Crisis of Implementation

 by

Dr Shahid Siddiqui

http://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2011/09/crisis-of-implementation/

 18 September, 2011

 History of education in Pakistan is filled with ambitious promises, half baked educational plans, and poor implementation mechanisms. Besides other important factors a major reason of failure in education is the absence of political will. This is closely linked with the lack of prioritisation of education in terms of funding, monitoring and accountability.

A quick glance at the educational reforms in Pakistan tells us that most of the reforms were initiated on the whims of individual rulers, supported by donor agencies, without much thinking and planning. There has always been a centrist mindset of the elite ruling class that concentrated all rights in the centre and dissenting voices from the periphery were suppressed. Usually, this suppression was done in the name of patriotism. The peripheral forces that raised voices for their economic, political, linguistic, and cultural rights were dubbed as traitors and anti-state agents.

One prominent example is the reaction of the centrist powers towards the rightful demand of people of East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) to declared Bangla as one of the national languages of Pakistan. The opposition to this demand led to a lot of bloodshed and played an important role in widening the rifts between the two wings of the country.

Pakistan has been ruled by the military dictatorship for most of the time that called for a centrist mindset and prompted the idea of a unitary state. The 1973 constitution that was prepared by consensus of major political parties had certain welcome provisions for provincial autonomy. Unfortunately, these provisions were not implemented according to the spirit of the constitution. For instance, Council of Common Interest which could be a very important means of maintaining inter-provincial harmony was not utilised effectively. This is evident from the fact that since 1973 only eleven meetings of this council have been called.

With this background of non-participatory and centre based approach, 18th amendment was seen as a welcome step. It had its roots in the Charter of Democracy. On 10th April 2009 the National assembly and on 29th April 2009 the Senate passed resolution to form a committee to reform the constitution.

To develop a broad-based consensus, the committee invited citizens’ suggestions and political parties’ position by 10th August, 2009. To thrash out details and incorporate different points of view, the committee worked hard and held 77 meeting, consuming 385 hours in deliberations. This was followed by the Implementation Commission detailed report that was completed in one year. The distinct part of the whole process was that all the significant political parties were part of this process and thus owned the final report. The central theme of the 18th Amendment was devolution of a number of ministries to the provinces. Thus, it was supposed to be a big step forward to meet the popular demand of provincial autonomy.

Strangely enough as the time passed one could see that there is reluctance on the part of decision makers to implement the 18th Amendment in letter and spirit. One glaring example is Education which was one of those subjects that were devolved to the provinces in the 18th Amendment. There are certain instances that suggest that the government has already started rolling back the Amendment.

One example is the National Commission for Human Development (NCHD). In 18th Amendment, the commission was devolved. Quite contrary to this, no step was taken to implement this decision and as a result the NCHD is still working. Similarly, the National Vocational and Teacher Training Commission was also devolved in the 18th Amendment. The commission is resurrected again, with its headquarter based in Islamabad.

Another example is that of Higher Education Commission (HEC). After the 18th Amendment, certain legislation was requited for restructuring HEC. No step has been taken towards this direction.

These examples are sufficient to realise that the government is not serious in implementing the provision in true letter and spirit. This has been done either by procrastinating the process, defying the provisions or misinterpreting and misconstruing them. The repercussions of this roll back could be serious and far-reaching. The perceived roll back would suggest that the long deliberations of the committee on the 18th Amendemnt and the Implementation Commission were exercises in futility. This would mean negating the tremendous efforts and hard work of all the representatives of national political parties for two years. This would also mean putting the credibility of the government at stake.

A great legal question is whether that we are violating the constitutional provisions by not acting upon them. As mentioned before, the 18th Amendment was an outstanding example of national unity as all the political parties signed the document and it was passed by the National Assembly and the Senate. Now if we recoil from the agreed points which have also become the part of the constitution, the small provinces would be disillusioned.

It is high time to take a major decision regarding 18th Amendment. If we are serious about its implementation, let’s act upon the constitutional provisions in letter and spirit. This would mean a step towards realising a genuine demand of provinces for empowerment and autonomy. The other option is to sacrifice the far-reaching impact of 18th amendment for the sake of short term political benefits. The decision in either way is going to play an important role in determining the future direction of Pakistan.

The writer is Professor & Director of Centre for Humanities and Social Sciences at Lahore School of Economics and author of Rethinking Education in Pakistan. He may be contacted at shahidksiddiqui@yahoo.com

Democracy, diversity, and devolution

by

Dr Shahid Siddiqui

Pakistan Today, 12 June, 2011

Diversity has always been considered a hazard by imperialist powers as they believed in the positional superiority of their culture. They would consider the colonised and marginalised groups as others who were undeveloped savages. They would like to civilise and develop them by conquering them This melting pot approach denies all kinds of diversities by refuting their legitimacy. Such a monolithic approach erodes individual liberty and identity and leads to a despotic environment.

Why is it important to recognise diversities in a society? It is tantamount to recognising different perspectives and viewpoints. A society may have social, ethnic, political, economic, linguistic, and educational diversities. In a hegemonic setup, these diversities are not only ignored but deliberately stigmatised and excluded from the main discourse. A true democratic system not only recognises diversities but also provides spaces to celebrate them. In Pakistan, we have seen prolonged spans of military rule where one person becomes the source of power and alternative perspectives are snubbed as they are considered to be potential threats to power concentrated in the centre.

To keep the power concentration in the centre, the centre strategically maligns the peripheral identities by dubbing them incompetent and unpatriotic. In Pakistan, we have witnessed this centrist mindset during many regimes. In all the martial law regimes in Pakistan, politicians were perceived by the dictators as corrupt and incompetent. The voices of dissent were suppressed by declaring them traitors and punishing them. One elected Prime Minister, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, was deposed and hanged to death by Zia-ul-Haq on the pretext of a murder case which was no more than a judicial farce. Another, Nawaz Sharif, was deposed, handcuffed, and put in Attock fort in solitary confinement and was later sent into forced exile.

In Pakistan, dictators have exploited the notion of oneness: one religion, and one language. After independence, Bengalis demanded Bangla to be declared as a national language together with Urdu since it was spoken by a majority. Unfortunately, this legitimate demand was denied as it would not go with the ‘oneness’ theory. It was declared that Urdu would be the only national language of the country. Even though there were numerous examples of countries with multiple national languages but the myopic administration did not pay heed to them.

In Pakistan, a powerful centre has either ignored or undermined the role and rights of provinces. The legitimate voices from provinces, especially smaller provinces, were suppressed by using coercive means. A typical response to the popular demand of rights has been that the provinces do not have the financial capacity and human resources to carry out the responsibilities. This perception could have some element of truth but the question is that how can provinces build their capacity if they are not given a chance to run their own affairs.

How can diversity be valued? A clear answer to this question is a true democracy that believes in sharing power with all the stakeholders. Interestingly, in Pakistan, two military dictators announced local governments apparently showing that they were ready to dilute the power of the centre but their political intentions were highly questionable. Thus rhetoric of delegating powers to lower levels happened to be counterproductive in essence.

A serious effort in this regard came in the form of the 18th Amendment that completes the third angle of the triangle: democracy, diversity and devolution. As a result of the Amendment, a number of ministries are to be devolved to the provinces. These rights are coupled with responsibilities, mainly of a financial nature where provinces will have to generate fundings for development projects. This very important juncture came sixty four years after independence where all the major political parties unanimously passed the resolution.

The forces of change are always challenged by the forces of resistance. So is the case with the 18th Amendment where status quo forces are trying to dampen this historical initiative. A major political party has left the membership of implementation committee while PML(Q), which is not very enthusiastic about devolution, managed to get the membership of the commission. The deadline of 30th June, 2011 is fast approaching. A common observation is the lukewarm attitude of the federal government. Similarly provinces, with the exception of KP, are not very enthusiastic. This situation is raising an important concern. Are we going to lose this hard-earned opportunity of devolving powers to provinces? Hopefully, this won’t happen and the hard work of implantation commission will lead to the empowerment of provinces, the ideal way of celebrating diversity.

The writer is Professor & Director of Centre for Humanities and Social Sciences at Lahore School of Economics and author of Rethinking Education in Pakistan. He can be reached at shahidksiddiqui@yahoo.com

Devolution and beyond

By

Dr Shahid Siddiqui

Since independence Pakistan has been mostly ruled by the such civil and military governments that were pro-centric in their approach and were not very keen to listening to the justified demands of the provinces. The 1971 war that led to the separation of East Pakistan and emergence of Bangladesh was not triggered instantly; rather it had a long history of a sense of deprivation by the people of East Pakistan. Similarly in 1955 West Pakistan all the provinces and states were bracketed together and were given the name of One Unit. This decision prompted a prolonged movement that successfully ended on 1 July 1970 when the provincial status of four federating units was restored after abolishing the one unit.

The provincial autonomy remained there as a popular demand and became an integral part of political discourse. Some major political parties of the country supported vociferously this demand. A concrete step towards this direction was when two major parties PPP and PML (N) signed the Charter of Democracy on 14th May 2006 that promised provincial autonomy. A committee, headed by Senator Mian Raza Rabbani, was formed in April 2009 for the constitutional reforms. The committee worked for about a year and, as a result of seventy seven meetings, prepared a comprehensive document. The 18th amendment was approved by the national assembly and the senate and was formally signed by the Presidents of Pakistan on 19th April, 2010.
Though drafting the 18th amendment was considered as an important achievement, and rightly so, but the real challenge was to implement the constitutional reforms. For this purpose an implementation commission was constituted that was headed by Mr Raza Rabbini. The eight- member multi party Implementation Commission, held fifty meetings ,i.e. at least one meeting a week to sort out the dynamics of devolution. Realizing the potential challenge of financial implications a committee was set up to look into the financial implications involved in the devolution process. The committee held six separate meetings. Four meetings of the Commission were presided over by the Prime Minister and in one all the chief ministers participated.

If we look at the performance of Implementation Commission the Commission has devolved ten ministries, nine selected functions of six federal ministries that fall under the abolished Concurrent list. It has been recommended to create a Capital Administration and Development Division after the approval of the Federal Cabinet. The National Economic Council has been notified according to new composition defined by the Constitution. The Federal Board of Revenue has been advised that no taxation proposal is made about a subject that is not included in the Federal Legislative List or was part of omitted Concurrent Legislative List. During its work the Commission ensured that any legislation, activity or function, if had to be retained in the federal government had to be supported from one or the other entry in the federal legislative list or any article of the Constitution

One genuine fear was that certain employees of devolved ministries might lose their jobs. This luckily didn’t happen as none of the employee was laid off or retrenched. Rather the employees of these ministries working in the main secretariats were adjusted in other federal ministries. The Election Commission of Pakistan was informed about the new mechanism of the appointments of the Commission members. After clause by clause review relevant offices and authorities were informed about necessary action. The good news for the provinces is that office buildings, furniture, fixture, equipment and transport in use of devolved ministries will be handed over to the provinces. Inventories of moveable and immovable assets are being maintained for this purpose.

The process of devolution cannot take place unless the bureaucracy is taken on board. The Commission, realizing the central role of bureaucracy, sensitized the civil servants on the consequences of the 18th Amendment at a meeting with the Federal secretaries. The hard work put into the drafting of 18th amendment and then implementation process met various hiccups but consensus lasted for almost two years. However, some recent developments are casting shadows on the future of this historic initiative. The first set back was the decision of PML (N) to pull out from the Commission. As a result Senator Ishaq Dar, who was chairman of the Implementation Commission, resigned. PML (N)’s pulling out could be significant as it is the ruling party in the largest province of Pakistan. The other political development that could have a negative effect on the working of Implementation commission is PML (Q)’s coalition with the People’s party. This development had a serious repercussion as Senator Raza Rabbani, under protest, resigned from the position of as Federal minister.

The Civil society and the thinking citizens of Pakistan are watching these developments closely and carefully. Will the implementation of the 18th Amendment be completed July 1, 2011? If it happens on the given date, it will coincide with the date of abolition of One Unit and restoration of provincial status to the federating units. In such case I July should be celebrated every year as provincial autonomy day.

The writer is Professor & Director of Centre for Humanities and Social Sciences at Lahore School of Economics and author of Rethinking Education in Pakistan.

E-mail:shahidksiddiqui@yahoo.com

Rethinking social sector

Rethinking social sector after the 18th Amendment

Roundtable on 17 March

Associated Press Service

ISLAMABAD: Participants of roundtable on ‘Rethinking social sector after the 18th Amendment’appreciating the Parliament for historic democratic engineering in the shape of 18th Constitutional Amendment exhorted the need for holding hand in transition phase besides creating effectiveoperational mechanisms. Members of political, civil and academic society from all over the country participated in day-long deliberations arranged by the Centre for Civic Education and Forum of Federations.Speakers said,the Parliament has made the Constitution pro-society and we need out of box solutions to make this devolution successful. “Social investments in Pakistan are already meager and the Implementation processes must clarify the cost of devolution and who is going to foot the bill for devolved ministries,” demanded the participants.Begum Shahnaz Wazir Ali, member National Assembly endorsed the need for nationwide constitutional literacy as the 18th Amendment has changed the centralist state to be a real federation. “Inclusion of Right to Education as judiciable fundamental right requires corresponding legal regime,policies and action plans,” she emphasized. Farahnaz Isphahani of Pakistan Peoples’ Party said we have to come out
of colonial mindset of retaining centralized powers and called for trusting the abilities of provinces to deliver social services. She acknowledged the challenges and described the way forward bit bumpy to retain power. Bushra Gohar of Awami National Party recalling the 18th Amendment lauded democratic consensus in a divided society where balkanization was being feared but the parliament has offered hope. “To make the devolution meaningful and provide better services, the provinces must take immediate steps to establish functional local governments,” demanded the participants saying we have to involve people in decision making. Pakistan had been a graveyard of federally planned and provincially executed non-functional projects and plans. “Even out of the low social investments most of the times the development budgets remained unutilized. Time has come to reform civil service with
futuristic vision so that their role in not reduced to ‘Fire-fighters.’ Allies of status quo will make the road to devolution bumpy and democratic handholding will be required in terms of sharing resources and enhancing capacities and competences,” many participants highlighted. As a nation we will require fiscal prudence and increased social spending as the provincial share in the National Finance Commission Award has increased, they have fifty percent control over natural resources, got General Sales Tax on services, duties in respect of succession of property, estate duty,capital gains and provincial powers to raise loans.The participant criticized ‘crowded parking’ of various institutions and mandates at the Cabinet division,Rethinking social sector after the 18th Amendment Economic Affairs Division, Inter Provincial Coordination Ministry and the Planning Division. Higher Education Commission (HEC) related controversies figured prominently as there were proponents of a federal level commission and devolutionists who presented their arguments. Vice chancellor of University of Gujrat, Dr. Nizamuddin stressed the need of clear operational and institutional
mechanisms to provide better services. Vice Chancellor of Quaid-i-Azam University, Dr.Masoom Yasinzai said the universities in the Federal capital must not be left at the mercy of newly created division to look after the issues and institutions in Islamabad. Pro-devolution Dr. Khadim Hussain and Dr. Ijaz Khan said, “Devolution after 18th Amendment is a reality and proposed that the future provincial arrangements shall neither be bureaucratic nor technocratic, rather democratic and academically independent.”Dr. Nasser Ali Khan, Farmanullah Anjum, Dr. Shahid Siddiqui, Dr. Rasul Bakash Rais,Prof. Shabir Shah,Zafar Ismail, Dr. Farzana Bari, Amjad Bhatti also shared their views on different aspects
of post 18th Amendment devolution and corresponding challenges in social sector. “Capacity does not grow in Islamabad alone,” said Dr. Fauzia Saeed. Dr. Syed Jaffar Ahmed said timeframe forimplementation shall be extended as there will be teething problems.The speakers complained about lack of information and ostensible communication gaps
between theImplementation Commission, devolved ministries and the relevant stakeholders. The Commission must arrange hearings with relevant stakeholders and involve experts as mentioned in its terms of reference,they demanded. The speakers also demanded to mainstream Federally AdministeredTribal Areas(FATA). To set the context, Zafarullah Khan, executive Director Centre for Civic Education made a presentation on Understanding the Constitution, Federalism and the 18th Amendment. “In order to make sense about
the 18th amendment we need to look at the set of policy recommendations and notes of reiterations as pending politics along with the actual amendment,” he said and urged to use experiences of 28 federations in the world.Associated Press Service