The creation of more provinces is a persistent demand from some circles in Pakistan. How do you see the creation of more provinces in Pakistan; as beneficial or harmful for the people? Explain your views with solid justification.

Introduction

Alexis de Tocqueville observed in Democracy in America that "town meetings are to liberty what primary schools are to science; they bring it within the people's reach." Government becomes meaningful to citizens when it is close to them. This is the core argument of those who demand more provinces in Pakistan: that a few very large provinces keep power far from the people. Opponents warn that redrawing provincial maps could inflame ethnic rivalries and burden the economy. The answer, I argue, is that new provinces can benefit the people if they are created on administrative grounds, through the Constitution and by consensus, and not on ethnic lines.

Overview and history

Pakistan began in 1947 with the provinces of East Bengal, Punjab, Sindh and NWFP, the Chief Commissioner's province of Balochistan, and princely states such as Bahawalpur, Khairpur and Kalat. In 1955 the western provinces and states were merged into One Unit, which was dissolved in 1970, when the four provinces of today were restored and Bahawalpur was absorbed into Punjab. Since then, demands have arisen for a South Punjab (Saraiki) province, the restoration of Bahawalpur province, a Hazara province in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and, at times, divisions of Sindh. The Punjab Assembly passed resolutions on 9 May 2012 supporting a Bahawalpur province and a South Punjab province, and the Punjab government set up a South Punjab Secretariat in 2020. Yet no new province has been created, because Article 239(4) of the Constitution requires the consent of the affected provincial assembly.

Benefits of creating more provinces

1. Governance closer to the people.

In very large provinces, a citizen in Rajanpur or Rahim Yar Khan must look to Lahore, hundreds of kilometres away, for decisions on jobs, development and justice. Smaller provinces would bring the provincial capital, secretariat and high court closer, cutting travel, cost and delay. (Reference: Pakistan Bureau of Statistics, 7th Population and Housing Census 2023, Punjab population about 127.7 million.)

2. More balanced development.

Development spending tends to concentrate around provincial capitals. A separate province for under-developed regions such as South Punjab would let them set their own priorities and budgets for roads, schools and hospitals. (Reference: UNDP Pakistan, National Human Development Report 2020, which shows wide gaps in human development between districts.)

3. Administrative efficiency.

Punjab alone has more people than Germany or the United Kingdom. Managing such numbers from one capital stretches the provincial bureaucracy; smaller units allow closer supervision and faster decisions. (Reference: 2023 Census, PBS; United Nations World Population Prospects for country comparisons.)

4. Fairer sharing of resources.

Under the National Finance Commission, money flows to provinces, not regions within them. A new province would receive its own share of the divisible pool directly, instead of depending on decisions in a distant capital. (Reference: Article 160, Constitution of Pakistan; 7th NFC Award, 2009.)

5. Reducing the dominance of one province.

Punjab holds more than half of Pakistan's population and most National Assembly seats, which smaller provinces see as domination of the federation. Dividing Punjab would create a more balanced federation and ease inter-provincial mistrust. (Reference: Election Commission of Pakistan, 2023 delimitation; National Assembly seat allocation under Article 51.)

6. Recognising regional identity and grievances.

Regions such as Saraiki-speaking South Punjab and Hazara have long felt their language, culture and needs are ignored. A province can give a peaceful, constitutional outlet to such feelings. (Reference: the Hazara province movement, which saw protesters killed in Abbottabad in April 2010 after the renaming of NWFP, as reported by Dawn.)

7. Stronger democracy and accountability.

More provinces mean more assemblies and more elected representatives answerable to a smaller population, making it easier for voters to hold leaders to account. (Reference: Article 106 of the Constitution on provincial assemblies; Article 140A on local government, added by the 18th Amendment, 2010.)

8. Lessons from other federations.

Many federations have redrawn internal units to improve governance. India created new states such as Uttarakhand, Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh in 2000 and Telangana in 2014; most other large federations also have far more units than Pakistan's four. (Reference: States Reorganisation Act 1956 and later Acts of the Parliament of India; Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act 2014.)

Harms and risks of creating more provinces

1. Risk of ethnic fragmentation.

If provinces are carved on linguistic or ethnic lines, they may sharpen identity politics and create new minorities inside each new province, inviting further conflict. (Reference: the experience of Nigeria, which grew from three regions at independence in 1960 to 36 states by 1996, with recurring ethnic and religious tensions.)

2. Constitutional hurdles.

Changing a province's boundaries needs a two-thirds majority in each house of Parliament and a two-thirds majority of the assembly of the province concerned. Without broad agreement, the process can create deadlock and bitterness. (Reference: Article 239(4), Constitution of Pakistan.)

3. High financial cost.

A new province needs a governor, chief minister, cabinet, assembly, high court, secretariat and police headquarters. For a country with a large fiscal deficit, these costs are heavy. (Reference: Ministry of Finance, Pakistan Economic Survey 2023–24, on the fiscal deficit and debt.)

4. Disputes over water, NFC shares and assets.

New provinces would require renegotiating the water accord, the NFC formula and the division of government assets and debts, each of which is already contentious. (Reference: Water Apportionment Accord 1991; Indus River System Authority Act 1992; 7th NFC Award 2009.)

5. Disturbing the balance in the Senate.

Each province has equal representation in the Senate. New provinces would change this balance, which smaller provinces such as Balochistan may see as diluting their voice. (Reference: Article 59, Constitution of Pakistan, which gives each province 23 Senate seats.)

6. Capture by local elites.

Without strong institutions, a new province may simply give local landlords and political families more offices and patronage, without benefiting ordinary people. (Reference: research on elite capture in Pakistan, e.g. UNDP Pakistan National Human Development Report 2020 on privileges of the elite.)

7. A chain of further demands.

Creating one province may trigger demands for others, including divisions of Sindh that Sindhi parties strongly oppose, threatening national harmony. (Reference: the long-standing opposition of Sindhi nationalist and mainstream parties to any division of Sindh, widely reported in the national press, e.g. Dawn.)

8. Diverting attention from real reform.

The real problems of service delivery, corruption and weak local governments can be solved without new provinces. Focusing on maps may delay reforms such as empowered local governments. (Reference: Article 140A, Constitution of Pakistan, which requires each province to devolve political, administrative and financial authority to local governments.)

My stance with justification

On balance, I see the creation of more provinces as beneficial for the people if it is done on administrative grounds, through the constitutional process and with broad consensus, and harmful if it is driven by ethnic politics or short-term electoral gain. The strongest case is South Punjab and Bahawalpur, where the Punjab Assembly itself has supported new provinces and where development gaps are documented. Such a province should have its own share of the NFC, a fair water allocation and a clear plan for sharing assets, and its creation should go together with strong local governments under Article 140A, so that power truly reaches the district and the union council.

Conclusion

Abraham Lincoln warned in his 1858 "House Divided" speech that "a house divided against itself cannot stand." The aim of creating new provinces must therefore be to bring government closer to the people, not to divide the nation. If Pakistan redraws its provincial map by consent, on administrative logic and with fair arrangements for resources, new provinces can strengthen both the federation and the citizen. If it does so under pressure, along ethnic lines and without a financial plan, the cure may prove worse than the disease.