Federalism in South Asia

Ethnic Diversity, Political Aspirations and State Response: A Case Study of Pakistan

“…In reality, the unitarian character of the state has prevailed. During the rule of both the democratic governments as well as the military regimes, the political climate of Pakistan remained authoritarian and centripetal despite the apparent federal features, which the successive constitutions entailed (Singh & Kukreja, 2014, pp. 10—12).…”

“…Baluchistan package and the Eighteenth Amendment make the beginning of a new process of renegotiating relations between the provinces and the federation. However, the success of these two initiatives would depend on how sincerely and effectively the federal government implements them respectively (Singh & Kukreja, 2014, pp. 102–103).…”

Annexation of Manipur as the 19<sup>th</sup> State of India: The Status of the Territory of Manipur in International Law since 1949

“…After 15 August, 1947 there were three types of States out of British Indian Provinces and native States as classified by the Constituent Assembly of India: Part I States -representing formerly British Indian provinces under Governor's rule; Part II States -formerly smaller native States that did not pose much problem in joining the Indian Union and Part III States formerly native States whose integration with India proved to be problematic either due to the desire of the rulers to exercise the option of independence or due to smaller size and numerically and geographically scattered and fragmented history (Singh, 2008). 75 Later in 1950, the States were organised under three different categories corresponding exactly to the above-mentioned characteristics under the names of Part A States, Part B States, Part C States (Singh & Kukreja, 2014). 76 Manipur was listed as a Part C State of the Union of India between 26 January 1950 and 1 November 1956.…”

Liberal peace and peacebuilding: global and local debates in the context of Sri Lanka

“…However, in the interweaving negotiations between the Sinhala polities, the draft constitution that emerged in August 1996, was unable to retain the spirit of the originally proposed devolution package, was faced with virulent opposition by the Sinhala polity and failed to meet the aspirations of the Tamil parties as well as reconcile the LTTE's demand for autonomy (see Bigdon, 2003;Singh & Kukreja, 2014;Sahadevan, 2013). The proposed constitution bill of August 2000 was not passed by Parliament.…”