Qabailistan, Seraikistan and Pakhtunkhwah

The Frontier Post Tuesday, April 1, 2008, Rabi ul Awwal 23, 1429 A.H.
Dr Naeem Chishti
Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani announced at the floor of the National Assembly on March 29, after taking a unanimous vote of confidence, that the Concurrent Legislative List will be abolished from the Constitution within a year. This is indeed a very courageous statement and is a right step in the right direction. Our final objective indeed is an invincible Pakistan which is strong both internally as well as externally. Although military might is essential for a strong state but the real strength comes from the people and not weapons. Conversely, a state can still be strong without its artillery, armour and weaponry but it cannot stay long if its people are disunited and dissatisfied with their political system. This is all the more true in case of federal states. It is for this reason that democracy is regarded as the most suitable form of government for federal states. Federalism aims at devolving powers between federating units in such a manner that only the bare minimum powers are retained by the centre while the rest of the powers are allocated to the provinces. It is in accordance with this spirit of federalism that the 1973 Constitution divided the legislative lists into two categories. While the legislation on the subjects contained in the Federal Legislative List could be made by the Parliament, the legislation on the subjects not contained in any Legislative List was the prerogative of the Provincial Assemblies only. As far as the Concurrent Legislative List is concerned, both the Parliament and the Provincial Assemblies could legislate on any of the subjects contained in it. However, in case of clash between two laws, the bill passed by the Parliament would take precedence. The Concurrent List contains as many as forty-seven subjects. All these subjects are essential to be allocated to the provinces to give them autonomy. After the abolition of the Concurrent List, the Provincial Assemblies will be able to make or amend the civil, criminal and industrial laws and procedures in their provinces without any interference from the federal government. Furthermore, they will also be able to legislate exclusively on subjects such as education, electricity, press and publications, and legal medical and other professions. Abolition of the Concurrent List would mean that the federal government’s powers will be restricted only to the subjects contained in the Federal Legislative List while all other subjects will be governed by the provincial governments. Although Federal Legislative List is quite comprehensive but the abolition of the Concurrent Legislative List will not be a bad beginning. The underlying idea of the abolition of the Concurrent List is to give more autonomy to the provinces so that they can focus on their development. At the same time, the federal government will also be able to give more time to fundamental issues like defence, foreign affairs and fiscal management. However, abolition of Concurrent List alone will not solve the fundamental problems of the people. If we look at our political system, we will see that the pattern of development in our country has always been vertical and not horizontal. What it means is that there are certain areas in different parts of Pakistan which have traditionally been more developed at the cost of other areas. Therefore, while we can see some very developed regions in a province we can also see other regions too which are in complete contrast and do not appear to be a part of the same province. At least two examples can be quoted in this regard. The first example is that of the tribal areas of the NWFP while the other one is that of the Seraiki belt of the Punjab. If we travel either from Peshawar to FATA or from Lahore to the Seraiki belt, it would look as if we have come into another province especially as far as their political, economic and social development or backwardness is concerned. These areas inter alia need to be recognised as separate provinces. In old times, a province used to be a territory with a distinct culture. However, the concept of a province has undergone change in modern times. These days, the provinces are created for better administrative management rather than for their distinct cultures or geographic boundaries though those could be taken into consideration among other factors. The creation of new provinces is a regular feature of a federal state. In fact, the more the provinces the stronger the federation will be. It is so because it will offer more efficient administration and will afford a better opportunity to the people to participate in the horizontal development of their provinces. It is for this reason that we can always see truly federal states yearning for more provinces whenever it can reasonably be done. In this regard, we can present the examples of the United States and India. The United States of America at the time of its creation comprised of thirteen states only but today it has fifty-one states. Similarly, our neighbouring country India comprised of eleven provinces only at the time of independence form Britain but today it has as many as twenty-eight provinces. Pakistan has for the most of the time been under military dictatorships. Our military rulers spent their professional lives in very centralised and disciplined or closed environments. Therefore, they always believed in a very strong centre. They failed to realize that running a country was quite different, if not quite opposite, from having the command of a force. Therefore, they always abhorred the idea of creating new provinces. This was just their lack of knowledge and foresight. There is absolutely nothing wrong in creating new provinces in the country. In fact, the catastrophe of East Pakistan would have perhaps been avoided if the experiment of ‘One Unit’ had not been attempted by Governor General Ghulam Muhammad through his ‘Cabinet of Talents’ in which Iskander Mirza and Ayub Khan sat as Interior Minister and Defence Minister, respectively. We must not repeat our past mistakes and must willingly recognise FATA and the Seraiki belt as separate provinces after ascertaining the desires of the people of those areas. As far as the names of the new provinces are concerned, we should give the locals an opportunity to choose the names of their own provinces. For that matter, there is no harm even if the NWFP is renamed as Pakhtoonkhawah. To remove the doubts, let me clarify that I am neither a Qabaili, nor a Pakhtun, nor even a Seraiki. Therefore, my support for Qabailistan, Seraikistan or Pakhtoonkwah is based purely on my objective study and love for Pakistan. It is my candid opinion that Pakistan will be further strengthened by recognising FATA, Seraiki belt and other underdeveloped homogeneous regions as separate provinces. I have already presented the case for a new province comprising of Federally Administered Tribal Areas in my article ‘Qabailistan – Fifth Province of Pakistan’ published in these columns on October 24, 2007. I touched upon this issue again in my analysis titled ‘Repeal of FCR’ published in the Frontier Post on March 31, 2008. Incidentally, our Chief Editor Rehmat Shah Afridi has also supported the idea of a separate province for tribal people in his comments on ‘Abolishment of FCR’ published in the Frontier Post on March 31, 2008. Rehmat Shah Afridi hails from FATA and belongs to the famous Kamberkhel tribe. Therefore, his comments should be treated as a representative voice of the tribal people.