America is a Federation Pakistan is Not: Naveed Tajammal

Editor’s Note: All colonial powers in general and the British in particular left many seeds of discord in their colonial domains that created a wedge between the people so that it could allow them to exercise their remote control over the region. Like there never was any Afghanistan but it was created to provide a buffer between British India and the Czarist Russia. Within this buffer, another buffer the present day FATA (Federally Administered Tribal Areas) was also created. Kashmir was also delinked from Indus Basin and given a new status. At the time of departure from India, under British India Act of 1935 many states like Punjab, Bengal etc. were divided so that area never sees peace. This act is still in vogue that is eating into our national fabric like moth.

There is an increased pressure to accept Pakistan as a federation for which it is being linked and governed by Government of India Act 1935 of British India, an Act. This Act was tailor made for the British as per their own geopolitical requirements in relation, to an empire where the sun never set, or the rule of the Union Jack. We as a nation, have to see our past divorced from the past that the British created and thrust upon us by creating new geographic entities that never existed before. This was a result of the British Imperialist Forward Policies, spanning part of the 18th and the whole of 19thcentury, when the British had started their annexations in Indus Basin (now known as Pakistan) in pursuance of, their own interest, to check the emerging threats of various pivotal powers of the 19th and early 20th century.
When the British finally left, they left behind the proverbial, Pandora’s box with its ‘Lid’ open, but this particular Pandora’s box was filled with demons created by the British and their identities established, as per the job requirements, having rewritten our records, and having given us a spin like a top, they departed! Yet we labor, learning a script alien to us, a language alien to us, and for to write to express ourselves, we resort to a form of writing, not even remotely associated with us, a result of a little over a hundred years of despotic rule on us. Our indigenous educational system was destroyed, a generation gap created in the 19th century, as well as 20th century by introduction of this English Language. With its literature, based on alien cultures and histories tailor made for certain needs, now established, as dogmas.
In a hundred years, come three generations, add another 60 years, you end up with five generations. Then try taking on to yourself to seek the truth, wrapped in a bundle of lies, the unwrapping takes its own time, but, if the intentions are honorable and the manner sincere, you can even today hit the bull’s eye, and undo the damage which our old masters have done.
Of the former, two major British colonies in North America and Australia, both later became federations, we have to see the root of their creations and the races which decided to cross the stormy Atlantic Ocean fleeing prosecution of religious nature in their original abodes, and a feudal system despotic in all aspects of life, yet portrayed on us as the most harmless one. Taking USA as a case study of the original, thirteen colonies which formed the nucleus of a state, now called USA, the history is not very old, but of a recent past ,it’s independence almost coinciding with the, influx of Sikh inroads in our central regions, of the Indus Basin.. If we dwell in the past records we see that,. it was Newfoundland ,the most ancient of Britain’s colonial possession discovered by John Cabot in 1497. By 1504 fishermen of Normandy, Britannia and Basque provinces were engaged here, by 1517, forty sail ships of Portuguese, French and Spaniards were involved in the business of cod fishery. By 1578, four hundred vessels were engaged in fish business. But the British had only fifty out of the total quoted. Sir Humphrey Gilbert with letters from Queen Elizabeth landed at St John’s in 1583 and took possession of the country in the Queen’s name. But soon after, Gilbert was drowned and the whole maneuver failed. The other nations mentioned however maintained their businesses in these lands.
In 1606, James I, of England formed two companies by a single charter. To one, the London Company he granted, the North American East Coast between 34 degree and 38 degree north, and to the other, the Plymouth Company, whose membership was in West of England, he granted the coast between 41 degree and 45 degree North latitude. The intervening coast between the latitudes 38 degree and 41 degree north or between Rappahannock and Hudson River was to be common to both. The later colonists, had asked the Crown to declare that, their successor will be free persons and shall enjoy all liberties, franchises and immunities of free denizens, as enjoyed by all Born within the realm of England. The reason for this request was as quite a lot of these settlers were convicts being sent as penal settlers.
The London Company first sent the shipload under Christopher Newport and it landed near a River on 13th May 1607, in the present State of Virginia, a town was built called, James Town named after the King. Soon other waves of colonists came persecuted by the English Church; others came to Plymouth (Massachusetts) in 1620. In 1632, came up the Colony of Maryland, the land given to Lord Baltimore. In 1663, the South of present State of Virginia was cut off and called, Carolina, later they became the States of North & South Carolina in 1729. And that of Georgia in 1732. Hence five distinct colonies became states out of the London Company’s grant ,the sixth was the Massachusetts by the Plymouth Company. Besides these, Connecticut was next(1662) and Rhode Island came after. The New Hampshire and the next to follow. The other four colonies and later states were between the London and Plymouth Companies.
Meanwhile, the Spaniards had taken over the South of North America and the French moved to it’s North. The reason being, the religious differences with the Spaniards. Besides these nations, the Dutch also came in 1609. They had sent Henry Hudson an Englishman, to explore the central region of grant of James First. The Dutch had set up a trading post at, “Manhadoes” (the present city of New York) and a government under the Dutch West India Company was organized, here in 1621, named New Nether land and the town at the mouth of Hudson River, “New Amsterdam”. The next nation was Sweden, who established a colony at Delaware Bay in 1638 but the Dutch took it over in 1655.
By the time of reformation in religious matters in England, the northern and southern English colonies had started looking at these in between colonies as an annoyance and danger. England and Holland went to war in 1664, the English won and took over New Amsterdam and the whole of the Dutch central region. The king of England, awarded this, to his brother, the Duke of York. So New Amsterdam became the State of New York. The Duke of York sold out a part of these lands to Berkley and Cartwright and thus, New Jersey was the result. In 1681, the Great Parallelogram, west of New Jersey was granted to a , Mr. William Penn and this became Pennsylvania. Soon after, Mr Penn bought some more land from the Duke of York which became the State of Delaware. The Quakers, a sect of Christians, found refuge here. Soon after, every language of Europe could be found in the subsequent USA. The French, had moved to Mississippi by 1702, under D’iberville, New Orleans was thus founded as was the city of Mobile. The land between Mississippi and Saint Lawrence was then called New France, however by 1750, the British numbered a million and a quarter as opposed to the French who were only a hundred thousand in America then.
The struggle from England was started by these states, being rooted in, the Stamp Act of 1765 and the revenue which was to be raised for the Crown from it. Then came the Tea Tax of 1770, the Boston Port Act of 1774 and the Quebec Act of 1774, which effected the lands North of Ohio and east of Mississippi.
The nail in the coffin for the British was, the Quebec Act, the American puritans, resisted the establishment of the Church of England, a Roman Catholic System in their lands, so started the Independence Movement between 1775 -1788.

St Andrew’s and At George’s crosses
In 1776, surprisingly, the first flag of thirteen states, the stripes which represented the states had, also, however the crosses of St George and Saint Andrew on the blue ground in the corner which acknowledged the royal power. It was later in war, that in 1777, the crosses were replaced by the stars.
Here it would not be out of context to describe the Pakistan flag that comprises of two

Pakistan Flag
colours only. Green is for the Muslim majority and white that comprises of seven colours represents the religious minorities. These two colours do not represent any state or province as none existed in history. This reinforces the argument that Pakistan unlike the USA is a single state and not a conglomerate of various states.
Before, the War of American Independence, had started in the true sense, and the flag underwent changes as per the requirements of the people of earlier USA, which we have seen very briefly, i.e. the entities which were part of this Federation, then called as a Confederacy, and NOT a Federation. A legal difference, between the two which will be explained later.
The composition of these thirteen colonies, (later states), was that, all were called and termed provinces by the Crown, the Governors were appointed by the Crown and had an absolute veto on legislation. Hence there were thus, three proprietary, seven royal, one semi-royal and two charter colonies total ling the figure of thirteen. However, of the two charter companies, there were simple Representative democracies, having the power to legislate without a practical appeal to the Crown, and had no royal Governor or Agent within their borders.
It was their systems, which were the high water mark to which the desires and claims of other colonies gradually approached. Massachusetts, and the proprietary colonies were very nearly on a level with them, and the royal or proprietary governor’s veto power was rather an annoyance than a fundamental difference.
In all the colonies, representative governments had forced, their way and had fairly early taken a bicameral shapes i.e. the division of a legislative body into two chambers (a Senate and a House). In the Charter colonies, and Massachusetts, the Lower House was chosen by the towns, and the Upper House from the people at large, and the two Houses made up the Assembly.
In Pennsylvania, and Delaware, there were but only one House. In the Royal Colonies and in Maryland, the Lower House alone was elected by the people. The Upper House, or Council was chosen by the Crown, through the Governor. And the ascent of all three elements was essential for legislation. In the final revolution, the Charter Colonies did not change their governments at all, they already had what they wanted. The Revolution was consummated in the other colonies by the assumption of power by the Lower or popular houses usually known as, “Assembly”. The Governor or Counsel, or both, being ousted. A marked and important distinction is in the local organizations of the northern and southern colonies, all the southern colonies(later states),had begun as proprietary governments, settlers went there as individuals connected ONLY with the colony, to the individual the Colony, was the greatest political factory, his true new identity. His other connection was, his local church, related to the sect of Christianity which he followed, and they being numerous as will be elucidated.
The religion, thus played a dominant role in these colonies in those days, which eventually shaped them in later entities called states. Ethnicity too, was another factor in the making of these early states of USA.
The Dutch meanwhile, had created, in the central regions of both charter companies i.e. London and Plymouth Companies, a system of, “Patroon ships,” to understand the concept of this Dutch System one has to travel back in the Roman Times but briefly here, it was THE old patron and client relationship. The patron was technically here in USA in these states the First of the Equals, amongst the Dutch Colonists. The client was the New Colonists. It was the duty of the patron to provide his client with the necessities of life and it was the common practice to make him a grant of a small plot of land to cultivate on his own account, further, he (patron), advised him in all his affairs he represented, in any transactions with the third parties, in which the New Colonists took part. The New Colonist, had to render to his patron, the respect and obedience due by a dependent, but, also when he was in a position to do so and the circumstances of the patron required it, to render him, monetary assistance also. As the time advanced, the New Colonists amassed wealth, so now they, contributed towards the dowries of a patron’s daughter and also paid fines imposed on the patron by a competent authority, and also towards his (patron’s) maintenance when he had become reduced to poverty. The patron and the colonist were alike hereditary relationships. The traces of this system still exist as can be seen in the actual inner workings of certain classes in USA, the Mafia being the factor discussed. Such were the laws of the patron- ship fraternity prevalent in the central states in the Dutch regions of early USA.
In the religious matters, the colonies and later states were divided being protestants, Mormons, Quakers, Baptists, Methodists, Presbyterian, Episcopal and roman Catholics. The Baptists were further divided into northern and southern churches.
The immigration factor which created these later states were the heterogeneous flow from Europe. The educational aspect was also fairly well covered, Harvard College in Massachusetts was founded in 1636,William and Mary College, in Virginia in 1692,Yale College in Connecticut in 1700,Princeton College in New Jersey in 1746,Pennsylvania University in 1749 and King’s now Columbia College, in New York in 1754.
Amongst the causes of revolt against the English Crown, were the other restrictive laws also, imposed on the colonies, in 1699, on the complaint of English manufacturers, that the colonists were cutting them out of their foreign wool markets, the British Parliament enacted that no wool or woolen manufactures could be shipped from any of the colonies under the penalty of forfeiture of ship and cargo. The English manufacturers ruled supreme in Britain and at intervals, “The Board of Trade and Plantations” especially tailor made by the British traders having been created in 1696, saw to it. The Board, from time to time heard the complaints of English manufacturers and traders and framed remedial bills for the British Parliament, the home of democracy, the West minister type of Democracy which we so often quote, and this august assembly, saw to it, that, the bills were passed! The so often quoted man, MR Pitt, the famous Prime Minister of England saw to it, as late as 1766, as from 1718 onward in the colonies the manufacture of iron goods ,was alarming to the businessmen of British Islands. So Mr. Pitt, asserted the right and duty of Parliament to, “bind the trade and confine the manufactures” of the colonies, and to do all but tax them without representation.
Earlier too, in 1719, the British Parliament passed it’s first prohibition of iron manufactures in the colonies, and in 1750, it also forbade under penalties the maintaining of iron mills, stilling or rolling mills, plate-forges and Stella furnaces in the colonies. Where it suited the British provisos, were made .To quote an example, as it suited the traders and manufacturers of Britain, it allowed the import of American bar-iron into England as it was cheaper and better than the Swedish.
Silly acts and parliamentary laws were passed by British Parliament, to quote only one, in 1731, the Parliament had forbidden the manufacture or exportation of, “HATS”, in or from the colonies, even their transportation from one colony to the other.
The purpose of highlighting all these aspects of early American History, though as yet not fully covered is to enlighten the reader, that the British always drafted laws with ulterior motives. We have to question and check the veracity of these laws and study the past Acts of the British in their various colonies. The Act of 1935 is no exception as is being explained.
The British Imperialists, had thrust on us, by virtue of Government of India Act, the clause of Federation, and the cause of our present problems, which persists in all our Constitutions. The requisites of a Federation are quite different, and the term implies a state entity within the fold of a centre. Whereas, Pakistan never had State entities as the term goes, when the Act was passed; we had a Sindh, Punjab, NWFP and Baluchistan as per the Act. The War for Liberation brought in the AJK and Northern areas post 1947. Hence it is being explained how the USA and it’s Federation cannot be compared to Pakistan as was done in the previous articles and the concluding one.
The Confederacy which existed in USA till 1789, of thirteen states, the term “Confederacy” and meaning generally is a league or union, of states or individuals, in a nutshell, it implies a temporary league of independent states for a certain purpose. It was after 1789, that the term Federation came into use in the USA, Federation, now meant a closer union. This distinction was emphasised during the American Civil war between north and south (1861-1865), the seceding forming again a Confederation, which had earlier lasted till 1789, in opposition to the Federal Union.
The system of a federal state as in USA was based, in it’s own way, each state of USA is an independent state, as stated earlier it is a new country composed of different nations whereas, Pakistan is a new name yet we trace our past in a remote time. And have flourished as an entity, as a whole since then.
To further explain the American States composition and functions which has no bearing to our lands, as British ruled over us for barely a little over a hundred years. The point to note is, they did not settle us, like was the case of Australia too, a penal settlement initially hence it justified the Common Wealth Act of 1900 on the Australians. But the Act of 1935, with reference to Federation could not have been and, should not have been, enacted on us.
In the American State ,the powers of a state are inherent, not delegated, each retains all such rights and functions, of an independent government, each has it’s own documentary Constitution,  it’s legislature of two elective houses, it’s executive consisting of a Governor and other officials, it’s judiciary whose decisions are final, except in cases involving Federal law; it’s system of local government and local taxation, it’s revenue, system of taxation and debts; it’s body of private, civil and criminal law and procedure ;it’s rules of citizenship. An American, may, through his life, never be reminded of the Federal Government, except when, he votes at Federal elections, his direct taxes are paid to officials, acting under the state laws. Lastly the Constitution of each State is formed and enacted by the State itself, save those states which were not a part of the old Federal Union. And, had joined later, even in such states, the Constitution derives it’s force ,not from the national government, but from the people of the state.
When in 1776, the thirteen colonies threw off their allegiance to the British Crown, and took the title of States, they proceeded to unite themselves in a league by the Articles of Confederation of 1781.This scheme of Union proved defective, for it’s central authority and assembly called, “Congress” was THEN, hopelessly weak. It had neither an executive, nor a judiciary, nor had it proper means of coercing a recalcitrant state. It’s weakness became so apparent, especially, after the pressure of the war, with British had been removed. That the opinion of the wisest men called for a closer and more effective union and thus the present original Constitution(minus the amendments),was drafted by a convention in 1787, was ratified, by nine states(the prescribed number).In 1788, and was set, to work under George Washington as the first President in 1789. The original Constitution was a short document with only 7 Articles, sub divided into sections.
Now to compare this with Act of 1935 is an altogether wrong approach as this Act was the outcome of long constitutional developments, based on Government of India Act 1858 by which the Crown, took over from East India Company. The Act of 1909, which had introduced elective principles, the Act of 1919 which introduced provincial diarchy and some nation building subjects such as education which had already been introduced in the schooling systems of British India in the 19th Century as per the policy of Lord Macaulay vide his address to the British Parliament on 2nd February 1835.
Unfortunately, when this educational system was introduced and enforced ,it had already been well perfected in India and also the methodology of education had been refined by the hired and trained people to implement the British policies.
By virtue of the Act of 1919,the core subjects like law, order and finance were held by officials appointed by and responsible to British Governors and ultimately to the British Parliament. The Simon Commission in 1927 was greeted by black flags and mass protests on the roads as it was composed of only the British with no Indian Representation. In a nutshell, this report proposed ,”the setting up of an All India Federation in a distant future”. The Indian Round table Conferences 1931 -1933 composition of which had men, who never decided an issue, which was in fact the objective of the British in the first place and hence the composition of such men in these round table conferences. So, the British could do as they pleased and eventually blame it on the natives, for, “lack of decision”. So as the British wanted it, it was decided; that, both the British India and the Princely States would be integrated into an eventual Federal Dominion of India. Here again, the leaders of Congress and Muslim League could not arrive at any agreement, on how, this Federation would be structured i.e. how power was to be shared and how minority Muslims were to be protected from Hindu persecution, this resulted in letting the conservative dominated British Government, free to draft a legislative proposals in line with its own views, a joint select committee, chaired by Lord Linlithgow, received a draft paper termed as a ,”White Paper” and thus the Government of India Act 1935 was framed. In order to appease the die hearts of British Conservative Government, certain safeguards were strengthened. Indirect elections were reinstated for the Federal Assembly (Lower House). Among other things the Act continued to deny the British Indians the right to draft or modify their own Constitution.
The Act of 1935, was the longest Bill ever passed by a Parliament, a good constitution should clearly set out over arching principles, “Not lawyers small print”, the most successful Constitution ever is indeed that of USA, as described in my article with reference to the Federation aspect only. The reason of this long draft was the British Parliaments lack of trust of the politicians in particular.
After Independence Act of 1947 with a few amendments in the Act of 1935 it became the functioning interim constitution of Pakistan. Earlier, the objective of British in enacting this Act was to make a tailor made Constitution, to fulfill the requirement of British needs and it was expected that the Act was to lead to a nominally dominion status India, conservative in outlook, dominated by an alliance of Hindu princes by this stance, the Muslim and the right wing Hindus would have then, naturally, sought the guidance and protection of the British Government, assure stalemate like situation.
As stated earlier, after the Independence Act of 1947, we as a nation, should have with the help of good jurists, drafted our own Constitution as per own requirements. It is true that we have a massive population growth, we have to and need to, clear our stables. The geographic entities, a legacy of British Raj should be removed, a nation which has always existed can never be classed as a Federation. No colonists or charter companies brought in settlers in our Indus Basin. Circumstances forced on us, a British Rule. We must break the chains and re-emerge as one nation as one state. From north to south, east to west keeping in view the number of our population, as many provinces as feasible.
If the Indians want to retain the federation aspect, they have truly the grounds for separate entities, a pre-requisite for a Federation.
Naveed Tajammal is a historian with no parallel. He is researching in history for over 25 years. Although his area of focus is Indus Basin and the Muslim History but he has an equally good command over world history.
(The writer has over 26 years of experience in historical investigative research).

Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.


  • The Editors  On August 14, 2010 at 6:20 pm

    A confederation is an association of sovereign states, usually created by treaty but often later adopting a common constitution. Confederations tend to be established for dealing with critical issues, such as defense, foreign affairs, foreign trade, and a common currency, with the central government being required to provide support for all members. A confederation, in modern political terms, is usually limited to a permanent union of sovereign states for common action in relation to other states

    Confederation vs. federation

    Sometimes confederation is erroneously used in the place of federation. Some nations which started out as confederations retained the word in their titles after officially becoming federations, such as Switzerland. The United States of America was at first a confederation before becoming a federation with the ratification of the current US constitution in 1789. Moreover, the US Civil War was a byproduct of the formation of the Confederate States of America, US states allied in their desire to form a different political union and retain slavery.

    By definition the difference between a confederation and a federation is that the membership of the member states in a confederation is voluntary, while the membership in a federation is not. In other words Federation has provinces (administrative divisions) and a “Union” of Confederation has states which came together as in “Union of India”.

    The constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan describes the country as a “Federation”.

  • Pakistani  On August 15, 2010 at 10:01 am

    I’m still reading the article, but one thing I’d like to add is that it wasn’t British rule that made English so strongly influential in Pakistan- it was our own policy.

    Our grandparents generation spoke little or no English, this was our own imposition of English onto our people.

  • sharafs  On August 15, 2010 at 12:35 pm

    I agree and that is why Pakistan keeps stuttering. Read this article on my blog in concert.

  • Ubaid  On August 15, 2010 at 1:48 pm

    An extremely enlightening read.Long, but worth it.
    Thank you Dr Tajammal.

  • Farida  On August 15, 2010 at 1:52 pm

    Dr Tajammal, I have read a lot of the DRAWBACKS of 1935 Act. But am unaware of it’s details.Can you point wise just highlight what you think is WRONG with it?
    Thank you.

  • Summaya  On August 15, 2010 at 2:00 pm

    Before the time In pre-Columbian times, most of modern Central America was part of the Mesoamerican civilization. The Native American societies of Mesoamerica occupied the land ranging from central Mexico in the north to Costa Rica in the south. The pre-Columbian cultures of Panama traded with both Mesoamerica and South America, and can be considered transitional between those two cultural areas.Central America is composed of seven independent nations: Belize, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and Panama. After the Spanish conquest in the 16th century, most of the inhabitants of Central America shared a similar history. The exception was the Western Caribbean Zone, which included the Caribbean coast and encompassed both semi-independent indigenous polities, runaway slave communities, and settlers, especially English settlers who would eventually form British Honduras (the modern-day nation of Belize), a sparsely populated area that was leased by the Spanish Crown to Great Britain for freedom. British Honduras for the English and Belice for the Spaniards and Guatemalans gained its independence from Great Britain in 1981 and adopted the name “Belize”.
    From the 16th century through 1821 Central America formed the Captaincy General of Guatemala, sometimes known also as the Kingdom of Guatemala, composed by the states of Chiapas (now part of Mexico), Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Costa Rica. Officially, the Captaincy was part of the Viceroyalty of New Spain and therefore under the supervision of the Spanish viceroy in Mexico City. It was, however, administered not by the viceroy or his deputies, but by an independently appointed Captain General headquartered first in Antigua Guatemala and later in Guatemala City.In 1823 the nation of Central America was formed. It was intended to be a federal republic modeled after the United States of America. It was provisionally known as “The United Provinces of Central America,” while the final name according to the Constitution of 1824 was “The Federal Republic of Central America.” It is sometimes incorrectly referred in English as “The United States of Central America.” The Central American nation consisted of the states of Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Costa Rica. In the 1830s an additional state was added, Los Altos, with its capital in Quetzaltenango, occupying parts of what is now the western highlands of Guatemala and part of Chiapas (now part of Mexico), but this state was reincorporated into Guatemala and Mexico respectively in 1840.
    Central American liberals had high hopes for the federal republic, which they believed would evolve into a modern, democratic nation, enriched by trade crossing through it between the Atlantic and the Pacific oceans. These aspirations are reflected in the emblems of the federal republic: The flag shows a white band between two blue stripes, representing the land between two oceans. The coat of arms shows five mountains (one for each state) between two oceans, surmounted by a Phrygian cap, the emblem of the French Revolution.
    The Union dissolved in civil war between 1838 and 1840. Its disintegration began when Honduras separated from the federation on November 5, 1838.

  • Ashraf  On August 15, 2010 at 10:58 pm

    It has always been a Great Game by then powers of the day.I quite agree with Tajammal. This is true even today. With US interests in the Region, Pakistan is the one on receiving end. It serves their interest to be “friends” with India today.My prayers are, they are as “good” friends to them as they have been to us!

  • Abedi  On August 15, 2010 at 11:19 pm

    Britian screwed up on my beautiful NWFP by creating the FATA BELT. They created the issue of KASHMIR.But IS there a solution in sight to these deliberate twists?Maybe Dr Tajammal can tell us?

  • IMRAN  On August 16, 2010 at 4:23 am

    Dear Tajammal
    Are U telling us you are right & those who made the Constitution incorrect?

    1. The President may direct the Governor of any Province to discharge as his Agent, either generally or in any particular matter, such functions relating to such areas in the Federation which are not included in any Province as may be specified in the direction. 2. The provisions of Article 105 shall not apply to the discharge by the Governor of his functions under clause 1.

    1. Notwithstanding anything contained in the Constitution, the Federal Government may, with the consent of the Government of a Province, entrust either conditionally or unconditionally to that Government, or to its officers, functions in relation to any matter to which the executive authority of the Federation extends. 2. An Act of Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) may, notwithstanding that it relates to a matter with respect to which a Provincial Assembly has no power to make laws, confer powers and impose duties upon a province or officers and authorities thereof. 3. Where by virtue of this Article powers and duties have been conferred or imposed upon a Province or officers or authorities thereof, there shall be paid by the Federation to the Province such sum as may be agreed or, in default of agreement, as may be determined by an arbitrator appointed by the Chief Justice of Pakistan, in respect of any extra costs of administration incurred by the Province in connection with the exercise of those powers or the discharge of those duties.

    Notwithstanding anything contained in the Constitution, the Government of a Province may, with the consent of the Federal Government, entrust, either conditionally or unconditionally, to the Federal Government, or to its officers, functions in relation to any matter to which the executive authority of the Province extends.

    1. The executive authority of every Province shall be so exercised as to secure compliance with Federal laws which apply in that Province. 2. Without prejudice to any other provision of this Chapter, in the exercise of the executive authority of the Federation in any Province regard shall be had to the interests of that Province. 3. It shall be the duty of the Federation to protect every Province against external aggression and internal disturbances and to ensure that the Government of every Province is carried on in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution.

    1. The executive authority of every Province shall be so exercised as not to impede or prejudice the exercise of the executive authority of the Federation, and the executive authority of the Federation shall extend to the giving of such directions to a Province as may appear to the Federal Government to be necessary for that purpose. 2. The executive authority of the Federation shall also extend to the giving of directions to a Province as to the carrying into execution therein of any Federal law which relates to a matter specified in the Concurrent Legislative List and authorises the giving of such directions. 3. The executive authority of the Federation shall also extend to the giving of directions to a Province as to the construction an d maintenance of means of communication declared in the direction to be of national or strategic importance. 4. The executive authority of the Federation shall also extend to the giving of directions to a Province as to the manner in which the executive authority thereof is to be exercised for the purpose of preventing any grave menace to the peace or tranquility or economic life of Pakistan or any part thereof.

    Full faith and credit shall be given throughout Pakistan to public acts and records, and judicial proceedings of every Province.

    1. Subject to clause 2., trade, commerce and intercourse throughout Pakistan shall be free. 2. Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) may by law impose such restrictions on the freedom of trade, commerce or intercourse between one Province and another or within any part of Pakistan as may be required in the public interest. 3. A Provincial Assembly or a Provincial Government shall not have power to- a. make any law, or take any executive action, prohibiting or restricting the entry into, or the export from, the Province of goods of any class or description, or b. impose a tax which, as between goods manufactured or produced in the Province and similar goods not so manufactured or produced, discriminates in favour of the former goods or which, in the case of goods manufactured or produced outside the Province discriminates between goods manufactured or produced in any area in Pakistan and similar goods manufactured or produced in any other area in Pakistan. 4. An Act of a Provincial Assembly which imposes any reasonable restriction in the interest of public health, public order or morality, or for the purpose of protecting animals or plants from disease or preventing or alleviating any serious shortage in the Province of an essential commodity shall not, if it was made with the consent of the President, be invalid.
    The Federation may, if it deems necessary to acquire any land situate in a Province for any purpose connected with a matter with respect to which Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) has power to make laws, require the Province to acquire the land on behalf, and at the expense, of the Federation or, if the land belongs to the Province, to transfer it to the Federation on such terms as may be agreed or, in default of agreement, as may be determined by an arbitrator appointed by the Chief Justice of Pakistan.
    (National Security Council) Omitted by the Constitution Eighth Amendment. Act, 1985, section 18 with effect from November 9, 1985

    1. There shall be a Council of Common Interests, in this Chapter referred to as the Council, to be appointed by the President. 2. The members of the Council shall be- a. the Chief Ministers of the Provinces, and b. an equal number of members from the Federal Government to be nominated by the Prime Minister from time to time. 3. The Prime Minister. if he is a member of the Council. shall be the Chairman of the Council but, if at any time he is not a member, the President may nominate a Federal Minister who is a member of the Council to be its Chairman. 4. The Council shall be responsible to Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament).

    1. The Council shall formulate and regulate policies in relation to matters in Part II of the Federal Legislative List and, in so far as it is in relation to the affairs of the Federation, the matter in entry 34 electricity. in the Concurrent Legislative List, and shall exercise supervision and control over related institutions. 2. The decisions of the Council shall be expressed in terms of the opinion of the majority. 3. Until Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) makes provision by law in this behalf, the Council may make its rules of procedure. 4. Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) in joint sitting may from time to time by resolution issue directions through the Federal Government to the Council generally or in a particular matter to take action as Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) may deem just and proper and such directions shall be binding on the Council. 5. If the Federal Government or a Provincial Government is dissatisfied with a decision of the council, it may refer the matter to Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) in a joint sitting whose decision in this behalf shall be final.

    1. If the interests of a Province, the Federal Capital or the Federally Administered Tribal Areas, or any of the inhabitants thereof, in water from any natural source of supply have been or are likely to be affected prejudicially by- a. any executive act or legislation taken or passed or proposed to be taken or passed, or b. the failure of any authority to exercise any of its powers with respect to the use and distribution or control of water from that source, the Federal Government or the Provincial Government concerned may make a complaint in writing to the Council. 2. Upon receiving such complaint, the Council shall, after having considered the matter, either give its decision or request the President to appoint a commission consisting of such persons having special knowledge and experience in irrigation, engineering, administration, finance or law as he may think fit, hereinafter referred to as the Commission. 3. Until Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) makes provision by law in this behalf, the provisions of the Pakistan Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1956, as in force immediately before the commencing day shall apply to the Council or the Commission as if the Council or the Commission were a commission appointed under that Act to which all the provisions of section 5 thereof applied and upon which the power contemplated by section 10A thereof had been conferred. 4. After considering the report and supplementary report, if any, of the Commission, the Council shall record its decision on all matters referred to the Commission. 5. Notwithstanding any law to the contrary, but subject to the provisions of clause 5. of Article 154, it shall be the duty of the Federal Government and the Provincial Government concerned in the matter in issue to give effect to the decision of the Council faithfully according to its terms and tenor. 6. No proceeding shall lie before any court at the instance of any party to a matter which is or has been in issue before the Council. or of any person whatsoever, in respect of a matter which is actually or has been or might or ought to have been a proper subject of complaint to the Council under this Article.

    1. The President shall constitute a National Economic Council consisting of the Prime Minister, who shall be its Chairman. and such other members as the President may determine: Provided that the President shall nominate one member from each Province on the recommendation of the Government of that Province. 2. The National Economic Council shall review the overall economic condition of the country and shall, for advising the Federal Government and the Provincial Governments, formulate plans in respect of financial, commercial, social and economic policies; and in formulating such plans, it shall be guided by the, Principles of Policy set out in Chapter 2 of Part II.

    1. The Federal Government may in any Province construct or cause to be constructed hydro-electric or thermal power installations or grid stations for the generation of electricity and lay or cause to be laid inter-Provincial transmission lines. 2. The Government of a Province may- a. to the extent electricity is supplied to that Province from the national grid, require supply to be made in bulk for transmission and distribution within the Province: b. levy tax on consumption of electricity within the Province; c. construct power houses and grid stations and lay transmission lines for use within the Province; and d. determine the tariff for distribution of electricity within the Province.

    The Province in which a well-head of natural gas is situated shall have precedence over other parts of Pakistan in meeting the requirements from the well-head, subject to the commitments and obligations as on the commencing day.

    1. The Federal Government shall not unreasonably refuse to entrust to a Provincial Government such functions with respect to broadcasting and telecasting as may be necessary to enable that Government- a. to construct and use transmitters in the Province; and b. to regulate and impose fees in respect of, the construction and use of transmitters and the use of receiving apparatus in the Province: Provided that nothing in this clause shall be construed as requiring the Federal Government to entrust to any Provincial Government any control over the use of transmitters constructed or maintained by the Federal Government or by persons authorised by the Federal Government, or over the use of receiving apparatus by person so authorised. 2. Any functions so entrusted to a Provincial Government shall be exercised subject to such conditions as may be imposed by the Federal Government, including, notwithstanding anything contained in the Constitution, any conditions with respect to finance, but it shall not be lawful for the Federal Government so to impose any conditions regulating the matter broadcast or telecast by, or by authority of, the Provincial Government. 3. Any Federal law with respect to broadcasting and telecasting shall be such as to secure that effect can be given to the foregoing provisions of this Article. 4. If any question arises whether any conditions imposed on any Provincial Government are lawfully imposed, or whether any refusal by the Federal Government to entrust functions is unreasonable, the question shall be determined by an arbitrator appointed by the Chief Justice of Pakistan. 5. Nothing in this article shall be construed as restricting the powers of the Federal Government under the Constitution for the prevention of any grave menace to the peace or tranquility of Pakistan or any part thereof.

  • naveed tajammal  On August 16, 2010 at 12:32 pm

    Thankyou for your time taken in reading my article,it is a lengthy one.Perhaps in the preamble i should have high lighted, that,it was the Federation aspect of our constitution which irked me, as a student of our history, in 1947, by the act of independence due to shortage of time, the act of 1935, was deemed as our interim constitution,and as any constitution of any state is tailor made to needs of any nation, we should have improved it,the rationale of the analogy with USA was,as partly this country too had been a colony of the union jack,the thirteen states still hold the clout,the yankee party,good for them,but coming back to our own side, well we are a very old entity now with a new name,a nation gets its strength from its people,linguistics and culture, being the key words, ethnicity too,as goes the language,
    it is distinct from rest of British Indian empire from which it was, carved from,with language is the culture,dress and insignia,it were the British who left us with these states or governments, as stated in the constitution,the set of rules and regulation are found in words similar all over the world, these are the checks and balances of the center on its sprawling areas,of command,they are so found in each ACT or Article or Statute ,they are there to safeguard the Writ ONLY !
    The British created like the entity of Afghanistan,many states or entities governed by the crown,the Whitehall in London, in pursuance of its forward policies, to keep in-check the threat,from, firstly the french in the early 19th century and later from the Czars of Russia,throughout the rest of the century,so came the birth of Sindh, PUNJAB, balluchistan,FATA ,NWFP, not to miss the creation of the DOGRA hindu state of Kashmir,and its extended boundaries,and the loss of our WAHKHAN, to Aghanistan. I HOPE I HAVE CLEARED MY POINT OF VIEW.

  • Adil Rashdi  On August 17, 2010 at 2:44 am

    Naveed Tajammal is perhaps the best research scholar amongst the present generation of academics in Pakistan today. One hopes that what can clearly be seen as a labour of love on his part and his vast knowledge can benefit the average Pakistani citizen, who has been starved of knowledge deliberately by the state since the very beginning. However, I beg to remind him, my very dear friend, that Pakistan may be a state (single) as he says in his great exposition, yet the original idea was for it to be a sort of confederation of “autonomous” states – meaning the various (at the beginning five) nationalities of Punjab, Sindh, Pashtunistan and Balochistan would enjoy full autonomy in governance at the provincial level and surrender some common powers of foreign affairs, defence and finance to the central government. This is very clearly stated in the “Pakistan” Resolution of 1940, which has been celebrated with a PUBLIC HOLIDAY for 60-odd years. This arrangement was essential to the success and prosperity of the envisaged country because there were five different races involved with their own, respective languages, culture and history. Whatever affinity they had in terms of language and culture was too thin to wield them into one solid nation. We know the land of Sindhu (what was later erroneously called Hind and Ind/ia was home to many races with different characteristics. Our history since recorded history is replete with this information. It was the foreign invader through the tide of times who brought several races of India under one rule, but not all of India was ever under one foreign ruler till Aurangzeb, and he too had to spend his last 20 years trying to subdue the Deccan. It was only the British who united India under one rule. Therefore, India, as in India “a state” was the handiwork of colonial powers right through India’s history. However, it must also be remembered that political restlessness was a constant bedfellow of the colonial powers. One need not go into details as Naveed Bhai, the master historian that he is, is the last person who needs a lesson in history!

    It was such consideration of the characteristics of the people comprehending the sub-continent and the adverse impact of the colonial powers’ efforts to rearrange the national boundaries of post-First World War Europe and Middle East that prompted the leaders of the Pakistan movement to decide on the arrangement as laid out in the 1940 resolution mentioned above. Such an arrangement was also commensurate with the law of nature’s own arrangement of peoples and their geography. The tampering with this natural arrangement has always been the cause of the major upheavals known in history. Till today the impact of this tampering with nature is being felt. The latest example is the partition of Czechoslovakia in the 21st century as there were two distinct nationalities with a wafer thin affinity which could not keep them together in the end.
    That the framework of the state of Pakistan was changed into a unified state under central control was a colonial scheme. The truth of this will come to light in the near future as many documentary evidences presently under the official secrets act of Britain and India and perhaps Pakistan will be released. I am privy to some of such evidence and am thus in the know somewhat of the actual background. That is for another time to delve into. This is a big argument and needs a lot of time to get to grips with the reality of the issue. I hope this will happen in the future – Insha Allah.

  • naveed tajammal  On August 17, 2010 at 6:34 am

    Dear shah sahib (Adil Rashidi);
    Thankyou for the kind words,however let me,give you the rationale why our past leaders were sticking to the concept and asking for peanuts alone,as stated by you they as per 1940 resolution were confining themselves to the entities as seen on the map.which you have highlighted,the homework was lacking,whereas the clever hindu brahman and his well wishers, like william jones had given him,the grounds,in the late 18th century,no wonder they gave him the tittle of father of indology,in the full 19th century one reads a line of write ups,each outdoing the other,rescue passages were created,then four or five eminent,writers would confirm them so the cycle continued,our muslim intellectual what was left of him,failed to comprehend the undercurrents,no negation was seen,our sind valley was declared as the home of vedic scripts,it is a classic case of creating a history in reverse,our writers even now adhere to what they insist 1925, emerges the RSSS, A creation of a fertile mind,from Nagpur, a doctor called,Keshwar Rao Bali Ram Hedgewar.,who states, the whole of British indian empire then as it was, inclusive of Burma,and ceylon,and surrounding islands, was a old hindu state,Afghanistan and Tajikistan inclusive.the land of kamboji, our leaders sorry to say were so much impressed,that accepted this,When
    Dr.hedgewar,died in 1940,a lecturer of science of a bombay college took over, named Mado Rao Golwalkar,he said, hindus are not here since the last 3000 years, but of the last 10,000 years.hindutva doctrine, that in india only hindus can live emerged,and that muslims are invaders of recent had our leaders had done a bit of homework,they could have negated all this rubbish,and claimed the boundaries of the sindh valley empire,as the records were yelling to be seen and read.the concept of sindh wa hind.nehru too did his bit when he propagated oneness of india, read atizaz ahsan he too has fallen in the same trap.

  • saleemfida  On March 9, 2011 at 2:32 am


    Great Hearts,strong minds,true faith, and willing hands;
    Men whom the lust of office does not kill;
    Men whom the spoils of office cannot buy;
    Men who possess opinions and a will;
    Men who have honor, men who will not lie.

  • link building software  On August 17, 2011 at 4:29 am

    Awesome blog! Loving it! 🙂

  • Verona  On January 5, 2013 at 7:03 pm

    I would like to thnkx for the efforts you’ve put in writing this blog. I’m hoping the same high-grade website post from you in the
    upcoming as well.

    Actually your creative writing abilities has inspired me to get my own blog

    now. Really the blogging is spreading its wings rapidly. Your write up is a great

    example of it.

  • Newton  On April 17, 2013 at 10:18 am

    I precisely had to thank

    you very much once again. I am not sure the things that
    I might have

    created without these creative ideas shown by you over

    that situation. It truly was a real hard

    case for me, nevertheless witnessing the specialised approach you solved

    took me to jump with joy. I am just happier for your guidance and

    in addition pray

    you really know what a powerful job you happen to be accomplishing instructing others through your web
    blog. Most

    likely you haven’t met all of


  • Darrel  On April 21, 2013 at 2:07 am

    Usually I do not learn article on blogs, however I
    would like to

    say that this write-up very pressured me to try and do so!

    writing taste has been surprised me. Thank you, quite nice article.

  • Houston  On May 12, 2013 at 1:49 pm

    As I web site possessor I believe the content material here is rattling excellent ,
    appreciate it for your efforts. You should keep it up forever!
    Good Luck.


  • By Slaves till? – BlahBlah on March 25, 2016 at 9:14 pm

    […] read, tasteful and artistic man he was, one of his many articles that inspired me was on the “federation” comparison between the US and […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: