e-ISSN : 2747-2671
Homepage: https://ojs.unm.ac.id/pjahss/index
A Historical and Political Analysis of Sindh’s Position in Pakistan after the Independence
Abdul Shakoor1 *, Taha Shabbir2, Umair Ansari3
1 Pakistan Study Centre, University of Karachi, Karachi, Pakistan
2 Federal Urdu University of Arts, Science & Technology (FUUAST), Karachi, Pakistan.
3 Mass Communication, University of Karachi, Karachi, Pakistan
*: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
Abstract
Pakistan's federalism crisis dates all the way back to the country's inception. Pakistan was born amid various difficulties, several of which concerned the state's government and organization. Federalism has been accepted as a constitutional framework in Pakistan since its birth.
The Muslim League was Pakistan's political organization, and it advocated for full regional autonomy for the provinces of United India. The Congress, on the other hand, favored a moderate union. The Muslim League's lengthy history and practice have left it with no choice but to embrace federalism as a state structure. There were additional explanations for Pakistan's establishment as a federal entity. All of the explanations state that imperial legacies are special. This aspect was instrumental in Pakistan being a republic, and sadly, it was also instrumental in Pakistan failing to be a viable federation. The British government established federalism in India to protect its vested interests.
The British style of ruling India was not uniform across the nation, but varied according to area. As a result, certain provinces were overdeveloped, while others stayed underdeveloped. The district of Punjab also had representation in state institutions such as the military and bureaucracy. Following Pakistan's independence, there was an overdeveloped Punjab, but it was not the country's largest region by population. It was dominant and commanded a disproportionate share of representation in state agencies, and it was determined not to relinquish its hegemony. It was the most widespread infection in all of West Pakistan. After Pakistan's inception, there has been a point of contention between the underdeveloped Punjab and the Bengal provinces. Smaller provinces were overlooked and took a hard hit during this conflict. Punjab ruled the state from the start, and decisions were forced on the smaller provinces. Sindh was forcibly penetrated by the refugee influx. Karachi, a significant trade center in Sindh, was divided from the province and absorbed into the federal government's territory. Sindh's ministry was disbanded and Karachi was put under federal administration as a result of this undemocratic act. Following this creation, the smaller provinces were forced to join One Unit. Sindh's territorial status was abolished and its demography was radically altered by the One unit system. Punjab became the only dominant state after Bengal's dismemberment, and it controlled the state system. Sindh remained ignored in this sort of state. Sindh has faced the same fate throughout history. And Pakistan's constitutions did not guarantee Sindh's regional sovereignty. This study makes an analytical effort to analyze the Centre-Sindh relationship historically.
Keywords: Politics; Conflict; Constitutional Development; Indus River; Resources; Sindh Assembly.
1. INTRODUCTION
Pakistan inherits a long colonial history of British India. British ruled India about two centuries. That history of colonial period left its impact on the every aspect of Pakistani society. The idea of federalism in Pakistan is influenced by a long colonial history and experience. Mohammed Waseem in this regard writes,
‘Pakistan has been a federation since independence, partly as the constitutional legacy of British India’1 It was one of reason for the emergence of federalism in
Pakistan. So, the British style of ruling India was not same to every part of India. This imperial way of ruling changed from one region to other, from one race to another. Certain states were given more importance and privilege than the other states. Some particular ethnic groups were given the so called title of Martial races and others did not enjoy this privilege. Some areas were made frontiers and law which was implemented in those areas was totally different from the rest of subcontinent. This anomalous rule changed the structure of society which became important to
shape the society after independence.
In a new liberated country social and political institutes were not reformed to set up a new system.
Along with other political system federalism was formed on the style of imperial rule which was in the favor of British vested interest. The more or less federalism on the same pattern was implemented in Pakistan that was strongly opposed during freedom movement. This unreformed and anomalous system created so many problems and discouraged democratic process in the country. In a new country some over developed areas started to dominate the political system and attempted to manipulate the things in their favor on expense of vested interests of other states or provinces .This attitude of developed province created sense of deprivation for smaller provinces and this continuous undemocratic and totalitarian approach led state in to the abysmal of authoritarianism. Federation fails to strengthen itself in a state there is no democracy. Where there is no democratic culture there is not birth of coordinate federalism. So there was undemocratic political system in Pakistan which did not create a feasible environment for a federalism to flourish in its true spirit.
Muslim leaguers betrayed with their half centuries political struggle against the British. They exploited the support of minority province of Pakistan with the adaptation of same colonial constitution. For the minorities, and smaller provinces freedom was illusion because there were the same laws which were implemented in the British period on them. The rulers of country adapted the same imperialistic and dictatorial governing ways as British rulers had in their colonial period. The governor general has more or less the same authority which he lastly enjoyed in the imperial rule. Both have power to give laws on their discretion. The freedom was only for the Muhajirs, and Punjabi elites to rule imperially and plunder the whole resources of country on the name of Islam. Minority province saw the dreams of freedom from hundreds years of slavery and bureaucratic institutes but after the withdrawal of British, their laws, culture, and institutions got rebirth. Ruling elite did not change the obsolete ways of British and they cheated with the statesmen of the provinces. The vital role in the formation of the institutional structure of Pakistan was played by the migration. Muslim League had top leaderships from the Bombay and U P. They were nearly alien in the new state of Pakistan because they did not belong to this region. At the time of independence, Pakistan faces severe crises of political
party which had roots in the grass politics. Muslim League was not organized and cadre party but it was like populous party. There was desperate need of a mass party to spread its vision and mission to the provinces but leaguers neglected this need and never held election for gaining legitimacy of people to form constituent assembly but they constituted constituent assembly on the election of 1946-1945 which were held under British rule. Migrant leaders of league were afraid of their defeat with holding new elections because they feared to fight election on the new constituencies with the indigenous politicians because of losing election. Opportunistic desires of migrant politicians and Punjabi secular elites for their permanence interests in the power laid down the roots of country on undemocratic principles. This dictatorial rule shattered the spirit of federalism in Pakistan and it is principled fact that federalism cannot survive without the emergence of socio-political culture.
Figure 1. Map of Pakistan
1.1 Objectives of Research
a. It is attempted in this thesis to understand the nature of federalism in Pakistan in its historical context.
b. The disputes between the centre and the state are as old as the Pakistan itself, what are the hurdles that these issues have become the permanent in their nature.
c. One of my important objective to work on this topic is to explore the extend of provincial autonomy enjoyed by the provinces
d. It is my core and main object to understand the case of provincial autonomy of Sindh by doing the research on federalism in Pakistan.
2. METHOD
I have adopted the qualitative methodology to do my research work because this type of methodology suits my research plan. There are books, research papers, reports, newspapers, thesis and Constitutions. The study plan is more related to the reading material than doing the field work. Therefore I designed my synopsis according to this method. I would go through the primary and secondary resources during my study. Primary sources which I studied were Constitutions of Pakistan along with certain amendments and the Constitutional Acts which were introduced by the British government in India.
Secondary sources which I studied were containing books, research articles, thesis, magazines, reports and newspapers.
3. RESULT AND DISCUSSION
3.1 Result
There is not abundant work on the federalism of Pakistan but there exist sufficient material on the various aspects of federalism. The more research articles are published in the wake of eighteenth constitutional amendment which changed the shape and structure of federalism. Some of the major works includes Syed Jaffar Ahmed’s Federalism in Pakistan: A Constitutional Study, Mehrunnisa Ali’s Politics of Federalism in Pakistan, Syed Mujawar Hussain Shah’s Federalism in Pakistan: Theory and Practice, Katharine Adeney’s works, Federalism and Ethnic Conflict Regulation in India and Pakistan, Democracy and Federalism in Pakistan and A Step Towards Inclusive Federalism in Pakistan? The Politics of the 18th Amendment, Muhammad Mushtaq’s Managing Ethnic Diversity and Federalism in Pakistan, Mohammed Waseem’s Federalism in Pakistan, Iram Khalid’s Politics of federalism in Pakistan, K.B. Sayeed’s Federalism and Pakistan, Asma Faiz’s Making Federation Work, Mian Raza Rabbani’s A Biography of Pakistani Federalism:
Unity in Diversity, Muntazira Nazir’s Federalism in Pakistan: Early Years, Jami Chandio’s Crisis of Federalism & Prospects for Provincial Autonomy in
Pakistan and others are written on the major themes of Pakistani federalism.
Dr. Syed Jaffar Ahmed writes in his book about the evolution of federalism in Pakistan. He initiates a debate about political demands and the vision of Jinnah about federalism. He understands that Jinnah desired to establish the federal form of state for Pakistan but he strongly denounced some sort of loose federation in United India.2 The theme of the book is to put constitutions of Pakistan under the federalism. He envisages that whether the constitutions of Pakistan fulfill the criteria of federalism. The constitutions of Pakistan are determined under the main characteristics of federalism, supremacy of constitution, division of powers, judicial review and bicameralism. He finds after doing research that all four constitutions of Pakistan are nominally to be federal but all those constitutions are neither federal in form and letter .He further writes that though all the constitutions are written and have a rigid process of amendment rests in the power sphere of legislature yet do not fulfill the principle of federalism because the rigidity of constitutions tends to strengthen the power of executive rather than the federal units in amending the constitution4. In this way the supremacy of all the constitutions remain at stake. He states about the distribution of powers that constitution makers in all the constitutions have always manipulated the lists system and make all important subjects in the area of federal government. He envisages that in all constitutional history of Pakistan. Judiciary was not separated from executive and it has less and limited powers. He presents that there is the same case with the bicameralism. The constitution of 1973 was bicameral but the upper house (Senate) has circumscribed powers in comparison with the lower house (National assembly).
The Mehrunisa Ali belief federalism very suitable to diverse society of Pakistan and forms five bases of the federalism in Pakistan . First, geographical noncontiguous between the East and West Pakistan, second ethnic and linguistic differences between two parts third History, Muslim League demanded for federal system fourth Common religion fifth
perceived military threat from India. Unfortunately the balance between the center provinces failed to equate powers of both federal and unit government.
She causes the failure of federal equation because of the central hold over the provinces and the domination of one region to others5. Centralization and regionalism grew stronger due to the undemocratic and authoritarian rule which sue the seeds for regionalism and the outbreak of the 1971 debacle which disintegrated Pakistan. She understands that the federalism was not allowed to function smoothly .Pakistan is a country with the sharp cultural lingual cleavages so that no other political system will be conducive to Pakistan rather than Federalism but it is required to create a feasible conditions for the Pakistan to make federation work.
3.2 Discussion
With the emergence of Pakistan, all the hopes of Bengal and other smaller provinces smashed down, all the promises and the agreement which Muslim League leaders have had with the provinces before the formation of Pakistan were broken, all the dreams which Muslim league leaders have shown to the people about the vision of Pakistan remain as a false consolation. The vision of Pakistani federalism of Muslim League, on which the provinces supported the cause of Pakistan which is elucidated in the Lahore Resolution, was very loose federation.
Provinces were envisioned to enjoy the sovereign and autonomous status. In his interview to the Associated Press of United States, Mohammad Ali Jinnah, on November, 8, 1945, he said:
“The theory of Pakistan guarantees that federated units of the national government would have all the autonomy that you will find in the constitutions of the United States of America, Canada and Australia. But certain vital powers will remain vested in the Central Government such as the monetary system, national defense and other federal responsibilities.”
This interview of M.A Jinnah is remarkable due to his stance on the federalism. According to this interview, the envisaged future form of Pakistan is in accordance with the spirit of theory of federalism.
Provinces had remained under the colonial control did not hesitate to support the Muslim league for making Pakistan a viable federation. But soon after the independence, the attitude of Muslim League was changed. They did every effort to make Pakistan
centralized federation. The sense of deprivation was felt by the leaders of provinces. They felt that they did blunder to support the cause of Pakistan, because it was betrayal with them. They were promised of loose federation having few subjects to the Centre and remaining all of subjects would rest in the domain of provinces like the Constitution of United States. That concept of loose federation was buried with the emergence of Pakistan when the leaders of Muslim league adopted Indian Act 1935 as the Interim constitution of 1947, with minor amendments. The mater of regretting was that, This 1935 Act was severely opposed by Muslim leaguers due to strong centrist provisions in it.
3.2.1 Federation of Pakistan and Sindh
Indian federal modal had given space to ethnicities and make religion out of its content. However Pakistani federal modal had given space to religion and make ethnicities out of content. In this regard, Dr.
Mohammed Wasim said, Indian modal of federation is more viable than Pakistani modal. Bureaucracy and military in Pakistan is of particular kind, in this country, it will not allow Pakistan to move in the direction of that modal.
Figure 2. Districts of Sindh
It was envisioned that in the Pakistan, the centre shall have only three to four subjects. And the Remaining residuary subjects will rest at the provinces. This was demand of ethno-nationalists of smaller provinces. In contrast to that Interim constitution of Pakistan consisted on three lists, Federal list of powers, Concurrent list of powers and Provincial list of powers. Subjects which were in the provincial list belonged to provinces but they were violated very easily by federal government on the name of emergency. Federal list of powers consists on variety of subjects. It numbered more than 45 subjects, on which provincial government can claim nothing.
However concurrent list subjects were given to both federal and provincial government on the reason that it contained the subjects which are concerned with interests of both governments federal and provincial but federal government had supremacy in legislation process.
Finally First Constitution in Pakistan was adopted in 1956. The constitution of 1956 of Pakistan suggested federal and parliamentary system of governance. The nature of distribution of legislative powers between the Centre and provinces is concerned that it was not as much different from the previous constitutional schemes which were implemented in the British period. It seems only in the appearance that federating units have been given more powers but in the reality, it was not true. Federal government had more powers in the legislative and executive domain. By using these powers, Centre could be able to make interferences in the sphere of Provinces. By those powers centre can even suspend the democratic process for the indefinite period of time.
The Constitution of 1956, suggested unicameral legislature and this principle was the against the grunt norm of federalism. The Constitution had adopted the parity formula between the East and West Pakistan. This gives equal powers to the both wings of Pakistan. It is fact that in the first decade of Pakistan, it was never tried to introduce federal constitution. This constitution was as much centralized that it paved the way for the birth of movement for provincial autonomy in Bengal.
Katharine is of the view that as for as the Constitution of 1956, is concerned that it has no federal principles.
Therefore it was the quasi-federal Constitution. The federating unit which was in minority made the local majority and it took advantage of exercising illegally the self-governance due to the strong centre.
Both constitutions of Pakistan, 1956 and 1962, were based on the One Unit formula. Under this scheme all three smaller provinces Sindh, Khyber Pakhunkhwa, Balochistan, and princely states were merged with Punjab in the one province which was named as West Pakistan. This one unit scheme butchered the dual principle of federalism and buried down the separate identities of different ethnicities which they have since hundreds of years of history.
Identity was snatched away from the different nations on that very day Objectives Resolution was passed and territorial recognition was also snatched away with the enforcement of one unit plan.
In the dictatorial regime of Ayoub Khan, second tier of provincial government was abrogated. This is the state level government which is very essential in federal political arrangement. Without this state level of government federal set up is impossible. In a federation powers are distributed between the federal and state government through the Constitution But in a political arrangement there is no existence of state government. The principle of division of power is impossible and that state could be called a unitary state. In Pakistan this is a platform where from ethno- nationalists struggle against the hegemony of centre and fight for the provincial autonomy. All the leftist political parties were banned to organize their political activities. Local government system which Ayuob Khan introduced was limited in the power. Ali Cheema and Shadana Khan Mohammed wrote interesting research paper on this subject. They write despite of their repeated promulgation by authoritarian Centre, local governments were never accorded recognition as a formal third tier of government. Besides this, when local governments were first established in the area that now constitute Pakistan they had extremely circumscribed functions and members that were nominated by the bureaucracy ,thereby establishing a tradition of bureaucratic control over local subjects.
The Constitution of 1962 of Pakistan was implemented on June 8, 1962, which gives exclusive powers to the President. However, it had the Presidential form of government. The constitution was as much reactionary and conservative that it had no fundamental rights in the first draft. This constitution was contrary to the theory of federalism.
Like the Constitution of 1956, it had the unicameral legislature. This constitution created room for the national movement in the Bengal. However the military dictatorship does not create an ambiance of reconciliation but impose its will through the stick.
Rather solving issues creates more one and makes them complicated. The Ayoub regime remains unfortunate for the integration of Pakistan. As soon as One Martial law ends, Second Martial regime started under the Yahya Khan. Pakistan faced unfortunate conditions to such extend that East Pakistan was separated and became independent state of Bangladesh on 16th of December, 1973.
Figure 3. Mineral Map of Sindh
Jami highly criticizes the Constitution of 1973. He is calling it an unconstitutional constitution in reality because it was framed by the Constituent Assembly which was not competent to make constitution. This Constituent Assembly came into being when the Bengal was part of Pakistan. After the dismemberment of Bengal, It was necessary to hold re-election and get mandate in new Pakistan. But it is usual in Pakistan to get leaders elected on the previous elections rather than holding the new and fresh elections. First time it was not deemed necessary to hold elections when Pakistan was formed. It was the irony of history, the constituent Assembly of Pakistan was made on the mandate of those constituencies which became never became part of Pakistan. This time history repeated its unfortunates but it was never tried to make it correct. Jami is of the view that the constitution of 1973 was the continuation of colonial act of 1935, in the changed circumstances. The Constitution provided less autonomy to the provinces in comparison with the Act of 1935.
Therefore, Mohammed Waseem, understands ‘the history of federalism in Pakistan is a case of the adage 'two steps forward, one step backwards'’.
The constitution of 1973 was a many times mutilated by the elected leaders as well as dictators.
The Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, the founder of the 1973 Constitution started initial steps to mutilate it and the remaining unfinished work of Bhutto was accomplished by Zia-ul-Haque by making 8th amendment in that constitution. This amendment incorporated article 58(2B) which left the unending impact on the democratic process. This article actually gives the President power to dissolve the
national assembly. Presidents of Pakistan did not make any elected government successful to complete its term. Finally the 13th amendment in the second tenure of Nawaz Sharif was passed in a very quick motion to restore the Constitution of 1973 without making any appropriate debate. In the 17th, amendment Musharaf again mutilated the Constitution and resuscitated the article 58(2b).
3.2.2 Water Dispute
The distribution of water between Punjab and Sindh is the older dispute than the emergence of Pakistan itself. It had its roots in the British period. These disputes are common between the Upper Riparian and the Lower Riparian. International principle of law is that Upper Riparian cannot perform such acts on the rivers which affect the flow of waters and adversely affect the agriculture in the Lower Riparian. It is very necessary to ask for the assent of lower riparian when the upper riparian is going to construct a headwork or canal on the river. Sindh as a Lower Riparian has right on the waters of Indus Basin Rivers, such as Indus, Jhelum, Punjab, Ravi, Beas and Sutlej as all the rivers were eastern tributaries of Indus, Lastly Indus passes through the Sindh and forms one of the largest delta of the world in the Thatta, Sindh. The dispute on the waters started between Punjab and Sindh in 1859 when undivided Punjab with the help of British government started violation of International law of the waters, by constructing Bari Doab Canal on the Ravi River which adversely affected the flow of water in Sindh. That was the only starting point of dispute but the dispute on the waters continues from that period and exists even today in the worst form. Its current example is construction of Greater Thal Canal. Three canals were built without the consent of Sindh, Sidhnai on the Ravi, and other two are lower Chenab and Lower Jhelum Link Canal between the era of 1805 and 1901.
Similarly, Paharpur Canal in 1908 and Upper Swat Canal in 1817 were built. Another three canals plan, Jhelum Canal, Chenab Canal and lower Bari Canals were constructed in 1915. Punjab violated the all collective rights of water in 1919, when it initiated illegally the construction of Sutlej Valley Project;
Punjab started building eleven canals and four
headworks. This time, British government took notice and formed a “Cotton Commission” which rejected the planning of Punjab and asked Punjab government not to built any canal on the Indus Basin without the permission lower Riparian, Sindh.
Figure 4: Rivers of Pakistan
Sindh Punjab Treaty 1945, it was the result of “Rao Commission” which was formed in 1941, on the complaint of Sindh against Punjab’s again and again violation of the rights of Lower Riparian in 1939. Rao Commission in its decision condemns the violations of rights of Lower Riparian Sindh and bound Punjab not to make any project without the permission of Sindh. In these consequences, Sindh Basin Treaty formed between the Sindh and Punjab.
There have been great losses due to the single handedly decisions of Pakistani rulers. One of the examples of them is the Indus Basin Treaty which was signed in April 19, 1960 between India and Pakistan in Karachi. In this signing of the treaty there was no representation from Sindh. The treaty was solicited by the World Bank which played its role as a signatory not as the guaranteer in that treaty. The Rivers of Pakistan were distributed. India got the right of entire flow of eastern rivers Ravi, Sutlej and Beas, While Pakistan were given right on the western Rivers, Indus, Jhelum and Chennab.
3.2.3 Indus Water Accord 1991
It was the first government of Nawaz Sharif in 1991;
all the provinces were brought together. The Chief Minister of Sindh at that was of Pakistan People’s Party; Jaam Sadique Ali signed the Water Accord as a representative of Sindh on16 March, 1991. This accord was approved by the Council of Common Interests on March 21, 1991. Palijo writes that with the result of
signing of Accord , Punjabi’s violation from the 1859 to 1990 were neglected and it was allocated 7maf more water than assigned it in 1945 agreement which is half equal to the allocation of both Mangla dam (5.3) and Tarbela ( 9.3) is 14.6 maf.
Punjab not only gets lion’s share of water from the Indus but from the Jhelum and Chennab. Punjab also gets water through the link canals, Chashma-Jhelum and Taunsa Panjnad. Punjab has more ground water reservoir 2500 MAF compare to Sindh has 3 MAF. The Rainfall in Punjab is 20-40 inches and Sindh had only, 4-12 inches rainfall.300 After all these advantages, Punjab did every effort to curb the rights of lower riparian, Sindh. If one looks at the Centre- provinces relation there is no anything which is happening in right direction after the inception of Pakistan. There is no any institute from which one can hope of justice. In the British period, though the Punjab being the favorite of it, the government used to pay heed to apprehensions of Sindh when Punjab desired to violate the internationally accepted rights of the lower riparian. But after the establishment of Pakistan, all institutions were influenced by the Punjab. There is very illicit example; it is of the construction of big dams.
Out of the four provinces, three provinces Sindh, Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan have passed resolution against the construction of Kalabagh dam.
But the Punjab strongly favors to construct it and very easily it influences the federal government against the three federating units. In this way Punjab bypasses the protest of other units and timely and again it resuscitates the issue of Kalabagh dam. The former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court did not try to understand the importance of passed resolution by the assemblies and he never pay heed to slogans of common people against the construction of big dams.
This is a situation which Punjab benefits to impose its decisions. Jami analysis that the how institute like Indus River System Authority (IRSA) is being monopolized by the Punjab through its maneuverings. There is no any federal representative of Sindh in IRSA. The decisions are not made on the basis of merit but they are implemented through the majority. That is the chief reason; Sindh is not getting its due share of water. The institutions and federal design and structure of Pakistan do not be able to protect the due rights and share of Sindh and other smaller provinces in Pakistan.
Figure 5: Indus River Passage
3.2.4 Mineral Resources of Sindh
As for as natural resources are concerned that they are not formed under earth in the year but they take the geographical periods, hundreds of years to be formed. These resources are actually the wealth of any provinces. They create opportunities for indigenous areas. But it is half truth in that statement, here in Pakistan the areas where the mineral resources are found they are infact one of the backward districts of Pakistan. Chaghi district of Pakistan is rich with the gold, silver and copper but is one of the most underdeveloped areas of Pakistan. Here in Sindh the district Badin and Thar are suffering the same fat. This is because they are not the sole owner of the resources. Their own wealth of resources has become some sort of curse for themselves. The share of Sindh in the contribution of total gas of Pakistan is 71 percent. Baluchistan’s part is 22 percent, Punjab contributes only 5 percent and the share of Khyber Pakhtunkhuwa is 2 percent. If we look at the production of oil, in this sector contribution of Sindh is larger. Sindh produces 56 percent of the total oil in Pakistan. Punjab contributes 25 percent, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa’s share is 18 and Balochistan’s part is 1 percent. As for as Coal is concerned that Sindh contributes 41 percent in the total production. Sindh is on the leading position in the reservoir of these minerals resources. Gas reserves in Sindh are 58 percent, oil reserves are 40 percent and the coal reserves in Sindh constitutes 88.7 percent of the total reserves in Pakistan. Federal government royalty on these resources is more than the lion’s share 88.5 percent. Provinces gets only 12 percent share.302 In this way, provincial districts which contribute major part in the national resources, they do not get reward of it but punishment. Badin is largest contributor of
Oil in Pakistan but is very backward in Pakistan.
However, the statistics of consumption is very different. Consumption of Sindh of its own resources is 46 percent and Balochistan consumes only 25 percent. The consumption of Punjab is the highest among all. It is about 930 percent against its consumption. The consumption is directly proportional to the development. Higher level of consumption brings the higher level of development in the region. Lesser level of development brings lesser level of development. Consumption of its own resources in Sindh and Balochistan is less therefore they are backward and poverty striven province.
Figure 6: Mineral of Sindh
4 CONCLUSION
Sindh suffered unfortunate conditions in every dynastic period but the independence of Pakistan did not bring any difference. Why Pakistan failed to deliver generally in the most of smaller provinces but especially in Sindh. The answer lies of that question in the complex political structure of society. This political structure of Pakistan was mixed with its colonial influence, freedom movement, social structure and others. Therefore it failed to reform the social-political structure of society. Therefore the evils which existed before the independence remain unreformed even after the independence. Therefore the freedom of Pakistan did not bring the freedom for people from old aged autocratic norms, feudalism and other evils.
Federalism grows in a society which carries the democratic values and norms and principles of constitutionalism. But in Pakistan the Constitution which is the gauranteer of provincial autonomy of federating units was latecomer in Pakistan. It was severely violated and was not valued by the military junta in Pakistan. The consequences of that society which gives no respect and supremacy of the
Constitution remain oligarchic in nature. In a federation everything starts from the Constitution. It is a basic document which makes a covenant between the federal and regional levels of Government. Each level of government has its own domain of which it derives from the Constitution and each and every level of government respects the autonomy of other government and do not try to interfere in the sphere of freedom of government which it is protected through the Constitution. But here in the state of Pakistan Constitution itself has been subjugated.
Four times in the short history of Pakistan, Constitution has been suspended and Martial law has been introduced in Pakistan. Therefore the feasible environment in independent state of Pakistan did not grow. The democratic institutions fail to strengthen in this ambiance.
The First impact of this sort of political structure in Pakistan created a norm to dismantle the provincial ministries. Sindh was the only provinces which not only lost its ministry but it lost the mega city Karachi despites its severe resistance on various levels.
Furthermore One Unit scheme left no any effort in violating the existence of province. Until the wake of 1970, the demography of Sindh totally changed.
There was hope to introduction of 1973 Constitution that came after the first General Election of 1970 remain hopeless to bring the democratic norm and federal principle in Pakistan. Even the 1973 Constitution suffered various alterations. The dictatorial regimes of Zia ul Haq, and Musharraf remain curse for the Sindh. 18th Constitutional Amendment is regarded a progressive despites its defects but it even fail to survive in this autocratic environment of Pakistan. The prospect for viable federation lies in the development and growth of democratic culture not only in the institutions but also in the behavior of people of Pakistan. That viable form of federalism will not be panacea for the all evils of Pakistan but it would hopefully get rid Pakistan from most of the problems.
DAFTAR PUSTAKA
Adeney, K. 2007. Federalism and Ethnic Conflict Regulation in India and Pakistan. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
Ali, Mubarak. 1998. In the shadow of History. Lahore: Fiction House.
Ahmed, Mushtaq. 2009. Government and Politics in Pakistan.
Karachi: Royal Book Company.
Ahmed, Syed ,Jaffar. 1990. Federalism in Pakistan: A Constitutional Study. Karachi: Pakistan Study Centre, 1990
Ahmed, Manzoor and Jalal Faiz.2006. The experiment of Federalism in Pakistan: An Analytical Study. Pakistan Journal of History and Culture, Vol. XXXXVII.
Shabbir, T., M Nadeemullah, & Saeed Memon. (2020). Uses and Impact of 'Open Data' Technology for Developing Social Sector in Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 1(1), 50-64. Retrieved from https://www.pjmr.org/pjmr/article/view/24
Ali, M. 1996. Politics of Federalism in Pakistan. Karachi: Royal Book Company.
Ali, T. 1983. Can Pakistan survive? Death of a State. England:
Penguin Books.
Alvi, H. 2002. Social Forces and Ideology in the Making of Pakistan”. Economic and Political Weekly, Vol.37, No.51.
Hamilton, Alexander, Madison, James and Jay, John. The Federalists. Gideon ed. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 2001 Anderson, G. 2008. Federalism: An Introduction. Ontario:
Oxford University Press.
Adeney, K. 2012. A Step towards Inclusive Federalism in Pakistan? The Politics of the 18th Amendment”, Publius:The Journal of Federalism,Vol.42, No.4,,p.1-27 Adeney, K. 2007. Federalism and Ethnic Conflict Regulation in
India and Pakistan. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
Burgess, M. 2006. Comparative Federalism: Theory and Practice. London: Routledge Taylor and Francis Group.
Callard, K. 1957. Pakistan: A Political Study. London: George Allen and Univine.
Jahan, R. 1957. Pakistan Failure in National Integration. New York: Columbia University Press,
Jami, C. 2009. Pakistan mein Jhamhuri Wafaqiat jo Buhran aen Qaumi Khudmukhtiari. Hyderabad: Centre for Peace and Civil Society.
Cohen, S. 2005. Idea of Pakistan, Lahore: Vanguard Book.
Chaudhary, Z. H. 2017. Sindh Ji Khudmukhtiari ain Jageerdar ji Moqaparasti. Translated by Malook Lund.
Karachi: Peacock Printers and Publishers.
Dicey, A.V. 1915. Introduction to the Study of Law of Constitution, London: Liberty Classics.
Elazar, J.D. 1991. Exploring Federalism. Tuscaloose: University of Albania Press.
Elazar,J.D. 1995 Federalism: An Overview. Pretoria: HRC Publishers.
Faiz, A. 2015. Making Federation Work. Karachi: Oxford University Press,2015
Hussain, I, Quraishi, A..A, and Nadeem. 2019. The Economy of Modern Sindh: Opportunities lost and Lessons for the Future, Karachi: Oxford University Press.
Ian,T. 1998. Pakistan: A Modern History. Lahore: Vanguard Books pvt. Ltd.
Jatoi, H. B. 1955. Shall Sindhi Language Stay in Karachi or Not, Hyderabad: Baba- e- Sindh Hyde Bux Jatoi Academy.
Jatoi, H. B. 2013. “One Unit and Democracy”, in One Unit and Sindh, editited by Aijaz Ahmed Quraishi, Karachi: Peacock Printers.
