THIS is with reference to the article ‘Constitution and gas’ (May 2), which argued that the Constitution, in clear terms, accords ‘precedence’ to a province where the wellhead of natural gas is situated. It further pointed out that in reality nearly 50 per cent of the gas produced in the country has been supplied to Punjab instead of the province where the wellhead is located. Article 173 of the Constitution defines the ownership of these resources, which rests with both the province and the federal government. In my opinion, the wording of the Constitution is vague, and its interpretation by the courts in many cases needs to be applied more cogently.

First, natural resources beneath the earth should be utilised at the national level to maximise their utility. For example, industrial output should be given priority. At the same time, if gas is becoming scarce, an industrial policy document must clearly state that industries, wherever located, should plan for alternative energy sources in the future.

Next, it is important to determine the ratio of resource allocation between the industrial sector and domestic consumers. This ratio should be debated at legislative forums and made part of a long-term policy, possibly announced in budgetary measures.

This determination should give priority to domestic consumers in the province where the wellhead is situated. However, another factor to consider is that maximum household usage should be regulated, and elite consumers should not be allowed to use the resource excessively.

As such, due to the scarcity of natural resources, it is prudent that this vagueness in constitutional provisions regarding the usage and prioritisation of such resources be addressed by a specially constituted committee by the federal government, with clearer laws formulated in this regard.

Lt-Col (retd) Raza Kamal
Karachi

Published in Dawn, June 9th, 2026