The current ongoing hullaballoo in the political landscape of Pakistan regarding the proposed 26th amendment of the constitution entails meticulous handling, as it will have irrevocable implications in the future if passed. Some notable proposals are much-controversial judicial-related amendments like CJ tenure, the forming of FCC, and the appointment of judges to this very court. An increase in the Balochistan assembly seat from 65 to 81 and other amendments of diminutive importance are also in the proposals.

It is obvious that the amendments are more or less related to the judiciary and its judges, but the government is using this opportunity to bring amendments to many other articles too. Therefore, the government has come up with more than 50 proposals to the constitution.

Although it is apparent from the façade that the government is in some haste in the amendment process, and it was not in sight before the 12 July ruling of the Supreme Court in favor of PTI regarding the reserved seat plea of SIC. However, the application to the ruling is yet to come. Once the seat goes in favor of PTI, the structure of the assembly, and the number game of the assembly will surely be affected.

In such a posthaste situation, the government did not find time to ponder other major issues, namely addressing the issues of Balochistan and GB. Leaving Balochistan for some other day, we oversee the much-talked-about constitutional status of the administered territory of GB. The status of GB has been in abeyance since its annexation to the region. Successive governments have tried to assimilate the region into Pakistan in these seven decades, but could not bring a robust constitutional package to get the region out of this limbo.

Unlike other princely states, Gilgit Baltistan was freed by its fighters in 1948, forcing the Dogra army to leave the territory. Later on, the region voluntarily annexed itself to Pakistan and remained under the control of the federally administered tribal area. Till 1949, the area was ruled by bureaucracy, which enforced the stringent FCR law to administer the region.

In 1949, the federal government and the Kashmir government signed the notorious Karachi Agreement without involving the representatives of GB in the agreement. This agreement gave the region to KANA in 1950. Since then, the region has been considered part of Kashmir and its fate has been inextricably linked to that of Kashmir.

During the latter two decades of military regimes, no significant development was made except for the Chenab formula proposed in 1962 between India and Pakistan, which aimed to divide the greater Kashmir using the Chenab as the boundary between the two sides. This formula was discussed for years but failed to bear fruition.

For the first time, to give representation to its people, the Northern Areas Advisory Council came into being in 1969. It was renamed in 1974 as the Northern Areas Council. In 1994, the Legal Framework Ordinance gave minimal legislative power to the local representatives. But all these arrangements were ad-hoc in nature.

On 28 May 1999, the Supreme Court of Pakistan in its landmark remark declared the people of GB citizens of Pakistan for all practical purposes. It was only in 2009 that the then-government of PPP at the federal level introduced the Gilgit Baltistan empowerment and self-government order, which gave the province a quasi-province-like structure. The name was changed from FANA to Gilgit Baltistan. A 33-seated assembly was established, known as the GB legislative assembly, empowered to elect its chief minister. The region would have its own governor, election commission, and supreme appellate court, according to the order. Although this package tried to bring the region to parity with other provinces, it failed to placate the deeply rooted sense of deprivation.

To give the arduous constitutional journey a new turn, the much-sought-after CPEC project came to the show. China, being cognizant of the passage passing through GB, showed its reservation over the region’s status. To legalize it for China, in 2015, a committee headed by Sartaj Aziz was set up by the government. The committee submitted a 93-page constitutional report to the government. The report stipulated making GB a special province till the permanent resolution of the Kashmir issue. The report also suggested giving GB seats in the Senate and NA after amending articles 51 and 59 of the constitution. In this report, it was also mentioned that all the legislative subjects be transferred to the province to bring it to par with other provinces. Also, Gilgit Baltistan was to be given representation in NEC, NFC, and IRSA under this report. Although these recommendations could not be constitutionalized under the PMLN government, they led to the promulgation of the GB Order 2018. Later on, the Gilgit-Baltistan Supreme Appellate Court set aside the order and restored the earlier order of 2009.

However, in January 2019, the Supreme Court restored the order of 2018 by remarking that GB is an indispensable part of the Kashmir issue and will remain so till its resolution. This was in contrast to the decision in the Al Jehad trust case of 1999 where the people of Gilgit Baltistan were citizens of Pakistan for all intents and purposes. This ruling by the seven judges headed by JCP Saqib Nisar was to appease India at the cost of the rights of GB. This notorious ruling has also stalled constitutional progress in the future.

All these historical anecdotes show the state’s relenting commitment to the matter. Successive governments have brought recommendations and packages, but they have not been followed by actions. In the last four years, no development has been made in this regard. This has led to the inculcation of a sense of deprivation in the hearts of the populace.

The current dispensation of both GB and federal have not bothered to look into the matter; otherwise they would use the opportunity of the upcoming 26th amendment to constitutionalize the recommendations proposed by the Sartaj Aziz committee in 2017. However, the government has remained focused on bringing changes to the judicature.

In short, it is foolhardy to wait till the resolution of the Kashmir issue, which never seems to be happening before doomsday. Using this pretext to keep the people of GB deprived of their rights is ridiculous at a time when India is busy in making IOK part and parcel of its state. Now, the onus is on the government of Pakistan to deal with the matter. Sans giving constitutional status to GB, warding off the sense of deprivation from the hearts of the people of GB will remain a distant dream. It is high time the government paid heed to this matter seriously.

Sajjad Hussain
The writer is a Political Science graduate from Punjab University, hailing from Skardu.