Mustafa Kamal Demands National Alliance for Creating New Administrative Units

Muttahida Qaumi Movement-Pakistan (MQM-P) leader Mustafa Kamal has called on marginalized populations across all provinces to unite in demanding smaller administrative units. Arguing that Pakistan's existing four-province structure cannot sustain its governance and economic demands, Kamal advocated for decentralization to address severe resource disparities, municipal collapse, and fiscal centralization.

Speaking on September 12, 2026, Kamal stated that the central control exercised by existing provincial headquarters has crippled local governance, leaving millions without basic public services. "The current system can no longer run the country," Kamal declared, emphasizing that the creation of smaller, financially empowered administrative divisions remains the only viable solution to save state infrastructure from systemic breakdown.

The Governance Paradox: Why Pakistan’s Four-Province Model Has Collapsed

Pakistan ranks as the fifth most populous nation in the world with over 240 million citizens, yet it governs its vast population through just four primary provincial federations. By comparison, nations with comparable or smaller populations utilize far more granular administrative divisions to deliver civil services efficiently. Turkey manages 81 provinces for 85 million people, Iran utilizes 31 provinces for 88 million citizens, and neighboring India administers 28 states and 8 union territories for its population.

This structural bottleneck leaves provincial capitals—Lahore, Karachi, Peshawar, and Quetta—monopolizing governance, budgetary allocations, and administrative decision-making. In Sindh, for instance, political power remains centralized in the provincial secretariat, while urban centers like Karachi and Hyderabad struggle with collapsing municipal infrastructure, severe water shortages, and underfunded public transit systems.

The administrative paralysis extends far beyond Sindh. For decades, residents of the Saraiki belt in Southern Punjab, the Hazara region in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, and the expansive, under-resourced districts of rural Balochistan have voiced similar grievances regarding systemic neglect by distant provincial capitals. By framing the demand as a nationwide mandate rather than an urban-rural division within Sindh, Kamal seeks to build a broad political coalition capable of forcing constitutional reform.

From Karachi to Saraiki Belt: The Economics of Administrative Decentralization

The core mechanism driving this crisis lies in the mechanics of fiscal devolution. While the 18th Amendment to the Constitution of Pakistan successfully transferred significant financial authority from the federal government to the provinces via the 7th National Finance Commission (NFC) Award, provincial governments systematically failed to pass those funds down to the district and municipal levels.

Despite explicit constitutional protections under Article 140-A—which mandates that provincial governments establish empowered local government systems and devolve political, administrative, and financial responsibility—provincial elites have repeatedly starved municipal authorities of funds. Public revenues generated by high-density urban hubs are routinely absorbed into central provincial treasuries, leaving municipal corporations reliant on ad-hoc grants.

Proponents of administrative restructuring contend that creating 20 to 30 smaller provinces would break this fiscal concentration. Under a decentralized model:

• Development funds would be spent closer to the taxpayer, reducing leakage and administrative delays.
• Civil bureaucracy would become directly accountable to local regional assemblies rather than distant provincial secretariats.
• Regional inequality would drop as underfunded hinterlands receive direct constitutional budgetary allocations.

Political Resistance and the Battle for Resource Allocation

Despite the administrative arguments for smaller units, constitutional realities present a formidable barrier. Amending the Constitution to carve out new provinces requires a two-thirds majority in both houses of Parliament, alongside approval from the assembly of any affected province under Article 239.

Established political parties, particularly the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) in Sindh, strongly oppose any territorial division of existing provinces, citing historic identities, ethnic harmony, and territorial integrity. Opponents argue that creating new administrative units along ethno-linguistic lines risks deepening social fault lines and triggering political instability.

However, Kamal’s latest push signals a strategic pivot by MQM-P. By reaching out to underprivileged regions in Punjab, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, and Balochistan, the party aims to reframe the conversation from an ethnic conflict to a functional governance debate. Whether this national coalition materializes depends on whether political leaders in South Punjab and Hazara align with urban Sindh's leadership to challenge the status quo in Islamabad and the provincial capitals.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why is MQM-P demanding the creation of smaller administrative units in Pakistan?

MQM-P argues that the current four-province model centralizes political and financial power in provincial capitals while neglecting peripheral and urban populations. Establishing smaller units would enforce Article 140-A by ensuring local resource allocation and responsive governance.

Which regions in Pakistan have active movements for new administrative status?

Key regions advocating for administrative autonomy or separate provincial status include urban centers in Sindh, the Saraiki belt in Southern Punjab, the Hazara division in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, and regional divisions in Balochistan.

What constitutional process is required to create a new province in Pakistan?

Creating a new province requires a constitutional amendment passed by a two-thirds majority in both the National Assembly and the Senate, alongside explicit approval by a two-thirds majority in the affected provincial assembly under Article 239.