Gilgit Baltistan is a very distinct polity in the sense that it can neither legislate on subjects of concern to its people nor does the executives account for the principle of electoral accountability. Moreover, Gilgit Baltistan also lacks a robust and vibrant civil society that could moderate public matters in the best possible manner. All of these factors have contributed to inefficient governance that has halted institutional growth in the region.
Although Gilgit Baltistan has an elected assembly per se, it is far from being a serious institution. Each successive federal government presents its version of the Presidential Ordinance called, “The Gilgit Baltistan Governance Order” which outlines general principles to rule the region. These successive orders change the mandate, rules and principles of the legislative assembly and government structure at large. Such temporary and ever-changing arrangements overshadows the development of a strong parliamentary culture that is characterised by serious debates on policy matters, serious deliberation on legislation, vigorous opposition over-sighting the executives and abiding by the rules and procedures of the house.
The previous session of the assembly was called in June 2022, whereby, 8 bills were passed and astonishingly 6 were related to, “Salaries, allowances and privileges”. One might assume while looking at these statistics that Gilgit Baltistan has no real problems, but it turns out that the legislators are inept and consequently the assembly never developed the capacity to represent public interests. There are a host of issues that never made it to the agenda of the assembly: the region only gets 3 hours of power supply during winters; receives substandard wheat; lacks basic health infrastructure; has no water supply schemes and proper roads except for cosmopolitan city Gilgit and Skardu.
Secondly, since local politicians are cognizant of the fact that the federal government is key to their aspirations they unrelentingly do their bidding. The relationship is more of a patron-client transaction. In this manner, the local politician of Gilgit Baltistan does not entitle themselves accountable to the public but rather to their federal cronies. Putting it differently, the politician of GB get elected only if they have enough influence in the federal government irrespective of the fact that how much popular support they have in their constituencies. Similarly, Gilgit is a sort of summer resort for the bureaucracy. Francis Fukuyama in his book, ‘Political Order and Political Decay’, attempts to address the question of the absence of effective governance and the rule of law and concludes that among many reasons an inefficient bureaucracy is at the heart of the issue. Bureaucracy in Gilgit enjoys excessive luxuries in terms of allowances, housing, transport and authority. However, public issues like power, education, health care, sanitation, and water have shown no signs of improvement. Moreover, the upper tier of Bureaucracy is non-local who are not abreast of the local demography and issues.
Former and current Chief Ministers of GB have expressed similar beliefs that the bureaucracy is too large to control and it often stands against the decisions taken by the political executive. Chief Executive’s woes are enough to suggest the impotence of their office. A large and efficient bureaucracy is not only a burden on the exchequer but also a liability to the public service delivery system. Gilgit Baltistan not only has an inefficient governance system but also has a weak civil society. Political Philosopher Friedrich Hegel defines civil society as a form of a social order where people from different walks of life come together in a relationship of cooperation which is based on ‘Universal Self-interest’. Gilgit has a plethora of public issues and yet civil society has failed to get a response in the affirmative from the state.
Just to quote an example, Gilgit has no medical or engineering university despite outperforming in literacy rate and the previous local government approved a medical university for Gilgit. However, a dispute on the location of the medical university emerged between two prominent religious factions which is still unsettled after 6 years. Now, civil society has not only failed but there has been no attempt to form a collation among both these factions that could then convince the public that a medical university is a win-win scenario for everybody in the region. Foundations for a responsible and vibrant civil have never been laid in GB.
Gilgit Baltistan has some serious crises of governance and that too on multiple levels. All these issues have halted Gilgit Baltistan from getting on the trajectory of modernisation. No wonder why issues like the Constitutional status of GB, public sector development and power shortages have not seen any significant growth even after 75 years.