Governance: Back to British Raj

By Amir Zia
The News On Sunday
July 24, 2011

The elected local governments flourished mainly under the military rule, while the democratic governments maintain a record of stifling them. The affection of military rulers toward the local governments stems from the fact that they wanted to alienate the mainstream political parties. The democratic governments abhor the local governments and in most cases chose to run them through hand-picked lackeys as they could never truly digest the concepts of sharing and devolution of powers.


On July 13, the Sindh Assembly restored the time-tested legacy of British Raj, known in our part of the world as the “commissionerate system.” In what may appear as a befitting tribute democracy La Pakistani-style, the Sindh Assembly lawmakers belonging to the ruling Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) and its allies passed three controversial ordinances by a simple majority in barely 15 minutes, which repealed the former military ruler Pervez Musharraf’s Local Government Order of 2001 and amended the Sindh Land Revenue Act of 1967. One of the bills revived the British-era Police Act of 1861 by scarping the Police Order 2002.

The move is being described by the government loyalists as a victory for the democratic forces, though it is all set to increase polarisation and division in the ethnically diverse and volatile province of Sindh, which drifts from one crisis to another.

The PPP Sindh leaders claim that the Musharraf-era system remained alien to both masses and the administration and they wanted the old system back. Their rivals say that it gave powers to the grassroots level.

The government’s move first came in the form of Ordinances soon after its one-time ally, the Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM), which supports the Musharraf-era concept of local governments, quit the treasury benches and its Sindh Governor tendered his resignation. Within four days of the passing of the controversial ordinances, which restored the commissionerate system, the government got them passed in the assembly despite the bitter opposition of the MQM.

Although Sindh Governor Dr Ishrat-ul Ibad resumed his responsibilities on July 18, indicating a thaw in the relations of these two parties, the brewing crisis over the commissionerate system appears far from over.

As the MQM continues to sit on the opposition benches despite having its man as Sindh Governor, one of its leaders, Wasay Jalil, says that his party will continue its campaign for the restoration of Musharraf-era local government system. “We say that if there were flaws in the 2001 Local Government Order, they should be removed,” he says. “We are demanding this not just for Karachi, or Sindh, but for the entire country. Instead of living in the 21st century, the vested interests want to drag us back to the 19th century. We only harm ourselves by repeating the past experiments.”

Sindh remains the only province where the Musharraf-era system has been scrapped altogether by the elected representatives. In Punjab and Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, nominal changes have been brought in this system through executive ordinances.

Fahim Zaman Khan, a former PPP-nominated mayor of Karachi, who now leads a civil rights group, says that Sindh has reverted back to the 1979 Local Government Ordinance, while other provinces have made only symbolic changes, including restoring the old administrative titles. “Under the constitution, the local government is a provincial subject. The Musharraf government took the political, administrative and financial powers away from provinces and gave them to districts in the name of devolution and decentralisation. However, the military government made no attempt to transfer powers from the centre to the provinces. The step was taken with bad intentions from the day one,” Khan said.

“It was akin to Ayub Khan’s Basic Democracy, which was aimed at weakening political parties and dividing the people on the basis of ethnicity, clans, tribes and regions. Musharraf followed the footsteps of Ayub in his bid to eliminate the provincial authority.”

The traditional political forces viewed the 2001 local government system as full of anomalies and contradictions compared with the Municipal Act of 1848, enforced by the British East India Company.

Under the Musharraf’s planned system, police had to report to the elected nazim, but this part of the reform was never implemented, which, for many of its critics, led to the police becoming a “monster”.

Under the British Raj, they say, responsibilities and duties of police remained clear. For instance, police were not allowed to open fire without orders from the magistrate, but Musharraf gave this power to the police force itself.

Taj Haider, a senior PPP leader, says that Musharraf’s ordinance also remained in conflict with the constitution. “The system was full of loopholes… indirectly elected people were given vast financial powers.”

He says the PPP reverted back to the Ziaul Haq-introduced 1979 ordinance because it was closer to the spirit of constitution compared with the one introduced by Musharraf, which could not be reformed.

However, in line with its policy, the government ensured the separation of administrative and judicial powers, he says, adding that the recently resorted system will be improved further. “The government has setup a task force to decide whether commissioners, deputy commissioners and other officials report to chief secretary or the elected representative.”

Analysts say that the traditional political forces, especially belonging to the rural areas, felt that the powers of ministers were slashed under the Musharraf’s local body system. That was the reason many influential feudal lords chose to get themselves or their relatives elected as nazims rather than going for the provincial or national assemblies.

Danial Aziz, a former federal minister, who is leading a campaign for the devolution of powers and restoration of the 2001 local body system, says that vested interests are opposed to it because Musharraf’s system loosened their grip on the power structure. “These so-called democratic politicians, who run parties as their fiefdoms and nominate their heirs, saw a dark future because power was being transferred to the grassroots level.”

“They use deputy commissioners and other bureaucrats as their political agents. Obviously, they won’t like institution-building and decentralisation of power where people take ownership and hold elected representatives accountable,” Aziz says.

Sardar Ahmed, a senior MQM leader and a former bureaucrat, says the commissionerate system fitted the needs of colonial times and undemocratic rule, but enforcing the 19th century system in this day and age remains a cruel joke. “Only local representatives remain in a position to address problems of their people. It is not the job of members of the national or provincial assemblies or ministers to do this. The PPP never reconciled with the concept of transferring powers at grassroots.”

Differences over the local body system remained the main bone of contention between the PPP and the MQM even when they were allies. But PPP officials say that they can work together even with difference of opinion on this vital issue.

The elected local governments flourished mainly under the military rule in Pakistan, while the democratic governments maintain a record of stifling them. The affection of military rulers toward the local governments stems from the fact they wanted to alienate the mainstream political parties and create an alternate. The democratic governments abhor the local governments and in most cases chose to run them through hand-picked lackeys as they could never truly digest the concepts of sharing and devolution of powers.

One can call it the absurdity of Pakistani politics that our ruling elite keeps reopening and revisiting issues, which should have been decided long ago. The PPP government’s attempt to address the problems of 21st century Pakistan with the 19th century system remains ironic in itself, underlining the intellectual bankruptcy of our times in which past not just continues to hound us but seen as a panacea of all our ills. Pakistan, indeed, is set for more testing times.