Q. 4 Critically evaluate the process of land reforms during 19581977?

Ans: LAND REFORM: Re-distribution of land amongst small land owners by

expropriating
land from large land owners. Breaking up large land holdings
and thereby changing the
pattern of land ownership to stop the
concentration of land in a selected few hands.
It is universally recognized that feudalism in the developing countries is
an obstacle to
agricultural development; a root cause of socioeconomic
inequities and a barrier to the
working of a real democracy. The feudal
lords by virtue of holding large estates and
enormous
wealth,
exercise
excessive power and influence disproportionate to their
number; dominate
the state apparatus and breed all sort of corruption in the society.
No
wonder the recent advent of military regime in Pakistan brought joy and relief
to
the masses fed up with feudocracy. To quote FM Ayyubs Land Reforms
Commission,
1958-59, In many areas of West Pakistan the power is
largely concentrated in the hands of a few landlords who hamper free
exercise of vote by poor peasants, thereby
monopolize their hold on local,
provincial and federal legislative and executive arms of
the
state.
The
purpose of writing this article is to revive the issue of land reform, lying
dormant since 1977, in order to boost our dwindling agriculture and the
collapsing economy and to rebuff the pressure to restore democracy in
Pakistan. Because real democracy is possible only after liquidating feudalism.
The article traces the history of
past land reforms, attempts their appraisal
and presents a proposal for a fresh land reform. I hope the views expressed in
this article will stir up the conscience of journalists, economists, sociologists,
politicians and human-rightists to highlight the evils of feudalism. The present
military regime committed to rebuild the shattered
nation, is in the
best position to abolish the age-old feudalism and usher an era of
agricultural revitalization, industrial revival, fast economic recovery and
restoration of
real democracy in the country.
HISTORY OF LAND REFORMS BEFORE 1958
The dismal history of land reform efforts in this region began in 1930 with
the agitation of the oppressed haris, when the Sindh Hari Committee joined
the Indian peasant movement. The Indian Muslim League Council took up the
issue in 1937 and
passed a Resolution, Radical land reforms are required
to eliminate the existing
socioeconomic inequities caused by feudalism
Its ideology was based on the just principles of Islam wherein there was no
room for oppression, exploitation or
enslavement of the poor peasants.
Congress Governments in some provinces
introduced tenancy reforms in
late 1930s. The League Government in Sindh too
appointed
a
Tenancy
Economic Development and Planning-4660 Assignment #1
Q:4
Page 1

Legislation Committee (TLC) in 1943. TLC in its Report submitted in

1945,
decided to: (I) Grant conditional tenancy rights to haris; (ii) Protect waderas to
retain their land; (iii) Replace batai by cash rent and (iv) Prohibit eviction of
haris.
G.M.Saiyed a member of TLC opposed these measures. In his Note
of Dissent he
proposed to (I) Grant unconditional tenancy rights to haris;
(ii) Abolish batai and
adopt state-run tenancy and (iii) Resume all big estates
and distribute to haris. The Sindh Government controlled by waderas shelved
the TLC Report. The desperate haris
resorted to violent agitation, which
coincided with the 1946 Indian General Elections.
In the election campaign
the Qaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah and his lieutenants were making loud
promises to introduce Islamic Shariat and Land Reforms, soon after
the
creation of Pakistan. The League Government in Sindh, on advice of the Qaid-eAzam, appointed a Hari Enquiry Committee (HEC) in March 1947. The
HEC submitted
its Report in January 1948 and advised to maintain status
quo. M. Masud a member
disagreed with HEC and wrote a Note of Dissent
urging the government to abolish feudalism and to resume large estates.
Alas! the Muslim League which had made loud promises
for
land
reform
disallowed the publication of this Note of Dissent in the HEC
Report, 1948.
Rather, some Ulema-e-Su hired by a wadera minister declared M.Masud
a
communist and his Note of Dissent as Un-Islamic. He sued the minister, but the
case was withdrawn on the advice of the then Prime Minister. But the HEC
Report, 1948,
was quietly filed by the League Government, while the Qaide-Azam was Pakistans Head of State. Amazingly, a vast majority of the Muslim
masses had voted the Muslim
League to victory in the 1946 General
Elections, which became the basis of creation of
Pakistan.
SOON AFTER THE DEATH OF THE QUAID-E-AZAM, IN SEPTEMBER
1948, violent
agitation erupted in the country. The press and a pro-reform
lobby of politicians
pressed the League Government to redeem its
promises on land reforms. The Muslim
League Council in its meeting held in
February 1949 passed a Resolution, This Council
is of the opinion that the
present land-tenure system in Pakistan is antiquated and harmful
and
requires drastic changes. An Agrarian Committee (AC) was appointed in
April 1949. The AC submitted its Report in July 1949, stating, Our first
concern must
be to emancipate our economy from the oppressive shackles
of feudalism and to restore freedom, dignity and prosperity to the tiller of
the soil. It recommended short-term and long-term measures. The shortterm measures were to: (I) Abolish all
jagirs without compensation; (ii)
Replace batai by cash rent and levy tax on farm
income at par with
non-farm income and (iii). Fix wages, working hours, grant unemployment and
health insurance and pension to farm workers. The long-term
measures
were to: (I) Resume lands above the ceiling of 150/300/450 acres
Economic Development and Planning-4660 Assignment #1
Q:4
Page 2

irrigated/semi-irrigated/barani land and distribute it to needy peasants;

and (ii)
Prohibit zamindars to possess land above the prescribed ceiling by
purchase, gift, or inheritance. A Team of Experts was proposed to devise
measures to distribute the
resumed lands. The Committee aptly warned,
The statesmanship, the integrity and the
vision of the Muslim Leagues
leadership is on test. Unless a clear and precise plan is
formulated
and
implementedit is not possible, nor would be there any justification
for
sustaining amongst the people any confidence in the Muslim League any
longer.
Alas! the League Government did not act to abolish feudalism in
West Pakistan until
1958. The East Pakistan Government had abolished it
in early 1951, replacing the l anded gentry in the legislature by middle class
farmers. This change created panic
amongst the feudal lords in West
Pakistan. The then Planning Board in its first
FiveYear
Plan,
1955-1960
stressed urgent need of land reforms in West Pakistan as India had done it
right after partition and East Pakistan in 1951. The Board observed,
Feudalism is incompatible with the aspirations of a modern nation and
must be
liquidated. The poor peasants must have a sense of ownership in
the land they till, if
the economy is to develop for the benefit of the
people and warned the rulers, Land
reforms can only be delayed but cant
be denied.
THE LAND REFORMS WERE LOOMING LARGE WHEN GENERAL
AYYUB KHAN
TOOK OVER THE REINS OF THE STATE IN OCTOBER
1958. As he was convinced that feudalism was the root cause of multiple
malaise of the people, he soon appointed
a Land Reforms Commission.
The Commission submitted its Report in January 1959. It
was not unanimous
on fixing the ceiling on land. It recommended to: (I) Abolish
jagirdaris
without and zamindaris with compensation; (ii) Resume lands in excess of
prescribed ceiling for distribution to needy tillers; and (iii) Prohibit abwab,
haboob
and begar. It fixed the ceiling at 500/1000 acres irrigated/unirrigated land plus
orchards for each landlord, with permission to gift land
to his family members and
friends. It, however, made some conflicting
statements in its Report, such as, It did not
aim at breaking the power of
the ruling oligarchy with its roots in big estates? It hoped that
its
recommendations would lead to the creation of a strong middle class! Ghulam
Ishaq Khan, a member of the Commission, opposed the liberal measures
proposed by
it. Such measures would only shift the concentration of land
from the individual
landlords to their families and friends. He suggested
the adoption of the ceilings set by the
Agrarian
Committee,
1949,
at
150/300/450 acres irrigated/semi-irrigated/barani
lands. The orchards being
highly profitable ventures should be included in the prescribed
ceiling,
he
said. The President, however, accepted the Majority Report. In all
2.5
Economic Development and Planning-4660 Assignment #1
Q:4
Page 3

million acres of land was resumed and 2.3 million acres distributed to 1.8 Lac
peasants. However, the abolition of the revenue-free jagirs did not make
any difference. The erstwhile jagirdars instead of surrendering their lands
started paying
land revenue to the state. These reforms were, however,
hailed as a first step by a
military regime towards abolition of feudalism,
whereas the Muslim Leagues so called democratic regimes failed. After the
sad debacle of East Pakistan in December 1971,
Z.A.BHUTTO TOOK OVER THE REINS OF THE TRUNCATED
PAKISTAN. HE DECLARED,BREAKING UP OF THE LARGE ESTATES TO
DESTROY THE POWER OF THE FEUDAL LORDS IS A NATIONAL
NECESSITY. HE DECREED LAND REFORM IN
1972, fixing the ceiling
at150/300 acres irrigated/un-irrigated land and resuming excess land without
compensation. Only 1.3 million acres of land was resumed and
merely
0.9
million acres was distributed.
HE DECREED SECOND LAND REFORM IN JANUARY 1977, reducing
the ceiling to
100/200 acres irrigated/unirrigated land and resuming excess
land with compensation. He also levied income tax on big farmers. But
General Zia-ul-Haq took
over the reins of the State in July 1977. He halted
the implementation of the Bhutto reforms and annulled the tax law on farm
incomes. Thus General Zia brought the process of land reforms at stand still
for the time being.
APPRAISAL OF LAND REFORMS: The reformers always kept in view
the interests of the landlords. Being always in power they managed to keep
their lands in tact by
resorting to illegal means in league with corrupt
revenue officials. The main cause of
the failure of the reforms was the
liberal ceiling and the generous gifting of land by the landlords.
As
per
Mahmood H.Khans 1981 study the landlords illegally reaccumulated 2,0003000 acres of land, in excess of the ceiling of 500 acres fixed in FM
Ayyubs
1959 land reform. Thus actually 1.6% of farmland was covered by the reforms
and not 4.5-5.0% as reported by the Land Commission. Only 50% of the
resumed land
was distributed as the owners surrendered mostly
wastelands. He estimated that 40%
of the distributed land was given to
only 2% of countrys poor peasants. The rest was
auctioned to rich farmers.
So also in the Bhuttos 1972 and 1977 reforms, the landlords
raised
their
lands up to 930-1120 acres by illegal means from the fixed ceiling of 150
acres. As such, only 0.6 million acres of land was resumed and not 1.3
million acres as reported by the Land Commission. Moreover, if the
suggestion of Ghulam Ishaq Khan been accepted in 1959, 8.0 million acres
(6.0 m/acres from zamindars plus 2.0
m/acres from jagirdars) of more land

Economic Development and Planning-4660 Assignment #1

Q:4
Page 4

would have become available. About 8 Lac

instead
peasants could have benefited from this vast area.

of

only

1.8

Lac

ACCORDING TO AGRICULTURE CENSUS DATA FOR 1959, 1972 AND

1980, land concentration, as measured by Gini Coefficient has remained
practically unchanged over the years. The reform efforts have not succeeded
in changing significantly the status quo in the countryside. Rehman Sobhans
global study, 1993, has assessed the
impact of land reforms in 36
developing countries. He divided the reforms in 3
categories: (I) Egalitarian
with social transition; (ii) Inegilitarian with social transition and
(iii)
Inegalitarian without social transition. I have picked up 2 countries from each
category, (I) China&Japan distributed 50%&41% of land to 65%& 71% of
landless
farmers; (ii) Mexico&Egypt distributed 43%&15% land to 66%&10%
landless farmers and (iii) India&Pakistan distributed only 1.5%&3% land to 2.
%&2% landless farmers
respectively. It may be noted that China, Japan,
Mexico and Egypt distributed relatively more land, so more landless farmers
did benefit as compared to India and Pakistan where much less land was
distributed, so much lesser landless farmers did benefit. To
trace
the
impact of land reform, look into its contribution in raising farm productivity,
employment opportunity and living standard of the poor peasantin the
generation of savings in the farm sector and its investment in industrial
and other sectors. All this did not happen and the unfinished agenda of land
reforms is still
looming large over Pakistan.

Economic Development and Planning-4660 Assignment #1

Q:4
Page 5