Merit – Not Domicile

By Dr. Maria Saifuddin Effendi | August 2020

The quota system generates a fine balance of opportunity and representation in public services and education among the masses belonging to the contrasting demographics of agrarian and industrial areas of a country.

In Pakistan, the quota system was first introduced by Prime Minister Khan Liaquat Ali Khan in 1948 to create equal opportunity for the East Pakistanis. In 1973, the quota system was revised to provide 60% opportunities to the rural population in Sindh and 40% to the urban population. It was subsequently extended 2013 for 20 more years and would be completing its 60 years in 2033.

In the past 48 years, the ‘fine’ balance of opportunity between rural and urban people of Sindh has turned into a piercing discrimination that has gradually discouraged and prevented the urban youth to cultivate aspirations to join, for example, the civil services. The civil services of Pakistan cater to 92.5% of quota holders and only 7.5 % is on merit. In the education sector, people with lower grades and rural domicile are conveniently catered for in professional (medical and engineering) studies. Not only that this defeats and compromises merit, the quota system also risks crucial industries and human lives by inducting people with lower grades/CGPA into jobs at hospitals, engineering colleges and other organizations. People with fake domiciles and carrying two different provincial domiciles simultaneously, tell a story of political corruption which is encouraged by the quota system.

The quota system was a quick-fix but has created long-term impacts. It became a source of discrimination and impacted efficiency and quality in bureaucratic structures. There is a difference between merit and quota. Quota requires a domicile from rural areas, a piece of paper which guarantees one’s belongingness to a lesser developed region in the country. Just because somebody has a domicile from a rural area doesn’t mean the person has also lived in the under-developed area for his entire life. Merit requires years of commitment, academic acumen, genuine efforts, qualifications, experience and hard work. Since the only criterion that lends them to participate in CSS is merit, urbanites have no other choice but to invest their energies and efforts in achieving their goals. Contrarily, a person with a quota option may have easier conditions to opt for CSS.

The domicile is a poor indicator of authenticating one’s inaccessibility to equal opportunity in education and employment. Why? It is only a document to prove someone’s residence in an area, based on their birth certificate. Over the past 5 decades, migration has taken place from rural Sindh to Karachi. Most of these people have an agrarian or feudal background. They have settled in the city, have attended the best schools but they still possess the domicile of interior/rural Sindh. This gives them an unfair opportunity over someone who is competing on merit. It is also worth noting that rural domicile-holders with urban grooming face lesser competition in CSS exam at rural centres.

The quota system has also been a cause for violence in Karachi when as it has restricted the growth of a particular section of the population. It has diminished their chances to compete and win through their qualifications and hard work. It has also eliminated the difference between apples and oranges and has impacted the quality of the bureaucracy in Sindh. It has, thus, protracted the ethnic faultlines in Karachi. The Sindhi and Urdu-speaking people have been in conflict over the quota system which has pushed the Urdu-speaking youth to fall into the clutches of ethno-nationalistic political parties, such as the Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) which has exploited them by taking advantage of their deprivations. The MQM leadership claims that since Urdu-speakers are mainly concentrated in Karachi, their younger generation is being marginalized through the quota system.

The quota system serves a good cause when it is executed properly. While giving easier opportunity to rural youth without putting them through the drills and grill of hard work to compete against merit, public funds could have been better utilized in underdeveloped areas rather than being manipulated through political considerations and corruption. Instead of raising educational standards and employment opportunities by spending allocated public funds in rural areas, the quota system has instilled the ‘victim mentality’ in rural Sindh, where people remain underprivileged because people with power have been enjoying the advantages of the quota system.

Power and feudal structures are the beneficiaries of the system. The purpose of introducing quotas has failed in such urban areas as Karachi, Hyderabad and Sukkur, where the youth are intentionally discriminated against and deprived of their rights based on merit. The last 48 years gave fair education funds to underdeveloped areas in Sindh; these were rarely spent at the right places and at the right time. Public schools in interior Sindh still serve as stables for livestock and cattle under the supervision of ‘ghost’ teachers and administrators.

The quota system was needed in the 1970s when there were lesser chances for the rural population to be a part of the public services. After 48 years, the system has only marginalized urban dwellers in Karachi, Hyderabad and Sukkur. The system needs to be revised thoroughly while keeping a balanced view of the rights of both the urban and rural populations. They would have better prospects if the quota system is overhauled and good governance and accountability are given importance.

The current and future generations in Sindh deserve to grow on the strength of merit and competition through their academic and professional acumen rather than playing the rural card. There is a dire need to raise the bar and establish standards to enter the bureaucracy through deserved qualifications. Progressive nations find opportunity in adversity. Belonging to a rural background should not be an adversity if the youth are encouraged to learn and compete through hard work rather than looking for easy solutions or lesser competition. Prosperous Pakistan requires competitive, well-educated and capable bureaucrats – people who can be relied on for their merit and not their domicile.

Cover Story

Merit – Not Domicile

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Update