Provinces: To be or not to be

The renewed controversy over creating new provinces in Pakistan raises a question far more fundamental than the redrawing of geographical boundaries: can political and administrative restructuring improve governance without transforming the institutions responsible for delivering public services? The debate has once again become a battleground for competing political interests, regional identities and constitutional interpretations. Unfortunately, the central issue—empowering citizens rather than multiplying centres of political patronage—continues to receive insufficient attention.

During August and September 2026, political leaders, policymakers and civil society representatives revived proposals for new provinces, smaller administrative units and empowered district governments. Discussions have ranged from South Punjab, Bahawalpur and Hazara to the administrative future of Karachi and other regions. At a national dialogue organised by the Sustainable Development Policy Institute, participants acknowledged that any restructuring must address constitutional requirements, fiscal sustainability, public aspirations and the effectiveness of service delivery.¹

Pakistan certainly needs administrative reform. Whether additional provinces constitute the appropriate response is an entirely different question. A federation is neither an arrangement for concentrating power in the federal capital nor an invitation to provincial governments to reproduce centralised authority within their own territories. Its purpose is to distribute constitutional powers among different levels of government while preserving national unity, democratic accountability and the legitimate aspirations of diverse communities.

The Eighteenth (Constitutional Amendment) Act, 2010, effective from April 19, 2010, represented an important advance towards provincial autonomy. It abolished the Concurrent Legislative List and substantially strengthened the constitutional position of provinces. However, the transfer of responsibilities from Islamabad to provincial capitals was never intended to make Lahore, Karachi, Peshawar and Quetta alternative centres of unaccountable authority.

Genuine federalism requires decentralisation beyond provincial capitals. Unfortunately, provincial administrations have frequently demonstrated the same reluctance to surrender political, administrative and financial control that they previously criticised in the federal government. This contradiction is particularly evident in the treatment of local governments.

Article 140A of the Constitution requires every province to establish local governments and devolve political, administrative and financial responsibility and authority to their elected representatives. Article 32 encourages representative local institutions, while Article 37(i) envisages decentralisation of government administration to facilitate the expeditious disposal of public business.²

These provisions express a constitutional commitment to government that is accessible, participatory and responsive. Their effectiveness depends upon genuine implementation rather than occasional elections followed by administrative paralysis.

The Supreme Court, in its landmark judgment reported as PLD 2022 SC 439, emphasised the mandatory nature of Article 140A and the constitutional importance of meaningful local authority. Provinces cannot legitimately demand autonomy from the federation while denying comparable democratic space to elected institutions serving their own communities.³

The demographic realities nevertheless require serious attention. According to the 2023 Population and Housing Census, Pakistan had approximately 241.5 million inhabitants. Punjab alone accounted for 127.69 million, Sindh 55.70 million, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa 40.86 million and Balochistan 14.89 million. These striking differences in population, geographical area and settlement patterns pose genuine administrative challenges.⁴

Punjab’s population exceeds that of numerous sovereign countries, while Balochistan encompasses vast territory with comparatively dispersed settlements. Uniform administrative arrangements cannot adequately respond to such contrasting circumstances. However, population alone cannot determine provincial boundaries. Geography, historical identity, language, economic viability, infrastructure, water resources, administrative accessibility and popular consent must all receive appropriate consideration.

The aspirations of the people of southern Punjab, Bahawalpur and Hazara cannot simply be dismissed as separatist tendencies. Their demands arise partly from longstanding perceptions of political exclusion, unequal development and the concentration of opportunities elsewhere.

Equally, the genuine concerns of Sindh regarding territorial integrity, cultural identity and control over resources cannot be brushed aside by invoking administrative efficiency. A democratic federation must accommodate regional aspirations without undermining the constitutional rights of existing provinces.

The Constitution already provides the lawful mechanism. Under Article 239, constitutional amendments require a two-thirds majority of the total membership of each House of Parliament. Where an amendment alters the limits of an existing province, Article 239(4) additionally requires approval by at least two-thirds of the total membership of the affected Provincial Assembly.⁵

This is not an inconvenient procedural obstacle to be circumvented through political bargaining. It is an essential constitutional safeguard protecting the federal compact. Moreover, the implications of new provinces extend beyond geographical boundaries. Article 1, parliamentary representation, the Senate’s federal character, arrangements for provincial assets and liabilities, administrative institutions and the distribution of fiscal resources would require careful examination.

The financial dimension deserves particular scrutiny. Pakistan already faces serious fiscal constraints. Creating new provincial assemblies, secretariats, governor houses, judicial establishments and bureaucratic structures would entail recurring expenditure. Unless accompanied by rationalisation of existing institutions, the result could be greater administrative consumption rather than improved public welfare.

The National Finance Commission framework, particularly Articles 160 and 160(3A), must also inform any restructuring. Changes in provincial boundaries and populations would require reconsideration of intergovernmental distribution arrangements while respecting constitutional protections governing provincial shares.⁶

More importantly, resources transferred to provinces must reach districts, municipalities and communities through transparent and predictable arrangements. A 2025 analysis by the Policy Research and Advocacy Centre highlighted disparities in fiscal transfers to local governments, demonstrating the continuing weakness of sub-provincial financial arrangements. The problem is not simply the number of provinces; it is the institutional failure to connect public resources with citizens’ everyday requirements.⁷

What benefit would another provincial capital bring to an agricultural worker unable to obtain clean drinking water, a schoolgirl deprived of functioning educational facilities, or a patient compelled to travel hundreds of kilometres for treatment? The answer lies in enforceable responsibilities, adequate financing and democratic accountability.

International experience also suggests that neither large nor small administrative units guarantee effective governance. Federal systems operate through different constitutional arrangements, shaped by history, economic conditions and institutional capacity. Their effectiveness depends considerably upon respect for constitutional boundaries, dependable public finances and representative institutions. Pakistan should resist the temptation to treat provincial multiplication as a substitute for institutional reform.

A credible national restructuring exercise would begin with an independent, representative constitutional and administrative commission. It should examine demographic evidence, regional inequalities, the economic feasibility of proposed provinces, citizens’ preferences and alternatives involving empowered districts and metropolitan governments.

Public consultations must include women, workers, farmers, professional organisations, linguistic communities and historically neglected regions. Decisions should emerge through transparent constitutional deliberation rather than agreements among political elites.

Meanwhile, no constitutional amendment is necessary to establish effective local governments within existing provinces. Provincial legislatures already possess the authority—and constitutional responsibility—to create functioning institutions with meaningful powers, defined revenue sources, professional administrative support and regular democratic elections.

Provincial Finance Commission arrangements should ensure predictable fiscal transfers, supported by independent audits, published service-delivery indicators and enforceable accountability. Metropolitan centres require particular attention. Karachi, Lahore, Peshawar and Quetta cannot be managed effectively through fragmented agencies exercising overlapping powers without coherent democratic supervision.

The larger constitutional lesson is unmistakable. Pakistan’s federation cannot become stronger merely through territorial rearrangement while its political culture remains centralised, exclusionary and resistant to accountability. New provinces may become necessary where convincing constitutional, democratic and economic justification exists. Their creation should neither be prohibited by political prejudice nor promoted as an electoral slogan.

The immediate priority is to make existing constitutional institutions work, strengthen local democracy and distribute development opportunities fairly.

Ultimately, the question is not whether Pakistan should have four provinces, eight or more. It is whether every citizen, regardless of language, location or social standing, can exercise democratic rights and obtain essential public services without dependence upon political patronage. Provinces should exist for the people. People should never be reduced to instruments for preserving provincial power.

Endnotes

1. Sustainable Development Policy Institute, “Should Pakistan Create More Administrative Units?”, national dialogue, 11 August 2026.
2. Constitution of Pakistan, Articles 32, 37(i) and 140A.
3. Supreme Court of Pakistan, Constitution Petition No. 24 of 2017, decided 1 February 2022, PLD 2022 SC 439.
4. Pakistan Bureau of Statistics, National Census Report, Population and Housing Census 2023, “Digital Census 2023 at a Glance”.
5. Constitution of Pakistan, Article 239, particularly clause (4).
6. Constitution of Pakistan, Article 160, particularly clause (3A).
7. Policy Research and Advocacy Centre, “Pakistan’s Resource Distribution: Beyond the NFC Stalemate”.

_______________________________________________________________

Dr. Ikramul Haq, Advocate Supreme Court, specializes in constitutional, corporate, environment, media, ML/CFT related laws, IT, intellectual property, arbitration and international tax laws.  He holds an LLD in tax laws with specialization in transfer pricing. He was full-time journalist from 1979 to 1984 with Viewpoint and Dawn. He served Civil Services of Pakistan from 1984 to 1996.

He established Huzaima & Ikram in 1996 and is presently its chief partner. He studied journalism, English literature and law. He is Chief Editor of Taxation.  He is country editor and correspondent of International Bureau of Fiscal Documentation (IBFD) and member of International Fiscal Association (IFA).  He is Visiting Faculty at Lahore University of Management Sciences (LUMS) and member Advisory Board and Visiting Senior Fellow of Pakistan Institute of Development Economics (PIDE).

He has coauthored with Huzaima Bukhari many books that include, Tax Reforms in Pakistan: Historic & Critical Review, Towards Broad, Flat, Low-rate, and Predictable Taxes (third edition, 2024),  Pakistan: Enigma of Taxation, Towards Flat, Low-rate, Broad and Predictable Taxes (revised/enlarged edition of December 2020), Law & Practice of Income Tax, Law , Practice of Sales Tax, Law and Practice of Corporate Law, Law & Practice of Federal Excise, Law & Practice of Sales Tax on Services, Federal Tax Laws of Pakistan, Provincial Tax Laws, Practical Handbook of Income Tax, Tax Laws of Pakistan, Principles of Income Tax with Glossary and Master Tax Guide, Income Tax Digest 1886-2011 (with judicial analysis).

He is author of Commentary on Avoidance of Double Taxation Agreements, Pakistan: From Hash to Heroin, its sequel Pakistan: Drug-trap to Debt-trap and Practical Handbook of Income Tax. Two books of poetry are Phull Kikkaran De (Punjabi 2023) and Nai Ufaq (Urdu 1979 with Siraj Munir and Shahid Jamal).

He regularly writes columns/article/papers for many Pakistani newspapers and international journals and has contributed over 3500 articles on a variety of issues of public interest, printed in various journals, magazines and newspapers at home and abroad.

_______________________________________________________________

Abdul Rauf Shakoori, Advocate High Court, is a subject-matter expert on AML-CFT, Compliance, Cyber Crime and Risk Management. He has been providing AML-CFT advisory and training services to financial institutions (banks, DNFBPs, Investment companies, Money Service Businesses, insurance companies and securities), government institutions including law enforcement agencies located in North America (USA & CANADA), Middle East and Pakistan.

His areas of expertise include legal, strategic planning, cross-border transactions including but not limited to joint ventures (JVs), mergers & acquisitions (M&A), takeovers, privatizations, overseas expansions, USA Patriot Act, Banking Secrecy Act, Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC).  Over his career he has demonstrated excellent leadership, communication, analytical, and problem-solving skills and have also developed and delivered training courses in the areas of AML/CFT, Compliance, Fraud & Financial Crime Risk Management, Bank Secrecy, Cyber Crimes & Internet Threats against Banks, E–Channels Fraud Prevention, Security and Investigation of Financial Crimes. The courses have been delivered as practical workshops with case study driven scenarios and exams to ensure knowledge transfer.

His notable publications are Rauf’s Compilation of Corporate Laws of Pakistan, Rauf’s Company Law and Practice of Pakistan and Rauf’s Research on Labour Laws and Income Tax and others.

His articles include: Revenue collection: Contemporary targets vs. orthodox approach, It is time to say goodbye to our past, US double standards, Was Due Process Flouted While Convicting Nawaz Sharif?, FATF and unjustly grey listed Pakistan, Corruption is no excuse for Incompetence, Next step for Pakistan, Pakistan’s compliance with FATF mandates, a work in progress, Pakistan’s strategy to address FATF Mandates was Inadequate, Pakistan’s Evolving FATF Compliance, Transparency Curtails Corruption, Pakistan’s Long Road towards FATF Compliance, Pakistan’s Archaic Approach to Addressing FATF Mandates, FATF: Challenges for June deadline, Pakistan: Combating the illicit flow of money, Regulating Crypto: An uphill task for Pakistan. Pakistan’s economy – Chicanery of numbers. Pakistan: Reclaiming its space on FATF whitelist. Sacred Games: Kulbhushan Jadhav Case. National FATF secretariat and Financial Monitoring Unit. The FATF challenge. Pakistan: Crucial FATF hearing. Pakistan: Dissecting FATF Failure, Environmental crimes: An emerging challenge, Countering corrupt practices .

The recent publication, coauthored by these writes with Huzaima Bukhari is:                        

Pakistan Tackling FATF: Challenges & Solutions, available at:

https://aacp.com.pk/book-detail/pakistan-tackling-fatf-challenges-and-solutions-35

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08RXH8W46