Centre-Province Relations in Pakistan: CSS Solved Answer

Exam question: CSS 2018, Q6: Discuss the nature of centre-province relations under the 1973 Constitution.

CSS 2019, Q3: How far the nature of center province relations has changed under various amendments to the 1973 constitution? Evaluate. (One answer covers both: for 2018, expand Sections 2 and 3; for 2019, expand Sections 4 and 5.)

Syllabus topic: Topic XXVII of the CSS Pakistan Affairs syllabus.

Short answer

Outline for quick revision

Introduction
Nature of Centre-Province Relations under the Original 1973 Constitution: A federal parliamentary structure; Legislative relations; Administrative relations; Financial relations; Emergency powers; Institutions of cooperation
Assessment of the Original Design
How the Amendments Changed Centre-Province Relations: The 8th Amendment (1985); The 13th Amendment (1997) and the 17th Amendment (2003); The 18th Amendment (2010): the turning point; The 7th NFC Award (2009-10); The 25th Amendment (2018); Recent pressures (2024-2026)
Evaluation: How Far Has the Nature Changed?: A real shift in law; Incomplete in practice; Continuing central dominance; Verdict
Way Forward
Conclusion

Reference colours:
Quotation / documentPersonality / historySyllabus bookCurrent referenceOfficial report / policy

1. Introduction

Centre-province relations decide how power, money and responsibilities are shared between the federal government and the provinces. In a diverse country like Pakistan, they have been central to national unity: over-centralisation contributed to the loss of East Pakistan in 1971, and the 1973 Constitution was drafted with that lesson in mind. This answer explains the nature of centre-province relations under the original 1973 Constitution and then evaluates how far successive amendments, above all the 18th, have changed them. Its argument is that relations moved from a centralised, “quasi-federal” system towards genuine provincial autonomy after 2010, but that implementation gaps and recent centralising pressures show that the balance is still contested.

Syllabus book: Katharine Adeney, Federalism and Ethnic Conflict Regulation in India and Pakistan (2007), argues that India’s multi-unit, power-sharing federation contained ethnic conflict, while Pakistan’s centralisation, One Unit, parity and military rule, alienated the Bengalis and the smaller provinces.

2. Nature of Centre-Province Relations under the Original 1973 Constitution

A federal parliamentary structure

Pakistan was declared a federation (Article 1) with a bicameral Parliament; the Senate gave each province equal representation to protect the smaller provinces (Article 59).

Legislative relations

The Constitution created a Federal Legislative List and a long Concurrent List of 47 subjects on which both could legislate, with federal law prevailing in case of conflict. In practice this gave the centre control over education, health, labour and many other subjects.

Administrative relations

Provinces had to exercise their executive authority so as to comply with federal laws (Article 148); the federal government could give directions to provinces, and senior civil servants of the federal services held key posts in the provinces.

Financial relations

The centre collected the major taxes, and revenues were shared through the National Finance Commission (Article 160); provinces depended on federal transfers for most of their budgets.

Emergency powers

The President could proclaim an emergency (Article 232) and the federation could take over a province’s government (Article 234), powers used in Balochistan in 1973 and later in other provinces.

Institutions of cooperation

The Council of Common Interests (CCI) and the National Economic Council (NEC) were created to resolve inter-governmental issues, but the CCI rarely met before 2010.

3. Assessment of the Original Design

The original design was federal in form but centralised in practice: the Concurrent List, federal control of finances and services, emergency powers and the dominance of the federal bureaucracy, and long periods of military rule, left little real autonomy to the provinces. Smaller provinces, especially Balochistan and Sindh, felt that the federation was dominated by the centre and the largest province.

Syllabus book: Ayesha Jalal, Democracy and Authoritarianism in South Asia (1995), argues that the contrast of “democratic India” and “authoritarian Pakistan” is misleading: both inherited centralised colonial structures, and in Pakistan the dominance of the bureaucracy and the military over weak political parties shaped the state.

4. How the Amendments Changed Centre-Province Relations

The 8th Amendment (1985)

Zia’s 8th Amendment gave the President the power to dissolve the National Assembly (Article 58(2)(b)) and governors the power to dissolve provincial assemblies (Article 112(2)(b)), strengthening central control over provincial governments.

The 13th Amendment (1997) and the 17th Amendment (2003)

The 13th Amendment removed these powers; Musharraf’s 17th Amendment restored them, subject to Supreme Court review. Centre-province relations swung with the political system.

The 18th Amendment (2010): the turning point

The 18th Amendment abolished the Concurrent List and transferred its subjects to the provinces; gave provinces joint ownership of oil and gas (Article 172(3)); strengthened the CCI with a secretariat and a 90-day meeting requirement; protected the provinces’ NFC share (Article 160(3A)); required a provincial assembly resolution for an emergency due to internal disturbance (Article 232); and added Article 140A on local government.

Official report / policy: The 18th Amendment (April 2010), passed unanimously, abolished the Concurrent List and devolved its subjects to the provinces, removed the President’s power to dissolve the National Assembly (Article 58(2) (b)), renamed NWFP as Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, strengthened the Council of Common Interests, barred any reduction of the provinces’ NFC share, and added new rights such as free education for children aged 5-16 (Article 25A) and the right to information (Article 19A).

The 7th NFC Award (2009-10)

Fiscal federalism changed alongside: the provinces’ share of the divisible pool rose to 57.5%, with multiple criteria benefiting the smaller provinces.

Official report / policy: Under the 7th NFC Award (agreed at Gwadar, December 2009), the provinces’ share of the divisible pool rose to 57.5%, and for the first time it was divided not only by population (82%) but also by poverty and backwardness (10.3%), revenue collection and generation (5%) and inverse population density (2.7%), a major gain for Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

The 25th Amendment (2018)

The merger of FATA with Khyber Pakhtunkhwa extended provincial government and constitutional rights to a region previously ruled directly by the centre.

Recent pressures (2024-2026)

The National Fiscal Pact shifted spending responsibilities to the provinces; proposals to change the NFC share and reverse devolution in the draft 27th Amendment were dropped after opposition from the PPP; and emergency and governor’s rule were imposed in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa in October 2026.

Current reference: Under the National Fiscal Pact (2024), agreed with the provinces as part of the IMF programme, the provinces took responsibility for funding devolved subjects such as health, education, social protection and provincial development projects, agreed to raise their spending on health and education, and passed laws to tax agricultural income at rates aligned with federal income tax from January 2025.

Current reference: The 11th NFC held its first meeting on 4 December 2025; Khyber Pakhtunkhwa demanded its unpaid share for the merged former FATA districts. A month earlier, the PPP had rejected proposals in the draft 27th Amendment to alter the provinces’ NFC share or reverse 18th-Amendment devolution, and they were dropped (November 2025).

Current reference: On 11 October 2026, citing terrorism of “unprecedented” intensity, the federal government imposed an emergency (Article 232) and governor’s rule (Article 234) in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. The PTI, which governed the province, called it a political move and said it would challenge it in court.

5. Evaluation: How Far Has the Nature Changed?

A real shift in law

Constitutionally, the change is substantial: Pakistan moved from a centralised federation to one of the most decentralised federations in the region, with a protected fiscal share and residual powers resting with the provinces.

Incomplete in practice

Provinces have not devolved power further to local governments, have not built capacity in their new subjects, and still depend heavily on federal transfers; the CCI meets irregularly and disputes over water, gas and the census persist.

Continuing central dominance

Emergency powers, federal control over security and foreign policy, the role of the military and fiscal pressure under IMF programmes mean that the centre remains dominant in key areas.

Verdict

The nature of centre-province relations has changed significantly in law and moderately in practice; whether the change lasts depends on political consensus and on the provinces’ ability to deliver.

6. Way Forward

Respect the 18th Amendment as a consensus settlement and resolve problems through the CCI rather than by re-centralisation; implement Article 140A through empowered local governments and Provincial Finance Commissions; increase provinces’ own revenues; build provincial capacity in health and education; agree the next NFC Award by consensus; and use emergency powers only as a last resort.

The swinging balance of centre-province relations

1973: federal form, centralised practice
1985 and 2003: 8th, 17th: central control
2010: 18th and 7th NFC: real autonomy
2024-26: fiscal pact, re-centralising pressures

7. Conclusion

Under the original 1973 Constitution, centre-province relations were federal in form but centralised in practice, a Concurrent List, central finances, emergency powers and, under military rule, presidential control over assemblies. The 8th and 17th Amendments tilted power further towards the centre, but the 18th Amendment and the 7th NFC Award transformed the system, giving provinces real legislative, fiscal and resource autonomy. Implementation gaps and new centralising pressures show that the balance remains contested. A strong federation in a diverse country depends on keeping that balance, autonomy for the provinces and cooperation through federal institutions.

Centre-Province Relations in Pakistan: CSS 2018 and 2019 Solved Answer