Instead of locking horns at the onset of every Kharif and Rabi season, the water distribution dispute should be resolved permanently. The issue has acquired urgency in view of the much awaited national water policy which is expected to be launched in the near future. Implementation of such a policy will not be effective unless water distribution conflicts are resolved and all adhoc arrangements like the 1994 ministerial accord are terminated.
AMID the continuing tussle between Sindh and Punjab over sharing of water shortages, the Indus River System Authority (Irsa) has failed to finalize the water distribution plan for current Kharif season in its meeting on April 10.
Over the years, water demand has been rising due to the increase in the cultivated land area and change in cropping patterns. Changing global climate is likely to further reduce the availability of fresh water in future.
The federal government has been locked in a debate on distribution of water among the provinces for a long time, and the Irsa has apparently failed to resolve the intra-provincial dispute over the sharing of irrigation water shortages equitably.
As a water allocation body manned by experts and bureaucrats representing all the four provinces and the federal government, Irsa is expected to allocate water in an equitable manner to the satisfaction of all parties concerned. But this has not happened since 1991 when Irsa for the first and last time, struck an agreed accord among the provinces.
Unfortunately, within three years of signing the 1991 accord serious conflicts have started to surface among the provinces over water sharing. In 1994, there was an exceptional decline in rainfall which created serious water shortages.
To meet this situation, the then federal minister for water and power convened an inter-provincial ministerial meeting in which it was decided that the Punjab and Sindh would be entitled to use water in the same proportion as they used water during the 1977-82 period, whereas the NWFP and Balochistan would continue to receive their stipulated share as envisaged in the 1991 water accord.
The record of official correspondence between Sindh, Irsa and ministry of Water and Power afterward this inter- provincial meeting suggest that Sindh was made to accept the 1994 arrangement under protest, as its water supply was subsequently reduced by 18 per cent under the ‘historical use’ formula, while that of Punjab actually increased by eight per cent.
This unjust distribution attracted a strong opposition from Sindh which has been demanding of the federal government that the four provinces should share water shortage on the basis of the 1991 water accord and not on the basis of the historical use.
Sindh’s contention was that why only two provinces— which are also most productive— should be made to suffer. It had demanded that the NWFP and Balochistan should also share the water shortages under the water accord of 1991. This demand of Sindh was never heard properly and each successive government tried to put a blanket over this issue.
After the ouster of the Nawaz government in October 1999, Sindh requested Irsa to seek the legal position of 1994 ministerial decision. To this the law ministry sent a report to General Pervez Musharraf on Oct 25, 2000, saying that the 1994 decision had no legal status and its implementation was against the 1991 Accord and, finally, Irsa upheld the water distribution according to the accord agreed upon on March 21, 2001.
The ministry of Water and Power also notified on June 28, 2001 that decision of the 1994 inter-provincial ministerial meeting stands annulled. Despite this clear-cut ruling of the law ministry and notification of competent authority status quo has been maintained on this issue.
It is almost shocking that even directives of the President regarding distribution of water shortages equitably among all provinces could not be implemented as yet.
As a matter of fact, the conflict of water between Sindh and Punjab is not new. It dates back prior to creation of Pakistan as early as 1900, but at that time it was due to development of irrigation infrastructure.
The recent row emanates from the admission by some officials from Punjab at the Irsa meeting held last month that the province used water in excess of its allocated share from the Indus during the Rabi season which ended on March 31st. This revelation seems to vindicate Sindh’s charge of water pilferage against Punjab. On whose permission this was done has not been made clear as yet.
The inter-provincial meeting held on April 5 attended by the irrigation ministers of Sindh, Punjab and the NWFP, irrigation secretary of Balochistan and officials of Irsa, Wapda and Met office, presided by Federal Minister for Water and Power Liaqat Ali Jatoi, failed to agree to a suggestion to roll over unutilized share of any province in Rabi to Kharif to compensate for over-utilization of any other province.
In this meeting Sindh Irrigation Minister Nadir Akmal Leghari had demanded that releases less than allocation to a province should be compensated in the next season as had been suggested in the A.N.G. Abbasi report of the technical committee on water issue.
Failure of Irsa to timely check and intervene this excessive water usage by Punjab has put at stake credibility of its entity. Even the installation of Rs350 million telemetry system to determine the exact quantum of water supplied to each province has failed to point out this dereliction and allay the inter-provincial mistrust.
It is due to such reasons that the people of Sindh feel that Irsa, which was designed to assure the implementation of 1991 water accord has failed in its very purpose.
In such a scenario, the need of the hour is that the Irsa must be strengthened so that it could make decisions independently and as per agreement of all federating units. Irsa may be given administrative, financial, judicial powers to implement in letter and spirit 1991 water accord.
The 1991 water accord was signed by the four provinces on March 16,1991 and was approved by the Council of Common Interests(CCI) on March 21, 1991 according to which 117.35 maf of water was allocated among four provinces season-wise.
The flow of our three western rivers is highly erratic. The maximum flow of 186.79 MAF was recorded in the year 1959-60 in contrast a minimum flow of 97.74 MAF was recorded in the year 1974-75. Therefore it was apparent at the time of signing of the 1991 accord that there would be shortages and surpluses in the actual water availability from year to year.
Having recognized this, the accord provides a methodology for sharing the shortages and surpluses whenever they occur under para 14 (a) and (b) of the accord,
Para 14 (a) of the accord states: “The system-wise allocation will be worked out separately on 10 daily basis and will be attached with this agreement as part and parcel of the agreement.”
Whereas Para 14 (b) states, “The record of actual average system uses for the period 1977-82 would form the guideline for developing a future regulation pattern. These 10 daily uses would be adjusted pro-rata to correspond to the indicated seasonal allocations of the different canal systems and would form the basis for sharing shortages and surpluses on all Pakistan basis”.
Both these clauses of the accord are quite clear, specific and unambiguous. The record of actual average uses of the system during the period 1977-82 is only a guideline for developing the future regulation pattern. It does not in any why provide a key for water sharing and distribution. The only basis for sharing the shortages and surpluses are the “ten daily” statements.
These “10 daily” statements have already been prepared and approved by CCI in it’s meeting held on September 16, 1991. Therefore, there seems to be no ambiguity whatsoever in the “water accord 1991” about sharing the shortages and surpluses, whenever they occur.
Instead of locking horns at the onset of every Kharif and Rabi season, the water distribution dispute should be resolved permanently. The issue has acquired urgency in view of the much awaited national water policy which is expected to be launch in the near future.
Implementation of such a policy will not be effective unless water distribution conflicts are resolved and all adhoc arrangements like the 1994 ministerial accord are terminated.
