Pakistan People’s Party Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari Friday said the 18th Amendment is the only way forward to ensure the rights of the smaller provinces.
Speaking at a dialogue on ’18th Amendment and Federalism’ at the Lahore University of Management Sciences (LUMS), Bilawal said Pakistan is a country where people from diverse backgrounds live and therefore federalism is the system which suits it the best. “We tried One Unit as well but unfortunately we lost half of our country,” he said.
The PPP chairman said after the dictatorship of General Ziaul Haq, Pakistan’s constitution had the name of a dictator in it. “So it was in 2010 when we achieved consensus and all democratic parties played role in the passage of the 18th Amendment,” he said. “No one else could do it as lots of political parties and dictators tried to reach that consensus even through handpicked parliaments,” he said, adding that along with 1973, year 2008 was also a traumatic year for Pakistan. “In 2008, the entire country was facing terrorist attacks and my own mother was assassinated. I think such traumas encouraged political parties to sit together and reach a consensus,” he said.
When asked about the most important changes that the 18th Amendment brought, he said the right to education, right to information and the right to fair trial were not part of constitutional rights until the amendment was introduced.” Restoration of parliamentary supremacy, along with that the 18th Amendment, offered a fairer system of appointing judges in Pakistan which included a parliamentary committee, with members of the government and opposition and reputable members of bar associations,” he said. Bilawal said the passing of 19th Amendment was “frankly caused by the judiciary blackmailing the government, as had we not done that, the entire 18th Amendment would have been called into question.”
“This unfortunately does not move us far away enough from a judicial system of appointment that forms a judiciary, of the judiciary, by the judiciary. It’s a fallacy that the bureaucrats in Islamabad are in a better position than those that are closer to the people that elect them. Can we say that labour rights, education and healthcare pre-18th Amendment were in a better position than today,” he asked.
According to the PPP chairman, the complete devolution was supposed to get into effect by 2015. “But, we saw an apathetic government at the time … and now we see a hostile government,” he said. “No matter what the federal government wants, they cannot go after your education and your healthcare. It is a responsibility of the provincial governments now,” he said. “We can argue about the powers and scope and how much local governments should have … there is absolutely room for improvement in Sindh as well, but I would just like to state that the only province in the country with a real local government in place is the Sindh province,” he said.
“There is a fantastic mix of cultures and ethnicities, languages, religions and a multitude of people that make up Pakistan and the Pakistani identity,” Bilawal said. “For me, the Pakistani identity is just as much as Muhammad Ali Jinnah and his struggle for Pakistan, as much as the Indus Valley Civilization that stretched from the coast to the northern areas of Pakistan. Somebody in Gilgit Baltistan or Skardu is just as much a Pakistani as I am and the people in Gwadar are,” he said.
Bilawal called for cooperation and facilitation between the provinces and the federation. “The conflict between the provincial and federal government about the appointment of IGP … in that case we have a short order from the Supreme Court of Pakistan that says that this is power of the provinces that allows us to go forward with the process. From the same quote, we have a long order that says no, it is the joint responsibility of both governments. Such contradictions create confusions,” he said.
When asked about student-led initiatives, student unions and politicisation of the campuses, he said, “We as a civilization and people used to fight over everything and then we decided to have elections and elect representatives to avoid disputes and not to fight as much … and this is a democratic theory. So, historically it is a dispute resolution mechanism,” he added.
