• A city with two souls

• Resolving the energy crisis

• Delay in K-IV plan may lead to water riots

• Anomalies detected in $40m coastal community project

• Freeing education

THE much-touted Prime Minister’s Housing Scheme (PMHS) is heading for doom. The housing minister disclosed recently that the government had signed 36 MoUs with a number of foreign construction companies but none had so far begun work on the project aiming for one million ‘low-cost’ housing units completed at a cost of Rs40bn. 

Insecurity has been cited as the main factor for the reluctance of foreigners to bring their investment to Pakistan. 

But the PMHS was a still-born scheme. Our planners failed to understand the implications of a scheme not based on ground realities. In a country where the housing backlog is calculated at seven million — a figure which grows by 500,000 every year — how far would a million housing units built in an unspecified period take us? 

According to experts the cost of Rs40bn for a million houses is itself unrealistic. The construction cost of each house will be much higher and with the House Building Finance Corporation now being inducted to give loans these houses will be beyond the reach of the low-income classes. 

With the government refusing to take a hard look at the realities, unscrupulous, avaricious and ruthless elements have stepped in as happens in any sector where basic needs are not met legally. 

The poor are being provided land that has been encroached upon by land mafias which have grown in size. Take the case of Karachi where the influx of immigrants from upcountry is estimated at some 30,000 families every year. They need shelter. The natural growth rate also creates a demand for housing. 

It is ironical that the government which had pledged roti, kapra aur makan to the voter has been turning a blind eye to this unmet need. Worse, the parties constituting the coalition government are accused of having become land grabbers to fulfil this need for shelter which could have been done through legal means as holders of office. 

By choosing not to do so, they have made the state the primary loser while the principles of town planning have had to be set aside. And who wins? The parties that rule. They are state actors who are using their control over sectors of the state administration, such as the police, to facilitate the illegal seizure of land. 

Parveen Rehman, director OPP-RTI (Orangi Pilot Project–Research and Training Institute), has all the facts and figures at her fingertips. She tells me that since 1996 when Karachi began expanding spatially — the new sabzimandi project was undertaken on the Super Highway and work on the Northern Bypass began — land grabbing became big business in the metropolis. 

The 1,500 or so goths that had previously been on the periphery of the city found themselves engulfed by the rolling tide of urban expansion. They became easy victims. 

The size and scale of this phenomenon is not realised and goes unreported. Only when there is a problem — as in 2006 when Juma Goth and Sikander Goth were seized — the matter figures in the media. According to Parveen Rehman, 3,000 acres of land subdivided into 100,000 plots valued at Rs25bn is sold every year in the goths. 

This is bound to become an explosive issue some day. It is resulting in an unplanned change in land use that is distorting Karachi’s civic planning — whatever there is of the latter. Obviously this will make Karachi a more difficult place to live in. 

And who are the land grabbers who are having such a field day? Ms Rehman identifies them: 1) experienced land suppliers; 2) coercive land grabbers; 3) goth elders who own the village; 4) members of political parties. 

How does this illegal activity proceed? Parveen Rehman describes it graphically as she is in touch with the goth residents and has observed the phenomenon closely. Those experienced in this business go about it quietly. They simply purchase huge chunks of land in the goths, subdivide them into smaller plots and sell them. 

About a third of this land is taken by the homeless to put up a shelter. The remaining two-thirds go to speculators who push up land prices. The coercive land grabbers are the ones who use force. They may pay for some land and occupy another chunk through violent means. 

Crushed in between the two, the goth elders describe the first as the ‘peela saanp’ (a benign snake) and the second as the ‘kala saanp’ who attacks and kills. They feel discretion is the better part of valour and make peace with the first and earn some money in the process. The party workers just grab land where they feel they can with the backing of their party and various government agencies. They face practically no hurdle except when the local people resist. 

Given the large number of people who have their share in the deal, the original owner gets barely a third of the amount paid. Thus a new category of un-regularised land is emerging. 

Although over 72 per cent of the katchi abadis in Karachi had been notified in 1985 — the period up to 1997 has also been covered under the new notification law — the city fathers cannot sit back and plan the metropolis. There is too much activity on the ground that is changing land use. 

This is land-grabbing of a new kind. Its features are disturbing. One is the size of the operation. The other is the power and reach of those involved. The victims are the impoverished who lack political clout and influence to stop such activity peacefully. 

Hence when matters get unbearable they try to resist and invariably violence results creating a law and order situation. Not that land grabbers do not try to touch the affluent areas. But the rich have their connections and know how to protect themselves. What is emerging is a city with two souls — the Karachi of the rich and the Karachi of the poor.

(By Zubeida Mustafa, Dawn-7, 12/05/2010)

The total installed power-generation capacity in Pakistan is about 20,000 MW. At any point in time, only about 75 per cent of it is operational. Pakistan`s demand is around 15,000 MW. The operational capacity and demand seem to match. Why is it, then, that we are only able to produce a little over 10,000 MW these days, to suffer the huge load-shedding and industry closures? 

There are a variety of factors. Pakistan`s hydel sources have the potential to generate the 6,000 MW, but they are not producing more than 2,200 MW due to the water shortage. Gas shortages for IPPs and Gencos have resulted in another 1,000-MW shortfall. The circular debt owed to power producers, oil marketing companies and gas utilities is another factor. 

From 2002 to 2007, Pakistan`s annual GDP growth averaged seven per cent, per-capita income and exports more than doubled. But while the economic planners were doing a good job, the energy planners of that government could not keep pace. Under the new government, which blames the previous government for all the country`s ills, the only energy policy we have seen is rental power plants (RPPs). This policy has been declared non-transparent and incapable of meeting the shortages of power by the Asian Development Bank. 

All the ten new IPP plants currently being commissioned were financially closed during the last government, despite the fact that the IPP policy of that time left the entrepreneur at the mercy of NEPRA for tariff determination. The IPP policy of the PPP government in the mid-1990s might be considered non-transparent, but the fixed tariff basis on which proposals were solicited is something we should move towards. Six hydroelectric power plants on which work is in progress started in the previous government. Five of them are in the public sector.

A flawed policy of the last two decades was successive governments disallowing WAPDA to upgrade its existing generation infrastructure or set up new power plants, while waiting for it to be privatised. This, coupled with an inadequate IPP policy and lack of political will to start large hydroelectric projects, has landed us in the current state of affairs. 

The RPPs were supposed to generate 2,250 MW of very expensive energy. To-date, not one MW has come on line. The government has not formulated any plan to utilise the vast Thar coal resources. Nor has it made an effort for additional gas production. Not a single project in thermal, gas, coal and hydel power generation or development of primary energy sources has been initiated by this government. 

Meanwhile, there has been no progress towards trans-national pipelines (from Iran, Turkmenistan or Qatar). India at first manoeuvred its way into the Iran-Pakistan-India (IPI) pipeline project, to use it for extracting the civil nuclear power deal from the US. Now that it is no longer interested in this pipeline deal, Pakistan has been pushed back by at least five years in the completion of this project. The US has now publicly advised Pakistan to drop the IPI gas pipeline. 

The previous government brought together the world`s leading energy consultants to work on the Mashal LNG project. It floated the integrated project, which would have provided LNG on a long-term basis and eventually have resulted in an LNG terminal in Pakistan. Two major international LNG players came forward. After proper consideration, one bidder was recommended. For over two years, the new government has failed to award this project and is still sitting on it, even as the country suffers enormous gas shortages. 

What the government did do eventually was to issue a tender for short-term purchase of LNG. Nowhere in the world is LNG sold or purchased through such tenders. In 2007, the LNG market was a buyer`s market and if the new government had awarded the contract, considerably cheaper LNG could have been available in Pakistan. This act of the government has undermined the entire LNG project. 

Even after the Supreme Court decision nullifying this contract, we would be lucky if global LNG companies are still be interested in Pakistan. Without such supplies we are clearly heading for gas load-shedding, which will be worse than the load-shedding the country is facing now. What is required now is to have an optimum energy mix based on maximisation of indigenous coal and hydel power generation. Priority should also be placed on renewable energy sources like wind and solar energy, particularly in remote and rural areas. 

The country`s current energy mix is: oil, 31 per cent; natural gas, 51 per cent; coal, 5 per cent, hydroelectric power, 12 per cent; and nuclear power generation, 0.7 per cent. What we should strive for is: oil, 20 per cent, natural gas, 51 per cent; coal, 15 per cent, Hydel 20 per cent; nuclear power generation, 4 per cent; and renewable sources, 1 per cent. 

Optimal capacity utilisation from IPPs must be ensured. The IPPs set up in the mid-90`s are beyond the front loading periods of their tariffs. Also, the more the power is purchased from them, the lower will be the tariff. The popular belief is that Thar coal is of inferior variety. But technology exists in the world where such coal can not only produce energy but also, in the process, natural gas. At the same time, the brackish water in the Thar area can be converted into potable water during the process. Up to 10,000 MW can eventually be generated from Thar coal. 

Every sugar mill in Pakistan is capable of producing energy which can be sold to PEPCO, based on a process called co-generation. Co-generation uses technology where bagasse, a by-product of sugar manufacturing, and coal can be used to generate energy. As a modest estimate, 2000 MW can be added to the system through this source. The tariff for such energy projects should be attractive enough for entrepreneurs and financial institutions to finance them.

Pakistan has an estimated hydel potential of close to 50,000 MW. Only a little over 6,000 MW has been installed. The big dams in the pipeline are Basha, Bunji and Dasu. Pakistan should have built a big dam every decade. Mangla was built in the 1960s and Tarbela in the 70s. Unfortunately, in the last three decades not a single big dam has come into existence. If the various political parties of this country can arrive at a consensus on as controversial an issue as renaming of NWFP, could they not have reached a consensus on Kalabagh? One large dam is required just to overcome the losses due to silting in the existing dams. More dams would enhance the water storage capacity of the country. 

Almost 8,000 MW can be generated through small/medium hydroelectric units on rivers and canals. Pakistan has developed good capability of nuclear energy both for peaceful and strategic purpose. We must explore ways and means of increasing the share of nuclear energy from 0.7 per cent to 4 per cent per year. Seeking a civilian nuclear energy agreement from the US should be our top priority. 

All the water and power sector projects like Gomal Dam, the raising of Mangla, the Thal Floodwater Canal, Kachhi Canal, Rainee Canal, Satpara Dam, Kurram Tangi Dam, Mirani Dam, Sabazkai Dam, Jinnah Barrage, Allai Khawar, Khan Khawar, Duber Khawar, Malakand III and Neelum Jhelum Hydro Electric Projects, were initiated during the last government. There are a number of other sites, in various stages of study, for water reservoirs and power generation, both on the Indus and Jhelum Rivers, and off-channel, which should be pursued vigorously. Also, there are small and medium storage sites in all provinces of Pakistan which must be pursued.  But all this needs vision and capacity in a government, which is not to be seen anywhere at present.   The writer, a former federal minister, is secretary general of the Pakistan Muslim League-Q.

(By Humayun Akhtar Khan, The News-6, 13/05/2010)

Work on the Greater Karachi Water Supply Scheme-IV, commonly known as K-IV, has already been delayed by two years as the Karachi Water and Sewerage Board has not yet been given the right to draw an additional quota of 1,200 cusecs (600 million gallons daily) of water required for the project from the Indus. KWSB officials fear that any further delay in initiating the project might lead to water riots in 2011, if not in the next two to three months, when summer will be at its peak. 

The officials hold jointly responsible the Indus River System Authority (Irsa) and the federal and Sindh governments for the inordinate delay in initiating the K-IV, accusing them of a lukewarm response to its request for the allocation 600mgd of water from the Indus. 

Senior KWSB officials, seeking anonymity, said that at a time when the utility was supplying water to 90 per cent localities of the city hooked to its system on alternate days and that, too, mere 25 gallons per person as against the World Health Organisation’s prescribed standards of 45 gallons per person, any further delay in initiating the project would create immense difficulties for them in meeting the city’s water needs in 2011, when its population, according to the Karachi Strategic Development Plan-2020, would surge to over 18.52 million. 

The entire K-IV project is of 600mgd and its first phase of 150mgd was to be initiated in 2008 and completed by 2011. But since the issue concerning allocation of additional 1,200 cusecs of water from the Indus for the project has become a game of ping pong between Irsa, the federal government and the Sindh government, KWSB high officials forsee water riots in 2011, if not this June and July when the demand for water would increase considerably owing to the hot and sultry weather. 

Well-placed sources told Dawn that on the one hand, both the Irsa/federal government and provincial government were not showing any interest in getting the additional water quota from the Indus source approved for the city’s vital K-IV project and, on the other, even the KWSB top bosses seemed reluctant in taking up the matter at different forums despite knowing that any further delay in initiating the K-IV project might create water crisis in the city in 2011 if not in the fast-approaching summer. 

As the KWSB had already utilised its quota of 1,200 cusecs (600mgd) with the commissioning of the 100mgd K-III project in 2006, Irsa through the federal government had been approached by the city government to seek the right of drawing additional 1,200 cusecs of water from the Indus for its K-IV project. The KWSB had earlier got the right of drawing 1,200 cusecs of water from the Indus during the era of Gen Zia-ul-Haq. 

However, Irsa/federal government while refusing to allocate a separate quota of water for the city from the Indus on the plea that the federal government allocates share of water from the river on a provincial basis and, as such, the KWSB should seek its required quota of water from the Sindh government’s share of the Indus. 

But when the previous Sindh government was approached by the KWSB with a request to allocate the additional 1,200 cusecs of water of its share from the Indus, the sources said the then provincial government refused bluntly, saying that the provincial quota of water from the Indus was already not enough to meet its drinking and agricultural requirements. 

The well-placed sources pointed out that although former city nazim Syed Mustafa Kamal, who was also the chairman of the KWSB, in his attempt to get the additional quota of 1,200 cusecs for the K-IV project had even sent a summary of the project to Asif Ali Zardari through a close friend of the president with a request to include the project in the Karachi Package by getting it approved from the Executive Committee of the National Economic Council (Ecnec) on a priority basis so that the city could meet its water needs beyond 2011, nothing has, so far, been done in this regard. 

“In fact, the KWSB bosses too have failed to forcefully plead its case to get the additional quota of 1,200 cusecs for the much-needed project from the Indus source with Irsa/federal government and even with the Sindh government,” the sources said. “Had the utility’s officials convinced Irsa/federal government and Sindh government that it will not be drawing the entire quota of 600mgd in one go but in four different phases and that too in a period of 10 years, they would have already got the right to draw the required quota of water from the Indus by now.” 

Elaborating, they said that though the entire project required 600mgd, it had to be completed in fours different phases and the KWSB would initially draw only 150mgd of water in 2011 when the project’s first phase was scheduled to be completed while the remaining quota of water was supposed to be drawn in the next nine years as three other phases, each to take three years, are scheduled to be completed by 2020. 

Asked about the present status of the project, sources said that the water utility’s officials concerned had consumed more than enough time in completing the project’s study and PC-1 and it was now lying with the Ecnec for approval. 

The sources were, however, optimistic that once the project was approved by Ecnec, the lingering issue relating to the additional quota of 1,200 cusecs from the Indus source would also be resolved amicably. 

They also hoped that Ecnec would approve the K-IV project on a priority basis keeping in view of the city’s water needs beyond 2011 as well as its cost which had already gone up by billions of rupees since the project was conceived and when the dollar was equal to Rs60.

(By Azizullah Sharif, Dawn-13, 02/05/2010)

Auditors have found irregularities of millions of rupees in the Sindh Coastal Community Development Project during the period from January 2007 to February 2010, Dawn has learnt. Highly placed sources said an audit of the $40 million project, designed for the development of coastal communities, found gross mismanagement of resources. 

According to the audit report, there was only 16 per cent physical progress in nearly half of the total estimated time allocated for the project. The cumulative disbursements stood at six per cent, contract awarded were 33 per cent and almost 77 per cent of the incremental staff positions were vacant, the report said. 

The Sindh Coastal Community Development Project is jointly funded by the Asian Development Bank ($36 million), the Sindh government ($3.42 million) and beneficiaries ($0.65 million). 

The report prepared by Sindh Audit Director-General Nazeer Seehar found that if the implementation schedule was not followed, targets could not be achieved and the poor coastal communities for whom the project had been designed would not get its benefits. 

The costal community development project was to be implemented through two consultants – the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) to plant 3,000 hectares of mangroves at a cost of Rs44 million and the National Rural Support Programme (NRSP) to establish around 1,300 community organisations for carrying out Rs976 million development works – selected by the ADB.The auditors observed that the consultants were selected on a single source selection basis without placing advertisements in the local or international media as well as on the internet, showing that there was a lack of competition, which was not completely in line with the ADB’s guidelines. 

The audit report found that the NRSP Badin office transferred Rs125 million to its head office in Islamabad on July 9, 2009 without getting its approval of the project director. 

Referring to the appointment and remunerations of project directors, the report stated that rules were violated in payment of salaries to the two project directors. 

An officer who had retired in BPS 19 was appointed project director on Dec 28, 2006 for one year. Keeping in view the officer’s grade, his monthly salary according to government rules should have been fixed at Rs75,000. However, the project director was given a salary package of Rs150,000 a month. This way the payment made in excess was Rs900,000 during the year, the report said, seeking its justification. 

In November 2008, the incumbent project director was appointed. According to the audit report, although terms and conditions of his service have not been finalised, the project director has been getting Rs50,000 every month in excess to what government rules say about the salary of a grade 20 officer if reappointed after retirement. Being an officer who claimed to have retired in a basic pay scale equivalent to grade 20, his monthly remuneration should have been fixed at Rs100,000. However, he was appointed at a monthly salary of Rs150,000 in violation of relevant rules. He had been paid Rs800,000 in excess from November 2008 to February 2010, the report pointed out, stating that the extra payment needed to be justified. 

The auditors found that a double-cabin vehicle (GS-7710) was allotted to the adviser to the chief minister on the Sindh Coastal Development Authority despite the fact that the project did not allow such privilege for the official. 

The funds spent on the repair of the vehicle and fuel amounted to Rs381,126 so far, the report noted. The auditors recommended that the vehicle and the amount spent on it be recovered from the adviser. 

The audit report said that under the government rules the amount in excess of even Rs200 should be paid through a “crossed cheque” but over Rs13.9 million had been paid through bearer cheques and that also without any acknowledgements. 

The coastal forest division of the Sindh forest department, working on behalf of the Sindh coastal community development project (SCCDP), had made various payments – including at least six payments of over Rs2 million each between April and September 2009 – through bearer cheques. The auditors said that payments done in this manner were irregular as even acknowledgement receipts were not shown to them despite repeated requests. 

The auditors noted that the Sindh Rural Development Programme (SRDP), which had agreed to give 10 double-cabin vehicles to the SCCDP, had only provided four vehicles whereas it transferred a single-cabin vehicle to its Islamabad head office. The report recommended the SRDP to provide the remaining six vehicles to the SCCDP and bring back the vehicle from the head office. 

Although the posts of conservator of forests and divisional forest officer had not been allocated in the project, the SCCDP hired services of two forest department officials – Riaz Wagan and Agha Tahir – on deputation in February 2009, which according to the audit report was irregular and unjustified. 

The audit pointed out that the NRSP appointed more than 90 staffers, including over 50 of its employees, without consultation with the authority or setting any competitive criteria. The agreement between the NSRP and the Coastal Development Authority (CDA) clearly mentions that “project staff selection process shall be transparent and competitive and the key staff to be engaged by the consultants will be evaluated by the clients (CDA).” 

The auditors also called for the recovery of Rs666,000, paid to SCDA staffers as project allowance against the guidelines prescribed by the donor. 

The NRSP Badin office purchased furniture, fixtures, a camera and other material at a cost of over Rs1.735 million without inviting open tenders, which was a clear violation of the public procurement rules. In other cases, it purchased computers and accessories by inviting bids, but instead of accepting the lower bids the NRSP accepted higher bids and spent over Rs134,000 extra. The auditors said that the responsibility of the irregularity should be fixed. 

Some 23 regular staffers – 18 from the forest department and five from the livestock department – were hired by the project without open competition. They were being given the project allowance, which was to be given only when a government servant was hired through an open competitive process. Otherwise, the rules said they should be paid deputation allowance only. 

The International Union for Conservation of Nature, the Coastal Development Authority’s consultant, spent over Rs1.357 million between April and December 2009 under various heads such as fuel expenses, labour charges, rent, and other miscellaneous charges. However, these expenditures were shown under the head of “trainings/ seminar/ workshop” without re-appropriation orders so this expenditure was misclassified and irregular, the auditors observed. 

The audit has noted that both consultants, the NRSP and the IUCN, were not maintaining proper record of the funds, which they had received directly from the ADB, in shape of cashbooks and ledger books. 

When asked by the auditors the NRSP provided partial information – the bank statement – while in the case of the IUCN no record was found to be maintained separately. The agreement clearly mentioned: “The consultant shall keep accurate and systematic accounts and records in respect of the services hereunder, in accordance with internationally accepted accounting principles …” 

Speaking to Dawn, Sindh Audit Director-General Nazeer Seehar said the records of investigation conducted by the ADB on the complaint about the selection of project director and the approval of the Single Source Selection (SSS) criteria for appointment of consultants was not provided to the audit for scrutiny. He said Section 14 (3) of the Auditor General’s (functions, powers, and terms and condition of Service) Ordinance 2001, clearly states that “any person or authority hindering the audit functions of the auditor general regarding inspection of accounts shall be subject to disciplinary action under Efficiency and Discipline Rules.”

(By Bhagwandas, Dawn-13, 06/05/2010)

Though much attention has been paid by the media to the various clauses of the 18th Amendment, the guaranteeing of the right to education in the newly enacted Article 25A of the Constitution has not received little meaningful coverage. The right to education has been considered fundamental in the Constitution under Articles 9, 14, 18, 20 and 22 in the pre-18th Amendment era.

As no explicit clause guaranteeing the same had ever been included in the constitution prior to the 18th Amendment, the courts addressed the issue by widening the ambit of the right to life under Article 9, taken together with other articles, to include the right to education. As such, it was stated that in order to be able to sustain a minimum standard of living, to uphold your right to life, a certain level of education was necessary. This implicated Articles 14, 18, 20, and 22, which elaborate upon issues of the dignity of man, the right to trade or to carry on a lawful profession, the right to manage one’s religious institutions of teaching, and pertinent safeguards in respect to religion in educational institutions. 

Along with these articles, Article 37 of the Constitution was often mentioned as it sys the state shall provide free and compulsory education to its citizens at the earliest, subject to the availability of resources. However, the latter provision is within the Principles of Policy section of the Constitution which, vide Article 30, is not enforceable by any court of law in Pakistan. The courts therefore have seldom questioned the policy decisions made by the government with regard to education, unless they were made in unfair exercise of authority.

However, in defining the tight to education, the Supreme Court in 2000 SCMR 1222 has said that the "right to seek admission in an educational institution and to continue studies therein was always subject to the rules of discipline prescribed by the institution, and therefore, a student who intended to pursue his studies in the institution was bound by such rules." Furthermore, the Sindh High Court in 2007 PLD Kar 116 stated that any "unreasonable restraint, hindrance or condition on its (the right to education) exercise would be ultra vires [a violation of] the Constitution". 

This seems to have been further elucidated in several cases, including two Lahore High Court cases, 2006 CLC 463 and 2005 PLD Lah. 428, which, when taken together, seem to enunciate that whereas an individual has the right to "seek" education, the Constitution does not explicitly guarantee any right to "free education". This appeared to restrict the application of the legal concept to a person having an equal right to attend an educational institution, subject to his fulfilling the lawful prerequisites of gaining admission into the said educational institution, including its financial requirements.

However, the 18th Amendment thereafter enacted Article 25A, which states: "The state shall provide free and compulsory education to all children of the age of five to sixteen years in such manner as may be determined by law". Here the right seems to have been redefined to include free education. 

Although quite laudable, there are several impediments to its enforcement.

The most problematic part of this clause is the portion which states that the right to education shall be provided "in such manner as may be determined by law". At the moment, there seems to be no defined manner via which one could in fact dispense free education to the masses, and hence the question arises as to whether Article 25A would be enforceable in the absence of any explicit legal instrument delineating a manner of implementing it, as is apparently required by the said article. If one takes the view that the legislature would have to enact a legal instrument or legislation to enforce and implement the said article, the same would amount to rendering the constitutional article redundant in the meanwhile, and as is well settled, the courts would never attribute redundancy to any provision of the law. Furthermore, the word "law" not only constitutes statutory provisions and legislation, but also judicial principles set down by the courts of law. Hence, it may very well be the case that where the government and parliament are seen as failing in their responsibility to implement the said fundamental right, the court may via various judicial principles, including that of legitimate expectations and vested rights, start enforcing it, or at least make an attempt at doing so. 

However, if in fact the above-mentioned impediments are resolved, certain questions still remain. For example, out of the estimated population of 185 million, children aged between 0-14 years are said to account for an approximate 40 per cent of the total populace. Hence, the question as to how the government intends to provide free education to such a massive demographic as encapsulated by the enumerated age bracket in Article 25A is yet to be answered. Furthermore, amongst other issues, the enforceability of the right may open the floodgates with respect to increased litigation in the high courts and the Supreme Court, further aggravating an already beleaguered and overworked superior judiciary. 

With that said, nothing stated above takes away anything from the fact that the enactment of Article 25A is an achievement in itself. It is fraught with certain difficulties and bottlenecks which perhaps should have been anticipated and addressed prior to the passage of the 18th Amendment. The writer is a Karachi-based lawyer. 

(By Basil Nabi Malik, The News, 12/05/2010)