When Planning Minister Ahsan Iqbal proposed dividing Pakistan into 12 to 15 smaller administrative units—or, alternatively, setting up 160 empowered district governments—he reignited a vital debate on how power should actually work across the federation. Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi similarly pointed out that our current administrative setup is failing to deliver for ordinary citizens. On the other hand, constitutional purists like Senator Raza Rabbani rightly caution against straying from the Constitution. Yet, amid these differing views, one crucial question stands out above the rest: Does Pakistan need a sweeping re-mapping of its federating units, or does it simply need to hold its provincial capitals accountable for the authority they have hoarded?
Passing the 18th Amendment in 2010 was widely celebrated as a milestone for Pakistani democracy. By handing major responsibilities down from the federal center directly to the provinces, it aimed to end decades of over-centralization and give regions stronger control over their own destinies. However, after more than fifteen years, that vision remains painfully incomplete. The amendment was never meant to stop at provincial capitals; rather, under Article 140-A, it explicitly demanded that financial, administrative, and political power be passed further down to local communities.
Instead of flowing down to the grassroots, power simply stopped at the provincial level. Chief ministers and provincial bureaucracies gathered resources into their own hands, leaving local bodies underfunded, powerless, and at the mercy of political convenience. Because provincial leaderships refused to share control with municipal councils, ordinary citizens still struggle to access basic services, local justice, or meaningful representation in their daily lives. In short, decentralized federal power merely became centralized provincial power.
This bottleneck explains why ideas about redrawing administrative boundaries keep resurfacing. Healthy federations throughout history have periodically reshaped their internal maps so they can adapt to growing populations, expanding cities, and shifting economic needs. Pakistan’s present provincial borders are not unchangeable lines in stone; in fact, several princely states joined the republic through original treaties before being merged into the existing setup over time. Treating current borders as sacred relics, despite clear evidence of governance failure, risks locking the state into total stagnation.
To be sure, valid concerns regarding water rights, National Finance Commission (NFC) resource sharing, and ethnic representation must be handled with immense care. Yet, clinging to the status quo out of fear only breeds deeper frustration. Provincial autonomy ought to strengthen national unity, but when regional interests are used as a permanent veto against necessary national reforms, autonomy devolves into self-serving provincialism.
The central flaw in Pakistan’s system is that expanding provincial power was never balanced by performance and accountability. When provinces fail to empower local governments, raise tax revenues, or maintain law and order, the financial strain and social fallout inevitably hit the national exchequer. Struggling public services, mounting debt, and weak growth stem directly from poor provincial management.
Pakistan must connect autonomy with responsibility: power with duties, freedom with performance, and rights with constitutional obligations. Until authority moves from provincial capitals into empowered local districts, and leaders accept accountability as readily as rights, Pakistan’s federal journey remains an unfinished promise.
—The writer is a political analyst, based in Islamabad.
