What's new

Punjab launches land record computerisation

I should have mentioned Cuba in my list too.
As I said, visit that place first (like I did) and then come back and report about the gooddiee gooodi softy softy @rse of Castrated Castro.

Your Personal disliking of socialism and Castro is no PROOF dear !!
Cuba ranks high in metrics of health and education, with a high Human Development Index of 0.783 as of 2012. Cuba was the only nation in the world in 2006 that met the World Wide Fund for Nature's definition of sustainable development, with an ecological footprint of less than 1.8 hectares per capita, 1.5 hectares, and a Human Development Index of over 0.855

So no, Nehru's attack on Muslim landowners should not be praised by Pakistanis.

Now that is being "biased" beyond rationality ... How did the feudal lords, whom you are defending so desperately , come to own "Giant Landholdings" in the first place ??
 
.
I was taking about the figures regarding land ownership in Pakistan, not about Umer II.

I can suggest some books if you want to study the economy of Umyyad Caliphate during his reign.

wiki

So here is the welfare system?


Umar was the first Muslim ruler to set up fixed rules for the discrimination of non Muslim subjects. He issued rules about ghiyar or "distinguishing signs" to be observed by the dhimmis under Islamic rule. His edict prohibited non-Muslims from using saddles and wanted them to cut their hair in a special way. They were not allowed to wear shoes with straps, a luxurious robe or a turban.[7] He also issued orders regarding the exhibition of crosses in public, the destruction of churches in certain cities and dismissal of Christians from high government positions.[8]
Umar II - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


if you are that knowledgeable about his rule then go fix wiki please.


Thank you

But we are better off from a system of 600 AD

It is like Pakistanis to travel using donkeys. hahahaha.

Your Personal disliking of socialism and Castro is no PROOF dear !!
Cuba ranks high in metrics of health and education,
??

tiny population getting billions of dollars from Commie Russia

is like mini Saudi.

Sure the health was free

But now that Ruskie money is gone

I'll see how long Venezuela keeps on funding for the top of the world health care system.


Why on earth you won't look at the budget and funding sources for a given population?

Before making claims?


My personal observation is linked to the budget for a set of people in a country.

Not some hanky phanky.


Thank you.

....



Now that is being "biased" beyond rationality ... How did the feudal lords, whom you are defending so desperately , come to own "Giant Landholdings" in the first place ??

Like you and I own a house or build a factory. This is how.


As I said

Being a communist these days is like being a denier of moon landing.

Be my guest if you want to remain in that state.
 
Last edited:
.
@FaujHistorian come on yar you know very well that what @RAMPAGE meant when he mentioned Umer II . He was talking about "Land Reforms" introduced by him , Giant Landholdings belonging to the Ummayad Elite were confiscated in the interest of general public

Regarding your concepts on Socialism , you are in a state of denial .. You are not ready to accept what stats suggest , but you present your assumptions as "absolute" truth ... Well if you want to live that way , its your choice
 
.
@FaujHistorian come on yar you know very well that what @RAMPAGE meant when he mentioned Umer II . He was talking about "Land Reforms" introduced by him , Giant Landholdings belonging to the Ummayad Elite were confiscated in the interest of general public

Snatching land in itself is not a recipe for good economy.

That is theft even if committed by state.

Heck why we keep on going to an era for which no printed budgets are available.

Look at ZA Bhutto, Indira Gandhi etc. Mao. too.

Everyone stole land and factories.

And in every country, their policies of theft had to be reversed.


Why don't you guys try to study your own history before doing jumping jacks on someone from 600 AD.

Thank you



p.s. Umer II's social and taxation system if implemented today will be very similar to the one by Hitler. Sorry to say.
 
.
1471271_640547059316753_1110036677_n.jpg

@FaujHistorian @RAMPAGE

LAND reforms in Pakistan have a long and somewhat chequered history. The British had less of an interest in the matter as they relied on the support of several influential landlords. Although there had been some limited reforms in the years leading up to 1947, all major reforms date from the years after independence. Almost immediately the various provincial legislatures passed several statutes whereby the jagirdari systems were abolished and tenants protected. The major reforms, however, came in three stages: the first during Ayub Khan`s martial law in 1959; the second and third during Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto`s rule in the 1970s.

Ayub Khan`s government passed the first major piece of legislation concerning land reforms in Pakistan. This legislation was the West Pakistan Land Reforms Regulation 1959 (Regulation 64 of 1959). The salient features of this regulation included a ceiling on individual holdings. No one individual could own more than 500 acres of irrigated and 1,000 acres of unirrigated land or a maximum of 36,000 Produce Index Units (PIU), whichever was greater. It further allowed that land be redistributed amongst tenants and others. In addition, the regulation contained provisions which provided for security of tenants as well as for preventing the subdivision of land holdings.

These land reforms stayed in force until 1972 and the next great wave of land reforms.

Bhutto, despite being a major landowner himself, was determined to institute reforms, having been a minister under Ayub Khan. Bhutto, seeing the former`s land reforms as inadequate, was responsible for two major land reform regimes. The first was by way of a martial law regulation, the Land Reform Regulation 1972 by which the West Pakistan Land Reforms Regulation 1959 was repealed through paragraph 32.

As per paragraph 8(1) no individual holdings were to be in excess of 150 acres of irrigated land or 300 of unirrigated land, or irrigated and unirrigated land the aggregate area of which exceeded 150 acres of irrigated land (one acre of irrigated land being reckoned as the equivalent of two acres of unirrigated land), or an area equivalent to 15,000 PIU of land, whichever was greater. Paragraph 18(1) of the regulations also provided for excess land to be surrendered and utilised for the benefit of tenants shown to be in the process of cultivating it.

By 1977, the country had an elected parliament. It would be this body which passed the last major piece of legislation dealing with land reforms; the Law Reforms Act 1977 (Act II of 1977) and the only one ironically which came the way of a democratically elected legislature as opposed to a military junta. It did not repeal the 1972 regulations, but was designed to operate concurrently with the same.

The most important and relevant change it made was that individual holdings, including shares in shamilat , if any, in excess of 100 acres of irrigated land or 200 acres of unirrigated land, or irrigated and unirrigated land the aggregate of which exceeded 100 acres of irrigated land (again, one acre of irrigated land being reckoned as equivalent to two acres of unirrigated land). Furthermore, notwithstanding the above, no land holding could (per section 3) be greater than an area equivalent to 8,000 PIU of land calculated on the basis of classification of soil as entered in the revenue records for kharif.

The end of the Bhutto era also signalled the end of the era of statutory land reform in Pakistan.

During Ziaul Haq`s reign only major new laws were passed. Only two amending ordinances came into being. The first in 1979 declared that where the provincial government had decided to lease out surrendered land, the person who surrendered it would have first priority, and the second allowed the federal government to exempt any educational institution or cooperative farming society from the operation of the 1977 act.

Land reforms were always controversial. It was alleged by opponents that they were un-Islamic and that they infringed on the right to own, use and enjoy property as protected by the constitution. Matters finally came to a head before the Supreme Court in the case of Qazalbash Waqf v Chief Land Commissioner in which both the 1972 regulations were attacked as being against Islamic injunctions and unconstitutional. The Supreme Court agreed.

Of the 1972 regulations, the Supreme Court declared that paragraphs 7, 8, 9, 10, 13 and 14 and thus consequently 18 were unconstitutional as being against Islamic injunctions. The striking down of paragraphs 8 and 18 overturned the main reforms achieved.

Similarly in the same case the Supreme Court overturned the entire sections — 3, 4, 5, 6, 7(5), 8, 9, 10 — and consequently sections 11-17 of the act as being unconstitutional and against Islamic injunctions. The striking down of sections 3 and 17 undid the main reforms promulgated in the act. The laws stated to be unconstitutional ceased to have effect on March 23, 1990 (the day the judgement was handed down).

The net result of the Qazalbash Waqf v Chief Land Commissioner is that land reforms in Pakistan are now at the same level as they were in 1947, as the 1972 regulations and the 1977 act have seen their main provisions being struck down and the 1959 regulations have been repealed.

To commence land reforms and to ensure they contain at least the same measure of reforms as the 1972 regulations and the 1977 act did will at the very least require a constitutional amendment which allows parliament to enact legislation regarding land reform notwithstanding the relevant constitutional provisions.

Failing the above, any proposed reforms would have to be more limited in their ambit than the previous reforms to avoid unconstitutionality or their lordships would have to overrule the judgment in the Qazalbash Waqf v Chief Land Commissioner in another case.



For a detailed study of legislation on land reforms , see page 17-28 :

http://www.sdpi.org/publications/files/Microsoft Word - A117.pdf

Unfortunately its the MULLAHS again who did not let ordinary peasant benefit from these reforms
lets see if SC can do something now
 
Last edited:
.
Whatever PTI manifesto is, PML-N co-opts it. Where was PML-N when PTI declared that they would computerize land record and finish patwari-culture?
Mr.Historian, the program dates back to 1994 when the pilot project to computerize the land records of Kusur was launched......Get your history correct.....
link

Does anyone remember that it was PTI / IK that came up with 2 Rs. Roti scheme. Shabaz Sharif simply copied it on a massive scale.
Again do you remember from where did PTI copy it? Here lemme give you a hint
According to Mian Mehmud ur Rashid, the idea was plucked out of the books of the AKP (former Welfare) party in Turkey which had begun to sell bread at subsidized rates in the localities of Ankara and Istanbul after the country was hit with hyper inflation in the mid-1980’s
Link
However, mere introducing the ideas doesn't mean 100%. PTI's sasta tundoors remained absent after the first photo shoot

KPK has an excellent Right To Information law. Punjab has done a half hearted RTI bill. Why could they not do better?
What are the defects in the bill, if i may know except for the IC commision to be of three members? Have you read the both bills? Have you ever witnessed the Punjab portal from where you can already get a lot of data and information?.....

I do not know when PTI / IK would come to power, but they have already made a difference.
Looking at their politics, seems like they will become another JI...
 
.
1471271_640547059316753_1110036677_n.jpg

@FaujHistorian @RAMPAGE......
For a detailed study of legislation on land reforms , see page 17-28 :

http://www.sdpi.org/publications/files/Microsoft Word - A117.pdf

Unfortunately its the MULLAHS again who did not let ordinary peasant from these reforms
lets see if SC can do something now

What's the point yaar.

What is the point?

Yeah. We had socialist and commie experiments in Pakistan and commies miserably failed like most everywhere else in the world even in Mao's commie Jannat aka China.

What's your point.


Thank you.
 
.
What's the point yaar.
What is the point?
Yeah. We had socialist and commie experiments in Pakistan and commies miserably failed like most everywhere else in the world even in Mao's commie Jannat aka China.
What's your point.

Whats wrong with you bhai sahib ??

Land Reforms could not be implemented as Mullahs got them declared "UnIslamic" !!!

And you are calling them miserably failed commi "experiment"!!!
You are highly misinformed and biased against socialism

I wonder what Jinnah meant when he said "religion has got nothing to do with state business"
 
. .
Whats wrong with you bhai sahib ??

Land Reforms could not be implemented as Mullahs got them declared "UnIslamic" !!!

And you are calling them miserably failed commi "experiment"!!!
You are highly misinformed and biased against socialism

I wonder what Jinnah meant when he said "religion has got nothing to do with state business"


Mullahs are bikaoo maal.

But commie experiment in Pakistan failed miserably. It destroyed our banks, educational institutions, and above all factories.

Thank God, the lands were not allowed to be looted by Bhutto commie, but he did loot factories and banks.

This is what I meant by failed commie experiment.


Peace
 
.
But commie experiment in Pakistan failed miserably. It destroyed our banks, educational institutions, and above all factories.
Thank God, the lands were not allowed to be looted by Bhutto commie, but he did loot factories and banks.

Too much yar ......

Bhutto himself owned thousands of acres of agri land and yet he decided to bring about reforms limiting the ownership of land by any individual to a maximum of 100 acres only.. And you say he planned to loot the lands ... shameful and stupid accusation really ...

Land Reforms 1977
Bhutto’s views on land ownership were widely publicized prior to the announcement of reforms,
and many landlords had transferred land among relatives in advance to preempt possibility of
confiscation. Within a few years, it was evident that desired results were not achieved. The
Bhutto-led government promulgated another Land Reforms Ordinance on 5th Jan 1977 with three
new significant features. The Ordinance reduced ceiling to 100 acres of irrigated land; allowed
compensation to land owners in the forms of bonds; and made provision for distribution to
tenants without charge. An additional area of 1.8 million acres was resumed of which 0.9 million
was redistributed among 13,143 persons .But the military government that took charge in July that year halted the implementation of this
Act.


And how did he loot Factories and banks ?? Do you ever bother to read something before making false accusations on everyone ??

Bhutto's policy largely benefited the poor and working class when the level of absolute poverty was sharply reduced, with the percentage of the population estimated to be living in absolute poverty falling from 46.50% to 30.78% by the end of 1979–80

http://www.sdpi.org/publications/files/Microsoft Word - A117.pdf

You are worried about the feudal lords and industrialists only ... What about the 99 % ???

@Azlan Haider @FaujHistorian

I suggest that one of you guys should open a thread for further debate. Indeed this topic is very important and I think we should give other members a chance to discuss it.

P.S. I think a poll in addition to the thread will be a good idea.

I think you are right
 
Last edited:
. . .
Mr.Historian, the program dates back to 1994 when the pilot project to computerize the land records of Kusur was launched......Get your history correct.....
link


Again do you remember from where did PTI copy it? Here lemme give you a hint

However, mere introducing the ideas doesn't mean 100%. PTI's sasta tundoors remained absent after the first photo shoot


What are the defects in the bill, if i may know except for the IC commision to be of three members? Have you read the both bills? Have you ever witnessed the Punjab portal from where you can already get a lot of data and information?.....


Looking at their politics, seems like they will become another JI...

I wish you had not called me Mr. Historian. Otherwise your post is actually a very good rebuttal. Here are my counter-arguments.

1. Even though the pilot project was launched in 1994, we have yet to see the practical results. A lot has been said; some has been done, but the implementation even after almost 20 years is sadly lacking. Computerization of Land records should not even be an issue in this century, and yet mid-way into the second decade of 21st century, we are discussing whether or not someone (not PML-N) should get credit for a pilot project. PML-N has been in power in Punjab for such a long time that I feel like blaming it for incompetence, but then really it is pressure from within its own ranks that keeps it from this important project - and that makes it nepotism, not incompetence. If it were not IK's constant jibes, I am convinced that this project would have moved at less than glacial pace.

2. Sasta Tandoor scheme was launched by PTI in Lahore (& it was not just a photo-op). That was my contention, and despite your hint and link, my contention stands. It was taken over by the initiative from Punjab Government and many of the people in the march to Islamabad on 9 March 2009 were its beneficiaries. I should know. I was there. I met some who told me that this was their reason for supporting Mian brothers. So, Mian brothers' good instincts led them to co-opt this scheme and put government resources behind it. They got their reward. Good for them. But let us be fair and give credit where it is due.

3. Thank you for providing the link for Punjab Portal. I had not seen it before. It seems like a colorful website. I shall know how useful it is if & when I need to use it. But I hope you understand that this is not a substitute for an effective RTI law.

My views on RTI law are borrowed from suject-matter experts (journalists and activists) who deal with it. I confess I have not viewed both the bills and that I have taken other people's word for it. But then it is a matter of trust; I trust the people who are the subject-matter experts. They have looked at both the bills and I trust their judgement. One such person is @XahidAbdullah on twitter.
 
.
Land Reforms could not be implemented as Mullahs got them declared "UnIslamic" !!!

Though I differ with Fauj on many things. I shall endorse his view as well as add a bit.

It was not that Mullahs got them declared UnIslamic. It was rather that Landed gentry got Mullahs to issue decrees and opinions to this effect. There is a difference. An important one. The same as between a tool and its user.

There were some from among 'Mullahs' that endorsed the view that absentee-landlordism (pls excuse my liberty with English here) was against the spirit of Islam.

Fauj is right about Communism having been dead for a long time now. There could be some room for a reformed socialism. But you know a welfare state model is perhaps much better by virtue of being practical and well-developed.

Pakistan should implement a land reform law that should take care of the worst abuses. And for that a computerised land record would be very valuable. Ideally one could just sort, slice, & dice data to find out who owns how much and where. One could also map data of criminal activity and come up with districts and divisions where large hand-holding and higher criminal activity converge. I would bet that such places would benefit greatly from land reform.
 
.

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom