Winds of change to where?

Speculation about an impending 28th amendment on administrative restructuring had been circulating for some time, but it was the interior minister’s public statement last month that confirmed that a change was in the offing. His remarks amounted to an indictment of the entire political order and a call for structural change. A statement by the military spokesman soon after provided further shape to the emerging plan.

Those statements triggered intense public debate over a plan whose contours remain obscure. All manner of suggestions — from the creation of new administrative units to devolution — are being floated. Yet even the political parties and federal ministers who adamantly support restructuring admit they have no clear framework for how it should be carried out.

The collapse of the system is the result of the denial of democratic rights to the people.

There is no disagreement that the existing political power structure has long since collapsed and can no longer deliver. But any attempt to salvage the system through patchwork will fail. The crisis runs far deeper and cannot be resolved merely by redrawing administrative units. Some media reports, apparently based on the official briefing, suggest the still to be finalised 28th amendment is not limited to new administrative units but also envisages ‘sweeping governance restructuring’.

Structural reform is inseparable from democracy, and any change imposed by extra-constitutional forces will only worsen the chaos and fuel instability. Yet given the existing imbalance of power in favour of the establishment, there appears little likelihood of resistance from a civilian leadership of questionable legitimacy. The 26th and 27th Amendments have already damaged the foundation of the Constitution by virtually destroying judicial independence; many are of the view that the judiciary has been reduced to an extension of the executive. A 28th amendment as currently conceived would destroy even the semblance of democracy that remains.

What happened

The creation of new administrative units and devolution of power to local governments has long been viewed as a way to improve governance. Yet the country’s political parties have never reached a consensus on the issue, and the constitutional requirement of a two-thirds majority in both the national parliament and provincial assemblies has produced the creation of new provinces almost impossible.

There is broad agreement on establishing a separate south Punjab province, but whether it should be divided along linguistic or administrative lines remains a sticking point. While there appears to be a general acceptance in KP of a Hazara province, the exact boundary remains disputed, similarly.

The suggestion to divide Sindh, however, rem­ains the most contentious problem. While others have suggested placing the country’s financial and industrial hub under direct federal control, not surprisingly, the PPP has campaigned aggressively against a plan that would create a separate Karachi province. Both proposals amount to cutting off Sindh’s capital city. It makes no sense; any such move could spark an uprising in the country’s second-biggest province. Likewise, dividing Balochistan into several administrative units would only worsen an already volatile situation. Far from improving governance, such arbitrary plans, conceived arguably by extra-constitutional elements, are impractical.

Rather than pursuing a controversial redrawing of administrative boundaries, empowering local governments is both more practical and urgently needed to take democracy to the grassroots. Devolution from the centre to the provinces, and from the provinces to the local level, is a core feature of the 18th Amendment. Unfortunately, the provinces have failed to implement the second stage of this devolution. That failure has distorted the system and caused widespread governance breakdown. Local governments have not only had their powers curtailed but have also gone years without elections.

The details

Punjab, for instance, has held no local government elections for years despite repeated Supre­­me Court orders. Sindh and KP have held electi­o­­ns, but their local governments’ powers have been drastically reduced, and their finances are controlled by provincial governments, rendering them largely ineffective. Even a megacity like Karachi is governed directly by provincial ministers. Bal­ochistan, the country’s most troubled pro­vince, has virtually abandoned the local government system, further disenfranchising its population.

What is needed is a constitutional amendment clearly defining the powers of local government and making those powers mandatory. The grand idea of creating more provinces, and governance reform imposed by the establishment, will only expedite the very collapse of the state that the interior minister mentioned. It must be left to parliament and the political parties to build consensus on devolution to local government. It is essential for democracy and good governance. We have the example of political parties jointly working on the 18th Amendment. It strengthened federalism through the devolution of power to the provinces.

A major problem, even so, is the security set-up’s growing control of the state. A civilian government of doubtful legitimacy, beholden to the establishment for its survival, is in no position to resist pressure. The collapse of the system is the result of the denial of democratic rights to the people, and the rot cannot be ceased through imposed solutions. A country mired in economic, political and internal security crises cannot afford another contentious issue dividing the residents. These so-called winds of change are certainly not good for the future of democracy and the country. What we need is the restoration of democracy and the supremacy of the Constitution to stem the rot.

The writer is an author and journalist.

Why it matters

[email protected]

X: @hidhussain

Published in Dawn, August 19th, 2026