There is an opinion that some of the subjects handed over to the provinces in 18th Amendment, should be handed over back to the centre. Do you agree: if yes then what subjects and why? If not, then why?

Introduction

K. C. Wheare described federalism as a system in which the general and regional governments are each "within a sphere, co-ordinate and independent." The 18th Amendment (2010) brought Pakistan closer to this ideal by abolishing the Concurrent List and transferring subjects such as education, health, labour, population welfare and environment to the provinces. Since then, some have argued that certain subjects, especially education and health, should return to the centre for national uniformity. This answer takes the position that the devolved subjects should not be handed back, but that a few areas need stronger national standards and coordination through existing constitutional mechanisms such as the CCI and Part II of the Federal Legislative List.

Overview

The 18th Amendment, passed unanimously in April 2010, abolished the Concurrent List of 47 subjects. An Implementation Commission devolved 17 federal ministries to the provinces by June 2011, including education, health, population welfare, labour, environment, social welfare, culture, tourism and Zakat. Some functions, such as standards in higher education and research and inter-provincial matters, were placed in Part II of the Federal Legislative List, under the oversight of the Council of Common Interests. Criticism of devolution grew after 2018, particularly regarding curriculum, health coordination during COVID-19 and federal finances.

Position: no rollback, but national coordination in a few areas

Returning subjects to the centre would undo a hard-won national consensus and revive the grievances that the amendment sought to address. The problems blamed on devolution, such as uneven quality, weak capacity and poor coordination, are better solved by building provincial capacity, setting national minimum standards through the CCI and improving fiscal arrangements. Selected functions can be coordinated nationally without changing the constitutional division of subjects.

Why the devolved subjects should not be handed back

1. The federal compact and consensus.

The 18th Amendment was passed unanimously by all parties after a year of negotiation in a committee representing every party. Reopening it would break that consensus and could unsettle the federation. (Reference: Report of the Parliamentary Committee on Constitutional Reforms, March 2010.)

2. Proximity and accountability.

Education, health and social services are best managed close to the people, where provincial and local governments can be held accountable for results. (Reference: World Bank, World Development Report 2004: Making Services Work for Poor People.)

3. The lessons of centralisation.

Pakistan's history, from One Unit to the alienation of East Pakistan and repeated insurgencies in Balochistan, shows that excessive centralisation fuels grievances and weakens national unity. (Reference: Rounaq Jahan, Pakistan: Failure in National Integration, Columbia University Press, 1972.)

4. Provincial innovation.

Devolution has allowed provinces to experiment, such as Punjab's school reforms, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa's Sehat Card health insurance and Sindh's public-private partnerships in health, models that others can learn from. (Reference: Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Sehat Card Plus programme; Punjab Education Sector Reforms Programme.)

5. Constitutional protections.

Article 25A makes free and compulsory education a constitutional right that provinces must deliver; the solution to poor performance is enforcing this obligation, not shifting it. (Reference: Constitution of Pakistan, Article 25A.)

6. Capacity can be built.

Weak provincial capacity is a reason to invest in training, institutions and local governments, not to reverse devolution. Many federations, such as Canada and Germany, keep education and health at the subnational level. (Reference: Forum of Federations, Handbook of Federal Countries.)

7. The real problem is finance.

Much criticism stems from the federal government's fiscal squeeze after the 7th NFC Award. That issue should be addressed through a new NFC Award and better provincial revenue collection, not by reclaiming subjects. (Reference: Constitution of Pakistan, Article 160(3A); Finance Division, Pakistan Economic Survey 2023-24.)

8. Reversal would deepen distrust.

Smaller provinces see the amendment as a guarantee of their rights. Any attempt to roll it back would be seen as recentralisation by the dominant province and the establishment, weakening national integration. (Reference: Raza Rabbani, A Biography of Pakistani Federalism: Unity in Diversity, Leo Books, 2012.)

Areas needing national standards and coordination (not recentralisation)

1. Higher education standards.

The HEC should continue to set national standards for degrees, research and accreditation, as the Constitution already provides through Part II of the Federal List. (Reference: Constitution of Pakistan, Fourth Schedule, Part II, Entry 12; Supreme Court judgment on the HEC, 2011.)

2. Curriculum benchmarks.

Instead of a single national curriculum imposed from Islamabad, provinces can agree through the Inter-Provincial Education Ministers' Conference on minimum learning standards and common core subjects. (Reference: Inter-Provincial Education Ministers' Conference; National Education Policy Framework 2018.)

3. Drug regulation and disease control.

The Drug Regulatory Authority of Pakistan (DRAP), created in 2012, shows that drug standards can be regulated nationally while health services stay provincial; national disease surveillance should be strengthened similarly. (Reference: Drug Regulatory Authority of Pakistan Act 2012; National Institute of Health, Islamabad.)

4. Population policy.

Population growth is a national emergency; the CCI's 2018 decisions created a national task force and a framework for provincial action, which should be implemented with federal financial support. (Reference: Council of Common Interests, decisions of 19 November 2018.)

5. Environment and climate.

Climate change requires national coordination, which the Pakistan Climate Change Act 2017 provides through a Climate Change Council, without taking environmental protection from provinces. (Reference: Pakistan Climate Change Act 2017.)

6. Labour standards and social security portability.

Workers who move between provinces need portable social security and common labour standards, which can be agreed through inter-provincial frameworks. (Reference: International Labour Organization, Decent Work Country Programme Pakistan.)

7. Data and statistics.

National data on education, health and poverty, collected by the Pakistan Bureau of Statistics, allow comparison and accountability across provinces. (Reference: Pakistan Bureau of Statistics, PSLM Surveys.)

8. Disaster management.

The NDMA coordinates with provincial disaster authorities, a model of cooperative federalism that worked during the 2022 floods. (Reference: National Disaster Management Act 2010.)

Conclusion

Daniel Elazar, in Exploring Federalism (1987), summed up federalism as "self-rule plus shared rule." That formula captures the answer to this question: provinces should keep self-rule over the devolved subjects, while shared rule handles national standards. Handing subjects back to the centre would undermine a historic national consensus, revive provincial grievances and ignore the lessons of Pakistan's history. The genuine problems of devolution, such as weak capacity, uneven quality and coordination gaps, can be solved within the 18th Amendment through national minimum standards, the CCI, bodies like the HEC, DRAP and NDMA, a fair NFC Award and empowered local governments. Pakistan needs cooperative federalism, not recentralisation.