Devolution Plan Of General Pervez Musharraf 2001

Introduction
General Pervez Musharraf came into power on October 12, 1999, dissolving the elected government of
Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif through a military coup. The de facto government of General Pervez
Musharraf had taken certain steps towards its heightened authority and legitimacy like other military
regimes including ‘Devolution of Power Plan 2001’. Following Ayub’s model of ‘Basic Democracy’,
General Musharraf attempted to increase his power through the local bodies which also helped to
decrease the political powers of national leadership and its influence on the local politics.

Discussions
According to the ‘Devolution of Power Plan, Musharraf regime had devolved the administrative powers
to the lower level and established the institutions of district governments through the public
participation but he had not allowed the political parties to participate in the electoral process. Non-
partisan elected representatives had no political agendas based on national issues but ethnic, local and
feudal influence in their politics which had divided the social life of the country into local and regional
segments. Military authorities had been feeling comfortable using the local bodies’ members to act
upon the authoritative governmental policies, under the centralized authoritive practice, without any
criticism and answerability. Therefore, they were used during the presidential referendum and general
elections in 2002 for political favoritism. The local bodies’ members were also inclined to be the part of
Pakistan Muslim League, patronized by the military regime, during and after the general elections 2002.
Anyhow, the two consecutive terms of local bodies’ elections produced a fresh generation of political
elites for the political system which not only served as the local leaders but also joined the national level
politics as well.

In devolution Plan, the administrative powers are transferred by the central authorities to lower
level political entities like state, regional, or local authorities through the statutory orders, or the
ordinances.

Creation of Local Governments

Despite the powers and authority, no military government can work without civilian administration and
bureaucracy and ultimately turns towards the political segment of the society for its legitimacy. (Aziz,
2008) The military authorities under Musharraf’s command intended to demonstrate their democratic
tendencies to international community and stepped in to transform the political system of Pakistan
through popular consent. For the purpose, General Musharraf had carved out a four phase roadmap for
transfer of powers along with the restoration of democracy in the country. First phase of them was the
devolution of powers to the local governments. (General Elections Report, 2002) The unique concept of
‘Devolution of Powers’ at the Grassroots Level in Pakistan was raised in 1999, and the non-partisan local
bodies’ elections were gradually held in first half of 2001. (Musharraf, 2006)
Figure 1: Local Government System under Devolution of Power Plan
2001

Local

Government Devolution of some Administrative, Political and Financial

Powers and Functions from Federation to Provinces.

Provincial

Government

Devolution of some Political, Financial and Administrative

District Functions from Provinces to Common Districts (City Districts)
and Tehsils (Towns).
Government

Tehsil Municipal
Administration

Devolution of some Districts Functions to Tehsils and Union

Administrations.
Union

Administration

To decentralize and devolve the political system and for other administrative reforms, General
Musharraf established National Reconstruction Bureau (NRB), responsible to carve out the master plan
of the devolution. The devolution plan facilitated to, officially, set up district governments on August 14,
2001, after a series of local bodies’ election in the country from December 30, 2000 to July 5, 2001.
(Musharraf, 2006) Previously, the elected governments had not paid any attention to establish the
elected local governments because of the protection of their own interests and that of their
constituents. They used to establish their party organizations at the local levels on party basis which had
to protect their party interests instead of the public. But, practically, Musharraf government had taken
initiatives to devolve the power to the grassroots level for furtherance of the public.

Under the guidance of NRB, as its focal point, the Local Government Plan (2000) was targeted to
devolve the political and administrative powers to the district, tehsil and union council levels. It
recognized the following three structural modifications in the local government system:
  Unifying rural-urban governance via zila government. This was to be achieved mainly at the
tehsil level, since tehsil government was to be responsible for both rural and urban municipal
functions.
 Integration of the local bureaucracy with the local government.
 Develop a coherent and reformed police and zila administration answerable to the elected local
representatives.

Structural Framework
The purpose of the local government system was to eliminate the divisions and disparities between the
urban and rural areas. The allocation of 33% representation for ladies in the decision making process, in
all of the three tiers of local governments, was a unique example in the history of Pakistan. Special seats
had been reserved for peasants, workers and religious minorities of the community. The concept of the
District Government was introduced first time in the accounts of the nation. The community segments
were able to participate in the development projects at their local levels according to their demands.

The local government structure was contained on three tiers, from bottom to top, such as union
councils at the lowest, tehsil councils and the district (Zila) councils.

(i) Union Council

A union council, representing 15,000 to 20,000 of population, consisted on 13 councilors including 4
ladies. There were 4 reserved seats for peasants and worker and at least one reserved seat for non-
Muslim minorities. The allocation for resources was the responsibility of the federal and the provincial
governments.

 The local councils could generate their revenues by imposing the local tax.

(ii) Tehsil Council

Tehsil/Town Councils, apart from reserved seats for women, peasants and workers and minorities,
consisted on Naib Union Nazims from all the union councils in the Tehsil, in a common district or in the
town, in a city district.

(iii) District {Zila} Council

Zila Council, in a common district or in a city district, apart from reserved seats for the women, peasants
and workers and minorities, consisted of Union Nazim for all the unions in the district and the city
district. This provided vertical linkages between the three tiers of the local government i.e. the Union,
Tehsil and District. Union Nazim and Naib Union Nazim were elected as joint candidates to the Union
Council, which consisted of twenty one elected members against general and reserved seats.

Three Tiers of Local Governments under Devolution of Power Plan 2001

Local governments: Functional Performance
First time in the history of Pakistan, the bureaucracy was made subordinate to the district nazims in the
new system of local governments. Prior to the devolution plan, since the time of colonialism, practically,
the bureaucracy had been ruling the country. In the new system, it was very unusual for bureaucrats to
work under the public representative, mostly less educated against the formers. So, the higher
bureaucracy was, status-wise, affected from the new system which caused a functional gap between the
elected representatives and the bureaucracy.

The Devolution of Power Plan had a mixed reception from the public and the political
leadership. During the local government system under Musharraf, people had been feeling comfortable
to meet with their local issues and demands through their local leaders and could convey their concerns,
mostly one-on-one. It was also convenient for the local representatives to allocate the financial
resources according to the public demands in the district and tehsil councils, without any interference of
the provincial authorities. A system of check and balance was available and the pros and cons of any
public expenditure used to be discussed during the meetings of the councils at their certain level. The
system was helpful to resolve the public problems at their doorsteps with low expenditure without
chasing the higher authorities at provincial or federal levels. It was inclined to dissolve the culture of
dependency, to accelerate the process of accountability, and to discourage the ‘rural-urban migration’.

Though, the bureaucracy had unwillingly accepted the devolution plan but instead of giving
functional freedom to the elected representatives at the local levels they entangled them with the rules
and regulations. The lack of coordination and confidence was common in many districts and the district
bureaucracy had been playing its role as the provincial agent, in opposition of the local authorities
instead to be their subordinates. Even, the District Coordination Officer (DCO) and District Police Officer
(DPO) got more power under the devolution plan through some mall-practices in district recruitment
process which was not in exercise before 2001. Critics also blame Musharraf to use local councilors to
elect himself as the president in his referendum 2001 and in the general elections to help winning the
official party PML (Q).

Devolution of power was a give and take process of authority. When one political entity was
empowered the other was disempowered. The devolution of power plan was implemented through an
ordinance other than any federal or provincial legislation to make it part of the constitution.

Surprisingly, in the devolution plan, the provincial powers were dissolved to the district
governments while the federal powers and responsibilities were not devolve to the provinces or the
districts. The continued holding of some powers by the federation was against the provincial autonomy
which had made provincial governments weaker than before.

Conclusion
The Devolution of Power Plan met its demise along with its creator and no local government election
could be conducted after 2005. Interestingly, all of the local bodies’ plans had been implemented during
the authoritative governments but none of the democratic regimes volunteered to establish any of
those. According to the prerequisites and conditions mentioned earlier, Devolution of Power Plan 2001
could not fulfill any of them and ended as dysfunctional. Firstly, central government in Pakistan needs to
be strong enough to bring its fragmented feudal, ethnic and tribal authorities into balance which is the
traditional part of the society. In a political environment surrounded among landed, industrial and
religious elites, true devolution is difficult if not impossible.
Secondly, a strong civil society requires; a substantial human growth, a favorable political culture, a
religiously split society, the quality of political institutions and the good governance. The conditions of a
strong civil society had not been fully available in the country, at least since 1977.

Thirdly, in democratic political systems, political parties provide opportunities for political socialization
to aggregate the public demands to the political authorities. They play their role in political environment
according to their party policies and programs. They also communicate between the public and political
authorities and help to produce leadership qualities among their political domains. During the period of
study, non-party local governments’ elections, held in 2001 and 2005, enhanced local and kinship
politics instead of the exploring the national issues and national developmental attitudes.

Lastly, though, devolution plan was not the part of constitution but enforced by an authoritative
ordinance. Devolution of power is the beauty of the federalism under democratically elected
government where the local bodies’ help to resolve the public problems at the local level. For a
successful devolution in Pakistan, local governments’ structure should be mentioned in the constitution.
It was a positive initiative towards the decentralization of powers and extensive political participation at
the lower level. It helped to meet the public issues at their door-steps but, inadequate planning and
improper structural stratification caused a gulf between the local governments and the bureaucracy
producing dysfunctionalism and distrust. Instead of the traditional bureaucracy, a separate cadre of the
local bodies’ bureaucracy could be established, especially trained to work with local governments’
elected representatives. Establishment of local governments would be functionally benefitted for
democratic governments to reduce their work load.

Prepared By:

Muhammad Imran Khan