Roof of the world: RIGHTS OF GILGIT-BALTISTAN

Since 1947 the people of Gligit Baltistan Have not given rights.mbiguous. While Pakistan recognizes residents as citizens, they still lack representation at the National Assembly and GilgitBaltistan remains undefined in Pakistan’s Constitution.

territory was composed of princely states ruled by Mirs and Rajas, controlled by British
and Kashmiri colonial powers, and then in the 1970s (depending on the area) directly
administered by Pakistan.
37 Although the 2009 Order expanded its powers, Gilgit-Baltistan is not a province:

In 1999,

The Supreme Court of Pakistan was called on to assess the constitutional
status of the Northern Areas in Al-Jehad Trust. The case shows the role of the formal
law in analyzing, describing and ultimately justifying this constitutional liminality. The
petition, brought by residents of Northern Areas, sought four remedies:
(1) the enforcement of fundamental rights found in the Constitution of Pakistan;
(2) a declaration of the Northern Areas’ constitutional status;
(3) a declaration that the people of the Northern Areas are full citizens of Pakistan with the right to fully participate in the affairs of the federation;
(4) granting of provincial status to the Northern Areas.

In 2007,

the former President General Pervez Musharraf presented a provisional legal

framework to address some of the issues raised in Al-Jehad Trust.56 This included
upgrading the representative body in the region to a “provincial legislature” and
empowering it to elect its own head and prepare its own budget.
57
It also provided for the transfer of administrative and financial powers to the Northern Areas from the Kashmir Affairs and Northern Areas Ministry.
58While the 2009 Order also expands the
powers allocated to the region, Gilgit-Baltistan continues to be legally constructed as a
liminal place, with major consequences for residents.
59
First, the legislation still excludes the region from representation in the National
Assembly and other important federal bodies.
60
While democratic deficiency does not
necessarily imply liminality, the lack of representation in Gilgit-Baltistan is presented by
the Federal government as impermanent and transitory: a temporary state that will
change once the Kashmir conflict is resolved. Moreover, as discussed below, the
justification for the democratic deficiency is based on the liminality of the region itself. In
this way, the liminality is cyclical: the ambiguous status justifies further unclear,
transitory exclusions.

18th Amendment’s
new concurrent power over mineral oil and natural gas and
revenue-sharing is particularly murky for Gilgit-Baltistan.