A case for 20 provinces

By Yasser Latif Hamdani
May 9, 2011 · 4:10 pmHow many provinces should Pakistan have and are the current provinces and provincial identities sacrosanct? There is no good reason to assume so.
Identity is always imagined and subjective. Administrative redistribution should not affect ethnic identity because there are Punjabis, Pushtoons, Sindhis, Baloch, Urdu speaking and other ethnicities living everywhere in Pakistan. However for the marginalised peoples of this multi-ethnic multi-cultural state of ours, administrative redistribution of provinces might actually be the best check against a tyrannical majority.
Post 18th Amendment, the time is opportune to divide Pakistan’s four provinces into as many as 20 with equal geographical area. Hypothetically speaking if Pakistan was to be divided into 20 provinces as aforesaid and each of these 20 provinces would have 5 senators in the upper house, the current Balochistan province would end up having twice as many senators as Punjab despite having one tenth of Punjab’s population. The senate can then be effective federal equipoise in the joint session of the parliament. The five senators- being indirectly elected from each provinces- can be made further representative of marginalised groups by including in them a mandatory religious minority and a woman. That way we can ensure representation and participation of not just all ethnic groups but of marginalised groups. After all we insist on being a confessional democracy, at the very least it ought to be a fair confessional democracy where gender and religion based identities can find justice and fair play.
There are other more tangible advantages. For example if the complaint of the Baloch people is lack of development and empowerment, the creation of up to eight or nine new provincial capitals instead of one will ensure genuine development at the grass roots level. In other existing provinces it will create new rival centers of power to Lahore, Karachi and Peshawar, all three of which will be better served by being converted into provinces. For the people of the far flung areas of Punjab, Sindh and Pakhtunkhwa – just like Balochistan – will experience real government at their door step.
This kind of provincial redistribution to empower backward areas or to gain political numbers for marginalised populations is not unprecedented. India has done it successfully. However for us there is another very important aspect that needs to be highlighted. Taking 4 provincial capitals for a Khaki usurper is very easy, especially when the army has garrisons in all four. Conquering 20 capitals will not be an easy task in the least, even for our mighty “mard-e-momins”. As a result continuation of democratic constitutional rule will be possible.
Similarly 20 provincial legislatures in the post 18th Amendment scenario would mean that the National Assembly would be more concerned with the job of law making instead of power politics of region and tribe. Many of the provisions of our lengthy and unwieldy constitution would make much more logical sense. The example of Article 158 comes readily to mind. Article 158 creates a priority for a province on a gas well head which is located in it. At the moment given the acute crisis in the country, centrifugal trends are exploiting this to deny a large mass of Pakistani population that lives in Punjab their share of the national gas resources. However in a scenario with smaller provinces, this constitutional provision would have real meaning and effectiveness.
In 1956 Pakistan made the crucial mistake of merging existing provinces into a single unit. What should have been done was that the then province of East Pakistan should have been divided along administrative lines. Not only would it have helped end much of the disparity, it would have ensured that Pakistan stayed united. Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.