Making of New Provinces in Pakistan

1. Introduction

Pakistan, since its independence in 1947, has grappled with an evolving and often contentious debate regarding the optimal configuration of its provincial units. The existing four provinces; Punjab, Sindh, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP), and Balochistan,  established largely on historical and administrative lines inherited from British India, have long been the subject of calls for re-demarcation. This discourse, far from being a mere administrative concern, touches upon fundamental aspects of governance, federalism, national integration, and socio-economic equity. Moreover, the demand for new provinces is a recurring theme in Pakistan's political landscape, driven by a complex interplay of political, administrative, and ethnic factors. Advocates argue that smaller, more manageable administrative units can enhance service delivery, promote greater political representation, and address longstanding grievances of marginalized communities. Conversely, opponents raise concerns about resource implications, potential new ethnic frictions, and the political ramifications of redrawing internal boundaries. This comprehensive article meticulously explores the constitutional, political, administrative, and ethnic drivers behind demands for new provinces in Pakistan, alongside their potential impacts. It critically examines case studies, the role of the 18th Amendment, political resistance, and draws comparative lessons from India, proposing institutional reforms and a strategic way forward for peaceful provincial restructuring.

2. Historical Context of Provincial Demarcation in Pakistan

The current provincial structure of Pakistan is a product of its colonial past and subsequent post-independence political experiments. Understanding this historical trajectory is crucial to grasping the complexities of the new province debate.

2.2. Post-Independence Challenges and the One Unit Scheme (1947-1970)

Upon independence, Pakistan inherited four main provinces from British India: Punjab, Sindh, North-West Frontier Province (NWFP, now Khyber Pakhtunkhwa), and East Bengal (later East Pakistan). Balochistan, then a conglomeration of princely states and tribal areas, gradually integrated into the provincial structure. The most significant challenge to provincial demarcation in Pakistan's early history was the geographical dismemberment between East and West Pakistan, separated by over 1,600 kilometers of Indian territory. Additionally, this geographical anomaly, coupled with linguistic and cultural differences, created inherent tensions.

Follow CPF WhatsApp Channel for Daily Exam Updates

Cssprepforum, led by Sir Syed Kazim Ali, supports 70,000+ monthly aspirants with premium CSS/PMS prep. Follow our WhatsApp Channel for daily CSS/PMS updates, solved past papers, expert articles, and free prep resources.

Follow Channel

Advertise with Us

To address the perceived administrative and political challenges, particularly the disparity in population between East Pakistan, which had a majority and West Pakistan, the One Unit scheme was introduced in 1955. As a result, this scheme merged all the provinces and princely states of West Pakistan into a single administrative unit, West Pakistan, primarily aimed at creating parity with East Pakistan. Proponents argued it would foster national unity, administrative efficiency, and reduce provincialism. However, the One Unit scheme was deeply unpopular, especially in smaller provinces like Sindh, Balochistan, and NWFP, which felt their distinct identities and cultures were being suppressed by Punjabi dominance. It exacerbated a sense of deprivation and alienation among non-Punjabi populations. Moreover, the scheme also failed to bridge the gap between East and West Pakistan, intensifying Bengali nationalism, which eventually led to the dismemberment of Pakistan in 1971.

The profound resentment against the One Unit scheme eventually led to its dissolution in 1970, restoring the original provinces of Punjab, Sindh, NWFP, and Balochistan. This historical experience underscores the sensitivity of provincial boundaries and the dangers of top-down approaches that disregard local identities and aspirations.

2.2. The 18th Amendment and Devolution of Power (2010)

The 18th Constitutional Amendment, passed unanimously by Parliament in 2010, marked a significant milestone in Pakistan's constitutional history. It significantly altered the country's federal structure by devolving substantial powers from the federal government to the provinces. 

• Abolition of Concurrent Legislative List: This critical change transferred 47 subjects, including education, health, labor, and environment, entirely to provincial jurisdiction, giving provinces legislative autonomy over these vital sectors.
• Renaming NWFP to Khyber Pakhtunkhwa: This symbolic but important change addressed a long-standing demand of the Pashtun population for their provincial identity to be recognized.
• Strengthening Provincial Autonomy: The amendment aimed to empower provinces financially and administratively, making them truly autonomous entities as envisioned by the original spirit of federalism. The National Finance Commission (NFC) Award, which determines resource distribution, also began to favor provinces more.

The 18th Amendment significantly impacted the debate over new provinces. On one hand, by granting greater autonomy, it might have reduced some of the administrative grievances that previously fueled demands for smaller units. Provinces gained more control over their destinies. On the other hand, the increased power and financial resources vested in the existing provincial capitals inadvertently intensified calls for creating new provinces, particularly from regions within large provinces that felt they were still being marginalized despite the devolution to the provincial level. For instance, the argument emerged that if the federal government could devolve powers to provinces, why couldn't larger provinces like Punjab devolve power to new sub-provincial entities?

3. Constitutional Provisions for Creating New Provinces in Pakistan

The creation of new provinces in Pakistan is governed by the country's supreme law, the Constitution of 1973. Specifically, Article 239 (Clauses 4, 5, and 6) outlines the complex and stringent procedure for altering provincial boundaries or establishing new units. Understanding these provisions is fundamental for CSS and PMS aspirants.

3.1. Article 239. Bill for amendment in Constitution

• Clause (4) A Bill to amend the Constitution which would have the effect of altering the limits of a Province shall not be presented to the President for assent unless it has been passed by the National Assembly and the Senate by a majority of not less than two-thirds of the total membership of each House and has been approved by the Provincial Assembly of that Province by a resolution supported by the votes of not less than two-thirds of the total membership of that Assembly.
• Clause (5) A Bill to amend the Constitution, which would have the effect of altering the limits of a Province or Provinces, and for the creation of a new Province or Provinces, and for the distribution of legislative powers between the Federal and the Provincial Governments, and for the distribution of revenues between the Federal and the Provincial Governments, and for the establishment of a new National Finance Commission, shall not be presented to the President for assent unless it has been passed by the National Assembly and the Senate by a majority of not less than two-thirds of the total membership of each House, and has been approved by the Provincial Assembly of that Province or Provinces concerned by a resolution supported by the votes of not less than two-thirds of the total membership of that Assembly.
• Clause (6) For the purposes of clauses (4) and (5), "Provincial Assembly" means the Provincial Assembly of the Province whose limits are proposed to be altered, or from which a new Province is proposed to be created.

3.2. Key Interpretations and Challenges of the Provisions

• Constitutional Amendment, Not Simple Legislation: The most crucial aspect is that creating a new province requires a constitutional amendment, not just an ordinary law. This makes the process significantly more difficult, as it demands a much higher threshold of political consensus.
• Double Two-Thirds Majority: The process mandates a two-thirds majority of the total membership in both the National Assembly (lower house) and the Senate (upper house). Thus, this ensures broad political support at the federal level.
• Provincial Assembly's Consent: Critically, the Bill must also be approved by a resolution supported by not less than two-thirds of the total membership of the Provincial Assembly(s) concerned. This gives the existing provincial assembly a veto power over its own division or alteration of its limits. Additionally, this provision is particularly challenging because incumbent provincial governments or dominant political parties within a province may resist division due to fears of losing political power or financial control.
• Scope of Amendment: Clause (5) specifically mentions that such a Bill can also address the distribution of legislative powers and revenues between the federal and new provincial governments, and even the establishment of a new National Finance Commission (NFC). Therefore, this implies that creating a new province is not just about drawing lines, but also about re-calibrating the entire federal financial and administrative architecture.
• Complexity and Political Will: The stringent requirements of Article 239 highlight the immense political will and cross-party consensus needed to create new provinces. In Pakistan's often polarized political environment, achieving such a super-majority, particularly at the provincial level, has proven to be a formidable obstacle.

In essence, while the Constitution provides a clear pathway, the high bar for consensus, especially the provincial assembly's two-thirds approval, means that the creation of new provinces is inherently a deeply political and challenging endeavor.

4. Factors Driving Demands for New Provinces in Pakistan

The recurring demands for creating new provinces in Pakistan are driven by a complex interplay of political, administrative, and ethnic considerations, each contributing to a sense of discontent and the aspiration for greater self-governance.

4.1. Political Factors

Political dynamics play a central role in fueling the demand for new provinces.

• Concentration of Power and Resources: In large provinces like Punjab and Sindh, power, resources, and decision-making authority tend to be concentrated in the provincial capitals (Lahore and Karachi, respectively). This leads to a perception among people from geographically distant or historically marginalized regions that they have limited political voice and are neglected in development initiatives. For example, within Punjab, the region of South Punjab has long complained of Lahore-centric governance, where major development projects and political influence gravitate towards the central and northern parts of the province.
• Greater Political Representation and Participation: Smaller provinces or regions within larger provinces often feel underrepresented in provincial assemblies and the federal parliament. Ostensibly and clearly, creating new provinces is seen as a means to secure more seats in legislative bodies, ensuring their distinct interests are adequately voiced and their political participation is enhanced. This is particularly relevant for ethno-linguistic minorities within existing provinces.
• Leverage for Regional Political Parties: The demand for new provinces often originates from regional political parties or movements that aim to carve out a new political space and consolidate their power base. For them, a new province means a new administrative structure, new political offices, and greater autonomy to implement their agenda without the overarching influence of larger provincial parties.
• Populist Appeals: Politicians sometimes exploit public grievances related to underdevelopment or perceived discrimination by promising the creation of new provinces. This populist approach can mobilize significant electoral support in regions demanding new units, even if the practicalities and challenges of creation are immense.

4.2. Administrative Factors

Inefficiencies and challenges in governance and service delivery within existing large provinces also contribute significantly to the demands for redrawing boundaries.

• Ineffective Governance due to Large Size: Provinces like Punjab, with a population exceeding 127 million (2023 estimates), or even Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, are vast in terms of both geography and population. Managing such large administrative units from a single capital can lead to logistical challenges, slow decision-making, and difficulty in effective oversight. This directly impacts the quality and reach of governance.
• Difficulty in Service Delivery to Remote Areas: Remote or peripheral regions within large provinces often suffer from inadequate access to basic services such as education, healthcare, water, and sanitation. The administrative machinery struggles to reach these areas effectively from a distant provincial capital. Creating smaller, more localized provincial units is seen as a way to bring government closer to the people, making service delivery more efficient and responsive.
• Improved Law and Order: Smaller administrative units can potentially lead to more focused and effective law enforcement. Provincial police and administrative bodies can have better localized intelligence, faster response times, and stronger community engagement, thereby improving overall law and order situations in regions that feel neglected by distant provincial headquarters.
• Administrative Convenience and Efficiency: Proponents argue that smaller provinces are inherently more administratively convenient. It allows for more focused development planning tailored to regional needs, better resource utilization, and streamlined bureaucratic processes. Hence, this can theoretically lead to quicker project implementation and more efficient public administration.

4.3. Ethnic and Linguistic Factors

Identity-based demands are a potent force behind the movement for new provinces, stemming from historical grievances and aspirations for cultural recognition.

• Addressing Perceived Marginalization and Discrimination: Many communities argue that their distinct ethnic or linguistic identities are not adequately recognized or respected within the existing provincial structures. They often report feelings of cultural and political marginalization, leading to demands for separate provinces where their language and culture can be promoted. For example, the Seraiki-speaking population in South Punjab and the Hazarewal community in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa assert distinct cultural and linguistic identities that they believe are subsumed by the dominant Punjabi or Pashtun cultures, respectively.
• Strengthening Cultural Identity and Representation: Creating a province based on shared ethnic or linguistic identity is seen as a mechanism to preserve and promote that unique culture, language, and heritage. Therefore, it allows for the development of educational curricula in their mother tongue, patronage for regional arts and literature, and a stronger sense of self-governance for the community.
• Rectifying Historical Injustices: Some groups feel that historical administrative demarcations were arbitrary and did not reflect their socio-cultural realities, leading to persistent injustices. They view the creation of new provinces as an opportunity to rectify these historical wrongs and create boundaries that are more aligned with their collective identity.
• Reduced Feelings of Alienation: When a community feels its distinct identity is recognized and it has greater control over its affairs through a dedicated provincial setup, it can lead to reduced feelings of alienation from the state and a stronger sense of ownership, contributing to national cohesion.

Lastly, the demand for new provinces is a multi-layered issue, reflecting a deep-seated desire for greater political participation, more efficient governance, and the recognition of distinct ethno-linguistic identities within Pakistan's diverse federal landscape.

4.4. Case Studies for New Provinces in Pakistan

The debate surrounding new provinces in Pakistan often centers on specific regions with distinct socio-cultural and administrative profiles. The most prominent examples include the proposed South Punjab and Hazara provinces.

4.4.1. Dividing Punjab As The Case of South Punjab

Punjab, Pakistan's most populous and economically dominant province, is frequently at the heart of the new province debate, primarily due to its vast size and perceived internal disparities. The demand for a South Punjab province is the most vocal.

• Geographical and Demographic Context

South Punjab encompasses districts like Multan, Bahawalpur, Dera Ghazi Khan, Rahim Yar Khan, and Bahawalnagar. This region is geographically distinct, historically known as the Seraiki belt, where the Seraiki language is widely spoken by its estimated 30-35 million inhabitants. It is generally less developed than central and northern Punjab, with lower literacy rates, poorer infrastructure, and higher poverty levels. For instance, the Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) is notably higher in South Punjab districts compared to central Punjab.

• Merits of Dividing Punjab
• Improved Administration and Service Delivery: Proponents argue that a separate South Punjab province would bring government closer to the people. Decisions would be made locally, reducing bureaucratic hurdles and speeding up service delivery. For instance, residents of Rahim Yar Khan would no longer need to travel to Lahore for administrative matters, improving access to justice, land records, and other essential services. This is expected to lead to more responsive governance, potentially boosting local development indicators which currently lag significantly behind those of central Punjab.
• Greater Representation for the Seraiki Belt: The Seraiki-speaking population has long felt culturally and politically marginalized within a larger, Punjabi-dominated province. A separate South Punjab province would provide them with a distinct political identity, greater representation in their provincial assembly, and the opportunity to promote their language and culture, thereby addressing long-standing ethnic and linguistic grievances.
• Addressing Developmental Disparities: South Punjab lags significantly in development indicators compared to central Punjab. For example, literacy rates in some South Punjab districts are below 50%, while in central Punjab, they can exceed 70%. A separate province would allow focused development strategies and dedicated resource allocation to address the socio-economic backwardness of the region. Hence, this could attract more investment to the region, create local employment opportunities, and improve living standards for its population.
• Reduced Burden on Lahore-centric Governance: Dividing Punjab would alleviate the immense administrative burden on the provincial capital, Lahore, which currently manages a province larger than many sovereign nations. This could lead to more efficient governance in both the new South Punjab and the remaining (Central) Punjab.
• Demerits of Dividing Punjab
• Resource Allocation Disputes: A significant concern is how assets and liabilities would be divided between the new and old provinces. Disputes over shared resources, infrastructure, and financial transfers could create new inter-provincial tensions. Furthermore, the new province would require a substantial initial financial outlay to establish new administrative infrastructure (secretariats, Governor House, High Court, etc.), which could strain national finances.
• New Administrative Costs: Establishing an entirely new provincial apparatus, including a Governor, Chief Minister, provincial assembly, bureaucracy, and police force, would incur significant recurring costs, potentially burdening the national exchequer already struggling with fiscal deficits.
• Potential for New Political/Ethnic Tensions: While intended to resolve existing grievances, new provincial divisions could inadvertently create new ones. For example, minorities within the new South Punjab province (e.g., Urdu-speaking, Punjabi-speaking) might feel marginalized. Boundary disputes between the new provinces could also arise.
• Impact on Punjab's Political Clout: Dividing Punjab, traditionally the largest and most politically influential province, could alter the national power balance. Political parties dominant in united Punjab might resist division due to a fear of losing their significant national political leverage.

Creating Hazara Province from Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

The demand for a separate Hazara province from Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) is another significant regional movement rooted in distinct cultural identity and administrative grievances.

1. Geographical and Demographic Context 

The Hazara Division, located in the northeastern part of KP, is distinct geographically (mountainous terrain) and linguistically. Its dominant language is Hindko, and its population is estimated to be around 5.5 million (2017 census). The region has a history of separate administrative identity prior to its merger into NWFP.

2. Arguments in Favor of Creating Hazara Province

• Historical and Cultural Distinctiveness: The Hazarewal people identify strongly with their Hindko language and unique cultural heritage, which they feel is overshadowed by the dominant Pashto culture and language of the rest of KP. A separate province would provide a platform for cultural preservation and promotion.
• Perceived Marginalization within KP: Residents of Hazara often complain of being neglected in terms of development and political representation within the larger KP province, which is predominantly Pashtun. They argue that development funds are disproportionately allocated to Pashtun-speaking areas, leading to economic backwardness in Hazara.
• Better Administrative Focus and Development: Similar to South Punjab, proponents argue that a smaller Hazara province would allow for more focused administrative attention on its unique developmental needs, particularly in tourism, forestry, and mountain agriculture, which currently receive less attention from the larger provincial administration headquartered in Peshawar.
• Past Movements and Public Support: The demand for Hazara province has a strong historical precedent, with significant public movements, including protests and a sustained political campaign, indicating considerable local support for the idea.

3. Challenges and Resistance

• Resistance from KP Political Parties: Major political parties dominant in KP, particularly those with a strong Pashtun nationalist base, resist the division of the province, fearing a loss of territorial integrity, political power, and a weakening of the Pashtun identity.
• Resource Implications: Like South Punjab, establishing a new province would require significant financial resources for new administrative structures, potentially straining the federal and provincial budgets.
• Inter-District Boundary Issues: Defining the precise boundaries of a new Hazara province, particularly regarding districts with mixed populations or disputed claims, could lead to new internal conflicts.
• Precedent for Further Divisions: Some fear that creating Hazara province could open a Pandora's Box, encouraging similar demands from other ethnic or regional groups within existing provinces, potentially leading to excessive fragmentation.

These case studies highlight the complex calculus involved in provincial restructuring, balancing administrative efficiency, political representation, and ethnic identities against practical challenges and potential new frictions.

5. Impacts of Creating New Provinces

The creation of new provinces in Pakistan, while aimed at resolving existing challenges, would have far-reaching impacts across governance, economy, and social cohesion.

5.1. Governance and Service Delivery Improvement

• Closer Government to People: The most significant potential benefit is bringing government closer to the grassroots level. This enables direct communication between citizens and administrators, faster grievance redressal, and more localized policy formulation. For instance, instead of traveling hundreds of kilometers to Lahore or Peshawar, a resident of a remote district in South Punjab or Hazara would have access to provincial offices within a shorter distance, improving the efficiency of public services like obtaining driving licenses, land records, or birth certificates.
• Faster Decision-Making: Smaller administrative units typically have shorter bureaucratic chains of command. This can lead to quicker decision-making on development projects, resource allocation, and administrative approvals, reducing delays that currently plague large provincial administrations.
• Tailored Policies: New provinces can formulate and implement policies specifically tailored to their unique socio-economic, environmental, and cultural contexts. For example, a South Punjab province could focus on agricultural development specific to its fertile lands and water management issues, while Hazara could prioritize tourism infrastructure and mountain economy.
• Increased Accountability: With a more localized administration, elected representatives and bureaucrats would be more directly accountable to their constituents. Citizens would have greater access to their provincial assembly members and government officials, fostering transparency and reducing corruption. This could manifest in better monitoring of public spending and project implementation.
• Improved Law and Order: Smaller, more focused police and administrative units can have better local intelligence networks, faster response times to crime, and more effective community policing initiatives, potentially leading to a significant improvement in the law and order situation.

5.2. Economic Impact

The economic impact of forming new provinces is a double-edged sword, involving both initial costs and potential long-term benefits.

• Initial Costs: The immediate economic impact would be the substantial cost of establishing new provincial capitals, secretariats, legislative assemblies, high courts, governor houses, and other administrative infrastructure. This would involve significant capital expenditure and new recurring administrative costs for salaries, utilities, and maintenance. Estimates for establishing a new provincial capital for South Punjab alone have ranged in the hundreds of billions of PKR, placing a considerable burden on the already strained national exchequer.
• Potential for Equitable Resource Distribution: A key economic argument in favor of new provinces is the potential for more equitable distribution of financial resources. Under a new National Finance Commission (NFC) Award, new provinces could receive direct allocations from the federal divisible pool, potentially addressing the perception of resource concentration in existing provincial capitals. Thus, this direct financial autonomy could stimulate neglected regional economies.
• Boost to Local Economies: Establishing a new provincial capital would create new administrative jobs, stimulate local construction industries, and attract new businesses, providing an economic boost to the chosen capital city and its surrounding areas. This could lead to new urban centers and regional economic hubs, generating employment and local commerce.
• Risk of Exacerbating Financial Dependence: If new provinces are not financially viable or capable of generating sufficient internal revenue, they could become perpetually dependent on federal transfers, further straining the national budget. This risk is particularly high for regions that are economically underdeveloped.
• Impact on Inter-Provincial Trade and Investment: While internal, new provincial boundaries might initially create some administrative hurdles for inter-provincial trade and investment. However, if managed effectively, they could also foster greater competition and specialized economic development, leading to overall national economic growth.

5.3. Addressing Ethnic and Linguistic Grievances

• Recognition and Empowerment of Marginalized Groups: Creating provinces based on ethnic or linguistic identities (e.g., Seraiki, Hazarewal) directly addresses long-standing demands for recognition. It provides a formal political and administrative platform for these communities, allowing them to shape their own destinies and promote their distinct cultural heritage. This can significantly reduce feelings of alienation and deprivation.
• Reduced Feelings of Alienation: When communities feel that their unique identity is acknowledged and they have a greater say in their governance, it fosters a stronger sense of belonging and loyalty to the state. This can help in building national integration by accommodating diversity within the federal structure.
• Potential for Managing Identity Politics More Effectively: By providing a legitimate avenue for identity-based demands to be fulfilled through provincial creation, the state might preempt more extreme or violent forms of ethnic nationalism. It shifts the discourse from secessionist tendencies to administrative restructuring within the federal framework.
• Risk of Creating New Minority Issues or Smaller Ethnic Conflicts: A crucial caveat is that drawing new provincial lines might inadvertently create new minorities within the newly formed provinces or exacerbate existing smaller ethnic frictions. Moreover, careful demographic planning and constitutional safeguards would be required to protect the rights of minorities in newly formed units. For example, if Hazara province is created, the rights and representation of non-Hindko speaking populations within its new boundaries would need to be guaranteed. Similarly, the exact boundaries of a Seraiki province, particularly where it borders Punjabi-speaking areas, could become contentious.

Overall, while the creation of new provinces holds significant promise for improved governance and addressing historical grievances, it also presents substantial economic and social challenges that require careful planning, political consensus, and robust institutional frameworks to manage effectively.

6. Resistance from Political Parties to the Creation of New Provinces

Despite the compelling arguments for administrative efficiency and ethnic recognition, the creation of new provinces often faces significant political resistance from various quarters. This opposition is rooted in fears of losing political power, control over resources, and traditional political strongholds.

6.1. Fear of Losing Political Power and Influence

This is arguably the most significant barrier. Major political parties currently dominant in larger provinces (e.g., PML-N in Punjab, PTI in KP until recently) derive immense political leverage from controlling a large administrative unit. Dividing these provinces would dilute their political power base, reduce their number of seats in provincial and national assemblies, and potentially create new regional power centers where they might have less influence. For instance, the PML-N has historically been hesitant to support the creation of South Punjab province, as much of its political base is in Central Punjab, and a divided province could diminish its overall national strength.

6.2. Apprehension Over Resource Redistribution

Existing provincial governments are apprehensive about the division of financial resources and assets. A new province would demand a share from the provincial divisible pool and federal transfers, potentially reducing the funds available to the remaining parts of the original province. This creates a zero-sum mentality where existing political elites fear losing their economic control.

6.3. New Administrative and Financial Burdens

While proponents highlight long-term benefits, political parties are often wary of the immediate, substantial financial burden and administrative complexities involved in establishing new provincial infrastructures. They might prefer to maintain the status quo rather than incur the short-term political and economic costs associated with restructuring.

6.4. Maintenance of Existing Political Strongholds

For parties with deeply entrenched political strongholds in specific regions of larger provinces, the creation of a new province could disrupt their vote banks and leadership structures. They might fear that new political configurations would challenge their long-established dominance.

6.5. Nationalist Narratives

In some cases, resistance stems from a strong provincial nationalist sentiment. For example, a segment of Punjabi nationalists might oppose the division of Punjab, viewing it as an attempt to weaken their collective identity or political strength. Similarly, Pashtun nationalist parties might resist the creation of Hazara province, seeing it as a dismemberment of the Pashtun homeland.

6.6. Risk of a "Pandora's Box"

Political parties often fear that creating one new province could open a "Pandora's Box," leading to an unending cascade of demands from other regions or ethnic groups for their own provincial units, potentially resulting in excessive fragmentation and administrative chaos. This fear of uncontrolled balkanization makes many parties cautious.

6.7. Lack of Broad Consensus

Given the high constitutional threshold (two-thirds majority in both federal houses and the concerned provincial assembly), achieving broad political consensus has proven extremely difficult. Without a shared vision and willingness to compromise, political parties tend to prioritize their narrow interests, leading to stalemate.

Ultimately, the resistance from political parties is a reflection of the high stakes involved in provincial restructuring, where established power dynamics, financial control, and political identities are all at play. Overcoming this resistance requires exceptional political statesmanship and a genuine commitment to national interest over party or personal gains.

7. Comparison with India's Provincial Structure

India, a country with a vast and diverse population, offers a compelling comparative case study for Pakistan regarding provincial restructuring. Its approach to state formation has historically been more flexible and responsive to sub-national identities, particularly on a linguistic basis.

7.1. Historical Context of State Reorganization in India

Post-independence, India initially largely retained the administrative divisions inherited from the British. However, widespread popular movements, particularly from linguistic communities demanding self-governance, compelled the Indian government to embark on significant state reorganization. The States Reorganisation Act of 1956 was a landmark legislation that restructured Indian states predominantly along linguistic lines. This was a direct response to popular pressure, notably the agitation for a Telugu-speaking state (Andhra Pradesh), which proved that linguistic identity was a powerful force. Since then, India has continued to create new states based on administrative convenience, developmental needs, and sub-regional identities, even if not strictly linguistic. Notable examples include the creation of Chhattisgarh, Uttarakhand, and Jharkhand in 2000, and Telangana in 2014. India currently has 28 states and 8 union territories.

7.2. Constitutional Provisions in India 

The Indian Constitution provides a more flexible mechanism for the creation of new states compared to Pakistan. Article 3 of the Indian Constitution allows for the formation of new states by ordinary law of Parliament (simple majority), rather than requiring a constitutional amendment.

• Article 3. Formation of new States and alteration of areas, boundaries or names of existing States

Parliament may by law

1. form a new State by separation of territory from any State or by uniting two or more States or parts of States or by uniting any territory to a part of any State;
2. increase the area of any State;
3. diminish the area of any State;
4. alter the boundaries of any State;
5. alter the name of any State:

Provided that no Bill for the purpose shall be introduced in either House of Parliament except on the recommendation of the President and unless, where the proposal contained in the Bill affects the area, boundaries or name of any of the States, the Bill has been referred by the President to the Legislature of that State for expressing its views thereon within such period as may be specified in the reference or within such further period as the President may allow and the period so specified or allowed has expired.

8. Key Differences between India and Pakistan

8.1. Simple Majority vs. Constitutional Amendment

The most significant difference is India's requirement for a simple majority in Parliament versus Pakistan's two-thirds majority in both federal houses and the concerned provincial assembly. This makes state formation in India much less politically arduous.

8.2. Referral to State Legislature (Non-Binding)

While the Indian President must refer the Bill to the concerned state legislature for its views, these views are not binding on the Parliament. This means a state assembly cannot veto its own division, unlike in Pakistan. This provision streamlines the process, allowing the central government to proceed even if a provincial government opposes the division.

8.3. Role of Boundary Commissions

India has often utilized independent State Reorganisation Commissions for example, the Fazal Ali Commission in 1953, to study demands for new states based on objective criteria (administrative efficiency, linguistic homogeneity, economic viability) before political decisions are made. This depoliticizes the initial assessment.

8.4. Impact on Governance and Ethnic Harmony

India's experience suggests that creating smaller, more homogeneous states can improve administrative efficiency and service delivery. While not entirely eliminating ethnic tensions, it has largely accommodated linguistic identities within the federal framework, reducing large-scale secessionist movements by providing avenues for sub-national self-governance. For instance, the creation of states like Punjab (for Punjabi speakers) and Haryana (for Hindi speakers) or the formation of northeastern states has largely managed ethnic diversity through administrative recognition.

8.5. Fiscal Decentralization

India's robust fiscal federalism, including mechanisms like the Finance Commission, provides clear guidelines for resource distribution to new states, which helps in managing financial implications.

9. Lessons for Pakistan from Indian Case Study

• Pakistan could consider amending its constitution (Article 239) to simplify the process, potentially by requiring a simpler majority at the federal level or making the provincial assembly's vote advisory rather than mandatory.
• Establishing an independent and expert Boundary Commission (similar to India's State Reorganisation Commissions) is crucial. Such a commission, operating on objective criteria rather than political expediency, could depoliticize the debate and provide evidence-based recommendations for new provincial boundaries.
• Pakistan needs to strengthen its National Finance Commission (NFC) Award mechanism to ensure fair and equitable resource distribution to any newly created provinces, as financial viability is paramount for their success.
• Embracing a more flexible approach to administrative restructuring, recognizing legitimate regional and ethnic demands through constitutional means, might contribute to greater national cohesion in the long run.
• Institutional Reforms Required to Manage the Formation and Governance of New Provinces Effectively: The successful formation and effective governance of new provinces in Pakistan would necessitate a series of critical institutional reforms to avoid exacerbating existing problems or creating new ones.
• Establishing an Independent Boundary/Reorganization Commission
• Objective Assessment: Pakistan desperately needs an independent, expert-led commission, similar to India's State Reorganisation Commission. This body should be composed of constitutional experts, demographers, economists, sociologists, and administrative specialists. Its mandate would be to objectively assess demands for new provinces based on transparent criteria such as:
• Administrative Viability: Can the proposed new province sustain its own administrative apparatus efficiently?
• Financial Sustainability: Is the new province economically viable, or will it become a perpetual drain on federal resources? This includes assessing potential revenue streams and expenditure needs.
• Population Density and Geographic Size: Is the proposed area of suitable size and population for effective governance?
• Ethnic and Linguistic Cohesion: While not the sole criterion, the degree of cultural and linguistic commonality should be considered to address identity-based grievances.
• Public Opinion: Gauge genuine public support, perhaps through localized surveys or referendums, to ensure demands are not merely elite-driven.
• Depoliticization of the Process: An independent commission would depoliticize the initial fact-finding and recommendation phase, providing a neutral, evidence-based report that could then inform political decision-making. This would prevent the process from being entirely beholden to political whims or party interests.
• Strengthening the National Finance Commission (NFC) Award Mechanism
• Equitable Resource Distribution: The NFC Award, which determines the share of federal revenues given to provinces, would become even more critical with new provinces. A robust and fair NFC mechanism is essential to ensure that new provinces receive adequate financial resources to operate and develop, and that the existing provinces are not unfairly disadvantaged.
• Fiscal Autonomy and Sustainability: The NFC should encourage fiscal autonomy in new provinces by incentivizing local revenue generation rather than fostering perpetual dependence on federal transfers. Clear guidelines for asset and liability division between old and new provinces are also necessary. The current NFC award, based on multiple criteria including population, poverty, and revenue collection, needs to be flexible enough to incorporate new units.
• Robust Local Government System
• Decentralization Below Provincial Level: Even with new provinces, the problem of centralized power within provinces can persist. Therefore, establishing a truly empowered, financially autonomous, and democratically elected local government system across all provinces (old and new) is vital. This brings governance closest to the people, addresses micro-level grievances, and acts as a feeder for provincial-level leadership.
• Service Delivery: Local governments are best positioned to deliver basic services like water, sanitation, local education, and healthcare. Strengthening them reduces the burden on provincial administrations and directly improves citizens' lives.
• Capacity Building for New Provincial Administrations
• Bureaucratic Training and Development: New provinces would require a fully functional provincial bureaucracy. This necessitates comprehensive training programs for civil servants, police, and other administrative staff to build their capacity for effective governance, policy implementation, and service delivery in a new provincial setup.
• Institutional Framework Development: Assisting new provinces in developing their legislative frameworks, administrative rules, and financial management systems from scratch would be crucial to ensure a smooth transition and effective functioning.
• Clear Constitutional Guidelines and Amendments
• Clarifying Article 239: While Article 239 provides the framework, its stringent requirements have proven difficult to meet. Parliament might consider amending this article to make the process more feasible, perhaps by introducing a mechanism where the provincial assembly's view is given due consideration but is not a binding veto, allowing for a federal decision after comprehensive review.
• Safeguarding Minorities: Any constitutional amendments or laws creating new provinces should include explicit safeguards for the rights and representation of linguistic and ethnic minorities within the newly formed units to prevent the creation of new marginalized groups.
• Fostering Inter-Provincial Harmony
• Inter-Provincial Coordination: As new provinces emerge, the need for effective inter-provincial coordination mechanisms will increase. A strong Council of Common Interests (CCI) and inter-provincial ministries/bodies would be essential to manage shared resources (e.g., water, energy), coordinate policies, and resolve potential disputes peacefully.
• These institutional reforms are not just procedural; they are fundamental to ensuring that the creation of new provinces genuinely addresses the issues of governance, representation, and development, rather than becoming another source of political friction and instability in Pakistan.
• Public Opinion and Regional Identity Movements be Harnessed for Peaceful Provincial Restructuring
• Public opinion and regional identity movements, while often perceived as sources of division, can be constructively harnessed to facilitate peaceful provincial restructuring by ensuring genuine representation and legitimacy for any changes.
• Creating Peaceful Channels for Expressing Demands
• Inclusive Dialogue Forums: Establish formal and informal platforms for dialogue involving all stakeholders: regional identity movement leaders, mainstream political parties, civil society organizations, academics, and local communities. These forums should allow for open discussion of grievances, aspirations, and the practicalities of new province creation.
• Deliberative Polling/Surveys: Conduct scientifically sound surveys and deliberative polling in the regions demanding new provinces to accurately gauge the depth and breadth of public support. This moves beyond political rhetoric to verifiable public sentiment.
• Regional Commissions of Inquiry: Instead of ad-hoc political committees, establish impartial, expert-led commissions that hold public hearings in the concerned regions. This allows local communities to voice their concerns and demands directly, feeling heard and included in the process.
• Avoiding Ethnic Polarization and Promoting Inclusive Identity
• Emphasizing Administrative and Developmental Benefits: While acknowledging ethnic and linguistic identities, the discourse around new provinces should consistently emphasize the administrative and developmental benefits (improved service delivery, localized planning, economic uplift) for all residents of the proposed area, irrespective of their ethnic or linguistic background.
• Constitutional Safeguards for Minorities: Any legislation for new provinces must explicitly include constitutional safeguards for the rights, representation, and cultural promotion of linguistic and ethnic minorities within the new units. This preempts new forms of marginalization. For example, ensuring proportional representation for minority linguistic groups in the new provincial assembly.
• Promoting Hybrid Identities: Encourage narratives that celebrate both sub-national (e.g., Seraiki, Hazarewal) and national (Pakistani) identities. This acknowledges regional distinctiveness without undermining national unity. Cultural festivals and educational initiatives promoting diversity can play a role.
• Addressing Economic Grievances First: Often, identity demands are intertwined with economic deprivation. Prioritizing development initiatives and addressing socio-economic disparities in marginalized regions can sometimes mitigate the intensity of purely identity-based political movements, or at least channel them into constructive developmental dialogues.
• Role of Civil Society and Regional Political Parties
• Civil Society as Bridge-Builders: Independent civil society organizations can play a crucial role in mediating between regional movements and the state, fostering trust, conducting research, and promoting informed public debate. They can also advocate for the rights of all groups involved.
• Regional Parties as Legitimate Representatives: Recognize regional identity-based political parties as legitimate representatives of their constituents' aspirations. Engage them in meaningful dialogue and negotiation, rather than dismissing their demands as divisive. This brings them into the mainstream political process.
• Educating Public on Constitutional Process: Disseminate clear and accessible information about the constitutional process for creating new provinces, including the challenges and implications. This empowers citizens to engage constructively and counters misinformation.
• Ensuring Genuine Representation vs. Elite Manipulation
• Transparent Decision-Making: All phases of the decision-making process, from commission reports to legislative debates, should be transparent. Public access to information and rationale for decisions is crucial to build trust.
• Preventing Elite Capture: Guard against the possibility of powerful local elites or political families co-opting regional identity movements purely for their own political or economic gain, rather than genuinely representing the aspirations of the masses. Participatory mechanisms should empower grassroots voices.
• Long-Term Vision: Political leadership needs to adopt a long-term vision, understanding that accommodating regional identities through provincial restructuring can be a tool for strengthening federalism and national integration, rather than a threat to the existing order.

By adopting a strategy that is inclusive, transparent, and respectful of diverse identities, Pakistan can transform the potentially contentious issue of new province creation into an opportunity for strengthening its federal system, improving governance, and enhancing national cohesion.

10. Way Forward

Navigating the complex issue of creating new provinces in Pakistan demands a strategic, phased, and politically mature approach. This cannot be a rushed or politically opportunistic endeavor; rather, it requires a national consensus and commitment to long-term stability and development.

10.1. Building Political Consensus Through Dialogue

• All-Parties Conference/Parliamentary Committee: The first step must be to convene an all-parties conference or establish a dedicated parliamentary committee, comprising representatives from all major political parties (federal and provincial), to initiate a structured dialogue on provincial restructuring. This dialogue should aim to build a broad national consensus on the principles, criteria, and process for creating new provinces.
• Depoliticization: The debate needs to be largely depoliticized, moving away from accusatory rhetoric and party-specific gains towards a national interest perspective. This requires political leadership to prioritize the long-term benefits of administrative efficiency and equitable representation over short-term electoral considerations.
• Incentives for Cooperation: Political parties from existing large provinces (especially Punjab and KP) that might resist division could be offered incentives or guarantees regarding future resource distribution and national political representation, to alleviate their fears of diminished power.

10.2. Establishing a Neutral, Expert Commission

• Mandate and Composition: Establishment of an independent, non-political expert commission with a clear mandate to objectively assess all demands for new provinces. The commission should analyze administrative feasibility, financial viability, population demographics, cultural cohesion, and potential impacts.
• Evidence-Based Recommendations: The commission's recommendations should be based purely on evidence and objective criteria, providing a rational basis for political decisions. Their report should be made public to foster transparency and informed debate.
• Public Consultation: The commission should conduct extensive public consultations, including hearings, surveys, and discussions with all affected communities and stakeholders, ensuring that grassroots voices are heard and considered.

10.3. Prioritizing Administrative Needs Over Purely Ethnic Demands

• Balancing Criteria: While ethnic and linguistic identities are legitimate factors, administrative viability and the capacity for effective governance and service delivery should be given significant weight. The goal should be better governance for all citizens, not just the recognition of a specific identity.
• Viability Studies: Thorough studies must be conducted to assess the financial, human resource, and infrastructural requirements of any proposed new province, ensuring it can function independently and efficiently without becoming a perpetual burden on the federal government.

10.4. Phased Implementation

• Gradual Approach: If new provinces are agreed upon, their creation could be implemented in a phased manner. This could involve first establishing a sub-provincial administrative unit with greater autonomy and financial control, akin to a regional government, as a stepping stone. This would allow for testing administrative models and building capacity before full provincial status is granted.
• Focus on Immediate Needs: Initially, focus could be placed on addressing the most pressing administrative and developmental needs of the aspiring regions, demonstrating tangible benefits before a full provincial setup.

10.5. Addressing Financial Implications Upfront

• New NFC Formula: A new NFC Award formula must be devised and agreed upon before new provinces are created, ensuring a fair and transparent mechanism for resource distribution to all provinces, old and new. This would mitigate future inter-provincial disputes.
• Revenue Generation Plans: New provinces must have clear plans for local revenue generation and fiscal responsibility to minimize long-term dependence on federal transfers. This might involve supporting local industry, agriculture, and tourism.
• Asset and Liability Division: A clear and mutually agreed-upon framework for the division of assets (e.g., government buildings, land, infrastructure) and liabilities (e.g., provincial debts) between the original and new provinces is essential to avoid legal battles and financial stalemates.

10.6. Ensuring Inter-Provincial Harmony

• Strong Council of Common Interests (CCI): The CCI, a constitutional body responsible for inter-provincial coordination, needs to be strengthened and made more effective in resolving disputes and fostering cooperation among provinces on shared issues like water, energy, and security.
• Safeguarding Minority Rights: As emphasized, robust constitutional and legal safeguards must be put in place to protect the rights of linguistic and ethnic minorities within any newly formed province, ensuring they are not subjected to new forms of marginalization.
• Promoting National Integration: The discourse surrounding new provinces must always be framed within the context of strengthening the Pakistani federation and promoting national integration by accommodating diversity, rather than being seen as a step towards fragmentation.

In essence, the path to creating new provinces in Pakistan is fraught with challenges but holds immense potential. It requires political foresight, a willingness to compromise, robust institutional mechanisms, and a commitment from all stakeholders to prioritize national cohesion and effective governance over narrow political interests.

3.5-Month Extensive Compulsory Subjects Course for CSS Aspirants

Struggling with CSS Compulsory subjects? Crack Pakistan Affairs, Islamiat, GSA & Current Affairs in just 3.5 months with Howfiv’s expert-led course. New batches every April, August & December! Secure your spot now – WhatsApp 0300-6322446!

Join Now

Advertise with Us

11. Conclusion

The debate surrounding the making of new provinces in Pakistan is not merely an administrative or political novelty; it is a fundamental discourse deeply intertwined with the nation's aspirations for good governance, equitable development, and robust federalism. From the historical context of the contentious One Unit scheme and the empowering spirit of the 18th Amendment to the persistent demands for regions like South Punjab and Hazara, the complexities are immense. The factors driving these demands - the concentration of political power, the administrative inefficiencies of large units, and the unaddressed ethnic and linguistic grievances - are legitimate and reflective of a diverse federation seeking better representation and service delivery.

Moreover, the potential impacts of creating new provinces are significant. On the one hand, they promise closer government, faster decision-making, tailored policies, and the vital recognition of marginalized identities. On the other hand, they entail substantial initial economic costs, the risk of new resource disputes, and the potential for new forms of internal friction if not managed carefully. The prevailing resistance from political parties, largely driven by fears of diluted power and resource loss, highlights the political courage required to undertake such a restructuring.

Drawing insights from India's more flexible approach to state reorganization, which prioritizes administrative convenience and linguistic identity through simpler parliamentary procedures, offers valuable lessons for Pakistan. The contrast underscores the need for Pakistan to revisit its stringent constitutional provisions and consider institutional reforms. The way forward necessitates a strategic, phased, and consensus-driven approach. Crucially, political leadership should foster a culture of dialogue and compromise, prioritizing national interest over narrow party gains, and actively harnessing public opinion and regional identity movements through peaceful and inclusive channels.

Expected Questions for CSS and PMS Examinations

• "The constitutional framework for creating new provinces in Pakistan, as outlined in Article 239 of the 1973 Constitution, presents significant political hurdles." Discuss the provisions and analyze why achieving the necessary consensus has proven so challenging.
• Analyze the multifaceted political, administrative, and ethnic factors that drive the persistent demands for new provinces in Pakistan. How do these factors interact to fuel regional movements?
• "The creation of new provinces can significantly improve governance and service delivery in Pakistan." Discuss the merits of this argument, providing concrete examples of how decentralized administration could benefit citizens.
• Critically discuss the merits and demerits of dividing Punjab into smaller administrative units, with a specific focus on the demand for South Punjab province. How would such a division impact the national political landscape?
• What are the primary arguments in favor of creating Hazara province from Khyber Pakhtunkhwa? Analyze the historical, cultural, and administrative justifications behind this demand.
• "New provinces can be a tool to address long-standing ethnic and linguistic grievances, thereby strengthening national integration." Discuss this statement, examining the potential of provincial restructuring to accommodate diverse identities in Pakistan.
• Evaluate the role and impact of the 18th Amendment in the debate over new provinces. Did its devolution of power reduce or intensify the demands for further provincial restructuring?
• Analyze the potential economic impact, both initial and long-term, of forming new provinces in Pakistan. What financial challenges and opportunities would such a restructuring present?
• Despite widespread demands, why has there been significant resistance from major political parties to the creation of new provinces in Pakistan? Discuss the underlying political and power dynamics.
• Compare and contrast Pakistan’s provincial structure and the flexibility of its re-demarcation process with that of India. What lessons can Pakistan draw from India's experience in managing federal diversity?
• What institutional reforms are indispensable to effectively manage the process of forming new provinces and ensuring their stable and effective governance in Pakistan?
• "Public opinion and regional identity movements, if properly harnessed, can facilitate peaceful provincial restructuring." Discuss strategies for engaging these forces constructively to achieve national consensus and promote harmony in the context of new province creation.