This document discusses Pakistan's evolving federal system and whether it can learn lessons from the US model. It outlines Pakistan's constitutional history, from the 1956 constitution establishing a parliamentary system to the 1973 constitution that created a federal structure. Recent reforms in 2009-2010 greatly enhanced provincial autonomy. However, capacity and coordination issues remain at provincial and local levels. The document considers whether aspects of the US federal system, like state rights, policy experimentation, checks and balances, and regulatory frameworks, could inform Pakistan's system as it continues to decentralize power.

1. Pakistan: Importing
America’s Federalism?
Asif Saeed Memon
September 25, 2014
Atlantic Council

2. Constitutional History of Pakistan
 Dominion
 Government of India Act (1935)
 Constituent Assembly as legislature
 CA dominated by Muslim League and increasingly perceived as
unrepresentative
 Loose federal structure including 5 provinces and some princely states
until “One Unit” declared in 1954
 De facto power becomes increasingly concentrated in the office of
Governor General

3. Constitutional History of Pakistan
 1st Constitution of Pakistan (1956)
 Promulgated by the 2nd Constituent Assembly in 1956
 Islamic Republic
 Parliamentary; unicameral with PM to be head of government and
President to be ceremonial head of state (immediately flaunted by
incoming President)
 Federal; while maintaining One Unit
 No clarity on elections
 Lasted two years before President Iskander Mirza declared martial law
and Gen. Ayub Khan appointed as CMLA.

4. Constitutional History of Pakistan
 2nd Constitution of Pakistan
 Promulgated through presidential order
 Presidential system
 President to be elected indirectly through 80,000 “Basic Democracies”
 Unicameral legislature
 Provinces (albeit, under one unit) had high autonomy but de facto
power was highly concentrated in the center

5. Constitutional History of Pakistan
 3rd Constitution of Pakistan (1973)
 Promulgated by elected assembly (West Pakistan)
 Parliamentary
 Bicameral legislature
 Federal with 4 provinces
 Responsibilities split with a number of them split between center and
provinces: federal, provincial and concurrent List
 Council of Common Interests
 National Finance Commission

6. Federalism in Pakistan up to 2009
 Provincial autonomy was undermined through the
following:
 One Unit successfully undermined the provincial autonomy of the four
Western provinces, especially the smaller three
 Military rule
 Federal control over revenue generation and lopsided distribution
through the NFC
 Federal control over policymaking through the concurrent list
 Capacity issues of provincial governments

7. Pakistan’s federalism transformed (2009
– 2010)
 Transition from 3rd Military era began with elections in 2008
 Two major legislative victories in NFC award: (2009) and the
Eighteenth Constitutional Amendment (2010) have
transformed the policy landscape.
 Greater share of provinces in state revenue
 Abolishing of the Concurrent List
 Devolution of major policy areas to provinces

8. The current discourse about federalism
 The re-centralization demand
 Devolution is failing due to:
 Capacity issues at the provincial level
 Policy divergence between the provinces is a threat to national coordination
(in some more alarmist terms a threat to national cohesion)
 Local government: Devolution interrupted?
 Devolution did not go far enough and powers need to be devolved
down to local government because:
 Provincial politics are just as corrupt as national politics
 Greater accountability can be achieved at the district level

9. The situation today
 Capacity Problems at Provincial Level
 Floods, Fake medicine incident, curriculum development
 Issues of coordination and international liaison
 Political fragmentation across provinces (each province
has a different political party in power) in 2013

10. The situation today
 At the same time public discourse has not caught up with the
changed situation.
 A recipe for center vs. province battles as well as for legal
challenges
 Increasing popularity of National Social Policy making
Benazir Income Support Programme (BISP)
 Current administration’s floating of a National Health
Insurance scheme

11. Can we learn lessons from the US?
 Keeping in mind that the two countries are not comparable?
 Federating units, but …
 Almost no provincial revenue generation
 Only four provinces with one representing more than half the
population
 Demographic, economic, ethno-linguistic variations, etc.

12. Can we learn lessons from the US?
 States Rights
 The demand for provincial autonomy has been an important part of
Pakistan’s democratic struggle. A discourse similar to states rights is
developing
 Kalabagh dam
 Higher Education Commission
 National Health Insurance Scheme & central curriculum development
 Adoption of components of the ACA (Medicaid Expansion) represents
a major challenge to the success of the law. Similar issues are
increasingly expected in Pakistan’s new federal environment.
 Technocratic efficiency vs. democratic legitimacy

13. Can we learn lessons from the US?
 Laboratories of democracy
 The US model of policy adoption at local and/or state level
prior to widespread adoption appears like an attractive
way to avoid large national level policy failures.
 There are some hints that suggest that inter provincial
competition may play a similar role.
 In the run in to the 2013 elections and since KP and the
Punjab the two most competitive polities have attempted
to out do each other

14. Can we learn lessons from the US?
 State Capacity
 Issues of variation in state capacity have been a major
challenge to national reform in the US (e.g. variations in ACA
implementation between some states)
 Similar issues are beginning to emerge in Pakistan. Variations in
practices, capacity, priorities and district-provincial relations.

15. Can we learn lessons from the US?
 Accountability & the importance of local governance
 10,000 democracies (Berkman)
 Ideological opposition to ACA at the state level and practical
buy-in at the local level
 The debate over LG in Pakistan is an outstanding issue and is
being battled over in each of the 4 provinces

16. Can we learn lessons from the US?
 Regulatory frameworks & Inter state coordination
Unlike the US most regulatory law exists at the federal level
(insurance, banking, etc.)
 There are major holes in the existing regulatory frameworks
(e.g. there is almost no regulation of private schools and
hospitals)
Reciprocity between states/provinces (medical licenses,
insurance coverage, etc.)

17. Can we learn lessons from the US?
 Checks & Balances
 At the federal level
Senate able to block unpopular legislation
Increased role of judiciary.
Vertical
Provinces better able to block federal over reach
 Radical reforms become harder. Incrementalism and marginal
changes become more likely. (e.g. Public Option under the ACA)

18. Preliminary Conclusions
 As Pakistan’s federalism continues to evolve and the loci of policy
making and implementation move away from Islamabad, it has
become imperative to explore the policy framework establishing
alternatives available to the country and its constituent provinces.
 While it is true that no two countries are alike, it is still important to
examine federal structures and policymaking within those structures
to derive lessons for Pakistan.
 There are lessons to be drawn from Brazil, Canada, Germany, India,
Malaysia, the United States and Venezuela.

19. Preliminary Conclusions
 The United States provides an interesting example for exploration
 The Affordable Care Act (legislation and implementation) along
with previous social sector reforms like SSA (1965), SCHIP (1997),
NCLB (2001) and the MMA (2003) provides important lessons in how
the large social sector reforms can be legislated and implemented
within a federal system based on state autonomy.
 Most respondents, however, argued that the challenges faced by
the ACA legislation and implementation are more a function of the
prevalent political culture/mood/zeitgeist as opposed to the
specifics of American federalism.
 A period of pessimism about American federalism.