1

Provincial status?
FOR decades, the territories comprising Gilgit-Baltistan have remained under the administrative control
of the Pakistan government. Its political destiny has been linked to the Kashmir dispute between India
and Pakistan. Pending a final settlement of the dispute, successive Pakistani governments have focused
on granting maximum possible administrative autonomy to GB, whereas the people of GB have
consistently expressed their desire to join Pakistan as a regular province.

Three developments in recent years kindled a ray of hope for the people of GB. First, the GB committee
set up by prime minister Nawaz Sharif recommended in March 2017 that GB be accorded a status akin
to a Pakistani province. The provincial status was to be provisional so that Pakistan’s principled position
on the Kashmir dispute was not undermined.

Second, the Supreme Court of Pakistan, in its judgement of January 2019, ordered conferral of
constitutional status and rights to GB residents at par with other citizens of Pakistan.

Third, the government of prime minister Imran Khan announced in 2020 its decision to grant provisional
provincial status to GB. The people of GB were excited at the prospect of finally fulfilling their
aspirations of joining Pakistan as a province of the country. However, despite the best of intentions, the
status quo could not be broken.

We shouldn’t adopt a ‘wait and see’ approach to GB.

The Kashmir dispute is an unfinished agenda of the partition of British India. As per the provisions of the
Independence Act, the Muslim majority state of Jammu and Kashmir should have been a part of
Pakistan. However, India occupied the state pursuant to a controversial instrument of accession.
Pakistan does not regard that accession to be legal and insists that the matter should have been
referred to the people of Jammu and Kashmir to decide if they wished to join Pakistan or India.

The second legal basis for Pakistan’s stance is that under the UNSC resolutions, there should be a
plebiscite administered under UN auspices to ascertain the wish of the Kashmiris. Regrettably, India has
refused to accord the people of occupied Kashmir their inalienable right to self-determination provided
for in the UNSC resolutions.

Meanwhile, the constitutional status of GB as a part of Pakistan has remained in limbo. The prospects of
India implementing the UNSC resolutions are slim because it has leveraged its size, military muscle, and
economic weight to resist pressures from the international community to grant Kashmiris the right to
self-determine their destiny. The emboldened Indian leadership has gone a step further and embarked
on demographic and electoral engineering to modify the very identity of Kashmir. Under these
circumstances, it is worth pondering whether the status of GB should remain a victim of India’s
intransigence and unwillingness to follow international law.

Those arguing for integrating GB with Pakistan contend that the suzerainty of the maharaja of Kashmir
over the territories of GB was at best notional. Further, the people of these territories had never
 2

accepted Dogra rule, and in 1947, they wasted no time in pronouncing their verdict to join Pakistan. The
then Gilgit Agency, for instance, formally acceded to Pakistan in November 1947, and the government of
Pakistan even appointed a political agent to take over in Gilgit.

Yet, it can be argued that integrating GB could have implications for Pakistan’s legal position on the
Kashmir dispute. So, it would be prudent to keep the integration of GB with Pakistan provisional and
subject to a final settlement of the dispute. The moot point here is that the people of GB have been
living pra--ctically as Pak-istanis for seven decades and justifiably expect their rights as citizens of
Pakistan formally recognised. Fur-ther, to avert any misunderstanding, Pakis-tan would need to assure
the Kashmiri leadership on both sides of the LoC that granting full rights of citizenship to the people of
GB is an interim measure and without prejudice to the final settlement of the Kashmir dispute.

What we cannot and should not do is to adopt a ‘wait and see approach’. In the evolving regional
geopolitics, GB not only provides the vital geographical link to China but is also central to the
implementation of CPEC. Formal integration of GB into Pakistan will not only give full constitutional
protection to CPEC-related investments in GB but also attract other international investments to GB,
especially in the hydropower sector. Lest we forget, there are forces at play to disrupt China’s link with
Pakistan through GB. It is, therefore, a strategic imperative that GB be integrated with Pakistan as a
provisional province without further delay and its people be recognised as citizens of Pakistan with full
rights admissible under the Constitution of Pakistan.

The writer, a former foreign secretary, is director general of the Institute of Strategic Studies Islamabad
and the author of Diplomatic Footprints.

Published in Dawn, June 11th, 2022

GB: a lost opportunity

SUBSEQUENT to their liberation from Dogra rule, the people of Gilgit-Baltistan unconditionally joined
Pakistan. However, based on a controversial agreement with the Kashmiri leadership, the government
of Pakistan linked the accession of GB with the Kashmir dispute and governed the area through a
bureaucratic arrangement that excluded the locals. The unilateral declaration of GB as disputed territory
not only violated the residents’ fundamental rights but also disregarded the UN resolution mandating
control of the disputed territories via self-rule for routine governance.

Read: GB Assembly demands provincial status for region

Under the impetus of popular demand for constitutional rights, the participation in government through
executive orders was granted until a Supreme Court verdict led to the creation of a representative
assembly invested with limited powers.

Due to growing demands for integration of Gilgit-Baltistan into Pakistan, and two earlier unanimous
local assembly resolutions for absorbing GB as a federating unit in Pakistan, leading political parties,
 3

including the two major parties in the present coalition, scrambled to promise provincial status to the
area ahead of fresh elections to the GB Assembly.

In response to an earlier petition, the honourable Supreme Court had already passed a landmark
judgement in January 2019, ordering the conferral of constitutional status and rights on GB’s residents
on a par with other citizens of Pakistan. To indicate its compliance, the PTI government even agreed on
a draft law, submitting it to court for immediate implementation. But then the PTI government chose to
execute a U-turn and file a petition for revising the judgement. This ruinous petition effectively
stonewalled the matter. However, facing political pressure, the PTI government then initiated action to
grant GB provisional provincial status as recommended by the Sartaj Aziz Report commissioned by the
earlier PML-N government. This also aligned with the aspirations of GB residents as reflected clearly in
the resolutions of the local elected assembly.

Despite all promises, little progress has been made on a provincial status for Gilgit-Baltistan.

The expectation was that PTI would immediately move a bill for constitutional amendment, thus
enabling the provisional integration of GB as a province until the resolution of the Kashmir issue.
However, the PTI again chose to procrastinate, and in lieu of legislation sent the proposed draft
constitutional amendment to the GB government for endorsement despite pre-existing GB Assembly
resolutions endorsing the desire for provisional provincial status. This uncalled-for process wasted
valuable time and deferred the introduction of the constitutional amendment bill.

Read: GB as a province?

GB’s chief minister appreciated the significance of the proposed integration of the region in the
federation with representation in parliament and in all statutory forums as a federating unit. This was
however undermined by the party’s own local chapter. Unfortunately, the chief minister could not resist
their pressure and formed a transitional committee to review the amendment. He failed to anticipate
the response of his party members, blinded by their petty and selfish political interests. From the start,
the members of the assembly nominated to this committee have wanted to thwart the acceptance of
the proposed constitutional package, unless their egoistical interests were safeguarded.

It was beyond their vision to be part of “a landmark achievement and the highest watermark for the
people of GB since their accession to Pakistan”. They could not comprehend that its implementation
would “go a long way in appropriately realising the objectives of the entire exercise for the benefit of
the people of GB in particular, and Pakistan in general”.

Instead of looking at the big picture and understanding the implications of GB acquiring the status of a
province with all its attendant privileges, rights and responsibilities, they advanced caveats on minor
issues falling within the normal legal structure of the country. Their major demands are summarised
here:

— Insertion of special provision for tax exemption in the Constitution for the region refusing to accept
the applicability of tax laws for such concessions.
 4

— Protection of tenure of the present assembly created under an executive order by the president after
integration of the region as a province. (Strangely, the members wanted automatic protection of their
tenure, also desiring this assembly to elect the constitutionally created Senate members. Unfortunately,
they failed to understand the legal impossibility of providing a legitimate arrangement of this nature.)

— Constitutional protection to subsidies granted through administrative orders and normal laws, and
service issues and other financial matters, ignoring the fact that provincial status would inevitably confer
enhanced legislative powers on GB, thus enabling the provincial government to address most of these
matters. Representation in parliament was key to taking up any matter provided within the ambit of the
federal laws.

A constitutional amendment for provincial status is not a governance order. Rather, it is a binding legal
structure ensuring fundamental rights equal to those granted to other citizens of Pakistan, including
representation in the highest legislative institution, participation in all statutory bodies where important
decisions are taken for the region and protection of an independent legal structure under the Supreme
Court of Pakistan. All governance matters such as taxation, service matters and subsidies can be
addressed by the elected regional representatives to parliament, and, for most, under the 18th
Amendment. The federating unit is the final authority on most important matters.

Read: ‘Almost’ Pakistan: Gilgit-Baltistan in a constitutional limbo

The status of a province with representation in parliament not only creates a legal linkage between GB
and the federation but also excises all impediments for local and international investments, thus lending
new impetus to CPEC in the region. CPEC will catalyse economic development, alleviate poverty and
generate employment opportunities in the region. The harnessing of its natural resources, particularly
hydropower, has the potential to transform GB into a powerhouse for the entire country, thus ensuring
affordable and clean energy and resultant prosperity for Pakistan.

The coalition government should take up this legislation on a priority basis and not hunker down for the
inevitable but avoidable protests in this sensitive region which are likely to ensue if a game of wait-and-
see is played. People are losing their patience with several unfulfilled pledges. Decisive action is good
not only for GB but also for Pakistan.

The writer, a former IGP Sindh, belongs to Gilgit-Baltistan.

Published in Dawn, May 23rd, 2022

GB as a province?
IN a major development, all political parties have agreed to accord
Gilgit-Baltistan the status of a province. According to this
understanding, the parties have decided they will take this
significant step after the elections in GB that are due shortly. The
opposition had demanded that integrating GB into the federation
 5

should not be treated as a partisan issue and therefore should wait

so electioneering does not impact the debate adversely. It will
require a constitutional amendment which will pass smoothly once
the parties have agreed on the exact parameters of this step. This
has been a long-standing demand of the people of GB because they
have been in a constitutional limbo for decades. This has led to
deep grievances and political unrest that have continued to fester
in the absence of any serious attempt by Islamabad to address
them. In this sense, the decision to make GB a province is a
welcome step. However, there are caveats. The final status of GB is
connected to the ultimate resolution of the Kashmir dispute. The
main reason that Pakistan had not integrated GB into the
federation was to ensure that such a step should not impact the
disputed status of Kashmir as per the resolutions of the United
Nations. In August last year, the BJP government of Prime Minister
Narendra Modi annexed India-held Kashmir by revoking its special
status. There is concern that by integrating GB as a province,
Pakistan may weaken its case in the way that India has. However,
the problem may be addressed if Pakistan can say GB’s status as a
province will be a provisional one and the final status will depend
on the resolution of the Kashmir issue. It could keep our legal
position on Kashmir intact while providing the people of GB the
full constitutional status they have always deserved.

The political leadership should tackle this issue with maturity and adopt an
approach that is non-partisan. There should be a full debate in parliament and
all legal and international aspects of the matter should be discussed in detail.
The final amendment should have a watertight text that is vetted by experts of
international law keeping in mind the requirements of the UN resolutions on
Kashmir. Once done, the amendment should enjoy unanimous support to
announce to the world that Pakistan stands firmly behind this decision. This is
a momentous step and should be accorded the attention it deserves.

Published in Dawn, September 23rd, 2020

Listening to GB
Local protesters have been peacefully demonstrating in Skardu for
two weeks, under the shadow of the fluttering green-and-white
Pakistani flag. All profess to be Pakistanis, and have Pakistani
passports and ID cards. Their elders liberated this region after an
armed struggle with the regular army of the Kashmir state.
 6

Today, the protesters lobby for GB as a federating unit of Pakistan. Their

major demands include: integration of the region as a province thus resolving
its status as disputed territory; land ownership rights in the liberated area;
exemption from taxes without defined status; opening the border with Kargil
to facilitate cross-border interaction of divided families; and restoring the
wheat subsidy granted by the PPP government in 1973.

Provincial status is key to settling all other demands. After acceding to

Pakistan in 1947, the trusting GB residents presumed that the deputation of a
semi-literate junior officer as political agent by the Pakistani government
signified acceptance of their request for integration. However, the region’s fate
was sealed by the Karachi Agreement with Kashmiri leaders who consented to
indefinite bureaucratic control of GB without consulting the local leadership.
And yet, GB residents remained loyal.

For almost 25 years, the area was ruled under the black colonial FCR. In the
hope of creating support for a plebiscite, our foreign affairs czars defined GB
as a disputed territory of Jammu & Kashmir. This twisted narrative was used
to legitimise the repressive GB administration in the name of national interest.

The demand for rights is getting louder.

Education and awareness via social media have fuelled the demand for
resolving GB’s contested status. Civil society took its case to the Supreme
Court. After years of hearings, a landmark judgement in 2019 rescinded the
Government of Gilgit Baltistan Order, 2018, in favour of a newly agreed draft
Gilgit-Baltistan Governance Reforms Order, 2019. On the pretext of
converting it into an act of parliament, the PML-N continued to administer the
area through the 2018 order, thus diluting the powers delegated by the PPP
under the 2009 law. The subsequent PTI government also continued with the
2018 order, reneging on its pledge to accord GB full provincial status and
rights.

Impelled by public pressure and the verdict, the PTI government finally
launched a process to grant provisional provincial status to GB via a
constitutional amendment, ensuring its representation in parliament and in
all constitutional institutions.

However, ignoring the two earlier, unanimous resolutions of the GB Provincial

Legislative Assembly, the centre referred it to the local government for
endorsement, a ruse to stall the process. Unexpectedly, the highly educated
GB chief minister played along, referring the reference to a committee of the
 7

local assembly, which delayed the endorsement to protect their tenure for two
more years in the local assembly. Sadly, the CM chose opportunism over the
chance to right a historical wrong.

In rare concert, the PML-N federal government and the PTI GB government
proved to be complicit in trampling on GB residents’ constitutional rights.
Despite a positive earlier record in supporting the locals’ demand, the PPP has
remained silent out of political expediency. Such decisions by national parties
compel a blind subservience from the local leadership, causing the latter to be
party to GB’s continuing subjugation. Locked in squabbling, political parties
are too distracted to deliver on local electoral promises to resolve the issue of
GB’s fundamental rights. Thus, two million GB residents, who are proud to
call themselves Pakistanis, feel let down.

As the current local government is too impotent to address the issues of

constitutional and land ownership rights, taxation, wheat subsidy and border
management, the discontent engendered by an authoritarian legal framework
has ignited unprecedented protests.

GB’s residents cannot be denied the right to be integrated into Pakistan. Nor
can their status remain in limbo. They are justified in demanding ownership
rights to the land they liberated and in refusing to accept laws/practices of the
former Dogra occupiers. With reference to the Kargil border management
policy, the policies adopted in AJK, Punjab and Sindh can easily be replicated
in GB.

While the Indian media projects these peaceful protests as anti-Pakistan, the
high-flying Pakistani flag at the venue of the protest and the desperate
demand for integration remain unacknowledged. A word to the powers that
be: these protests must be shown on our national media to dispel misgivings
about the intentions of the protesters who not only state but also truly believe
that they are more ‘Pakistani than Pakistanis’, a fact borne out by their record
of loyalty to Pakistan.

The writer, a former IGP Sindh, belongs to Gilgit-Baltistan.

Published in Dawn, January 17th, 2023