QUETTA(National Times)- Former Balochistan chief minister and chief of the Sarawan tribe, Nawab Muhammad Aslam Raisani, has challenged the provincial government’s decision to abolish Kalat Division and merge Mastung district into Quetta Division by filing a constitutional petition in the Balochistan High Court (BHC), arguing that the move violates the constitutional and democratic rights of the people.
Speaking to reporters outside the court on Thursday, accompanied by former senator Nawabzada Haji Lashkari Raisani, senior lawyer Riaz Ahmed and others, Mr Raisani said the government’s decision had stripped Kalat of its historical and administrative identity without consulting the public, tribal leaders or elected representatives.
He said members of parliament were also affected by the decision, but their silence was “deeply concerning”.
Mr Raisani maintained that Balo-chistan’s problems could not be resol-ved merely by replacing the chief minister, stressing that the province required a political solution and a new social contract to address its long-standing challenges.
“The government cannot make decisions on administrative restructuring, land allocation or land purchases without taking tribes and public representatives into confidence,” he said, accusing the provincial administration of imposing unilateral decisions while claiming to uphold democratic values. “The government calls itself democratic, but its decisions reflect a dictatorial mindset.”
Mr Raisani said efforts had been made during his tenure as chief minis-ter from 2008 to 2013 to address enfor-ced disappearances and other issues facing Balochistan.
Asked about reports of a possible change in the provincial leadership, Mr Raisani said he did not support replacing the chief minister but believed the focus should instead be on improving the system of governance. He remarked that under the current circumstances, “no one is willing to become chief minister”.
Speaking on the occasion, lawyer Riaz Ahmed said the government had failed to consult the people of Mastung and Kalat before issuing the notification. He argued that the decision had adversely affected the rights of local residents and should therefore be reviewed by the court.
