits as a federal body headed by the prime minister with chief ministers of all provinces as members to resolve any conflicts between the federation and provinces, there are serious conflicts and questions that cannot be addressed without revisiting the 18th amendment in light of the outcomes since its enactment.
Additionally, provincial governments need to review their rules and bring amendments therein to further devolve fiscal, policy and planning authorities to the district, tehsil, union council and village level through elected local governments. Provinces also need to address inter-province disparities by constituting District Finance Commissions, ensuring fiscal equity at the grassroot level. There should be national regulatory authorities to monitor provincial compliance with national minimum standards. A devolution true in letter and spirit is likely to empower people and make them masters of their own destiny. Such devolution will make districts epicenters of people power, thereby reducing (or possibly eliminating) the demands of more provinces in the country. The districts infrastructure already exists to accommodate strong district legislature and executive (hence, no new assembly buildings and no layers of bureaucracies). And most importantly, this system will act as the nursery to generate and train future leaders of the country.
The need of time is to empower people of Pakistan. The federalist and devolutionary paradigm introduced by the 18th amendment has been swinging between narratives of “too little too late” and “too much too soon”. The 18th amendment, in its current form, is a great idea that has been polluted by way too many discrepancies and loopholes coupled by lack of political will to enforce its spirit. For a better and stronger future of the country, this amended needs a serious rethinking.
The writer is chairman of Pakistan Freedom Movement
