essay on democracy in pakistan

Democracy in Pakistan Essay with Quotations

by Pakiology | Aug 22, 2024 | Essay | 1 comment

Explore the evolution, challenges, and progress of democracy in Pakistan in this in-depth essay . Gain insights into the nation’s rich history, the influence of the military, the pervasive issue of corruption, and the role of civil society in shaping Pakistan’s democratic landscape.

Title: The Evolution of Democracy in Pakistan: Challenges, Progress, and Prospects for the Future

Introduction.

Pakistan, a country characterized by its rich and diverse history, has embarked on a tumultuous journey in pursuit of democracy. Overcoming numerous obstacles, its citizens have tenaciously defended their democratic rights and worked diligently to forge a more equitable society. In this comprehensive essay, we delve into the current state of democracy in Pakistan, recognizing its historical context, addressing the persistent challenges it confronts, highlighting the progress made, and considering the prospects for the future.

The Historical Landscape

Democracy, at its core, is a system of government grounded in the principle of representation, allowing citizens to actively participate in decision-making processes that impact their lives. Regrettably, the implementation of democracy in Pakistan has been marred by a series of military coups and periods of martial law, intermittently disrupting its democratic trajectory. Despite these adversities, Pakistan now operates as a federal parliamentary republic with a president and prime minister at the helm.

The Military’s Influence: A Persistent Challenge

A major impediment to democracy in Pakistan has been the enduring influence of the military on the political landscape. Pakistan’s history is replete with instances of military interventions in civilian governance, including several coups and martial law declarations. This persistent interference not only undermines democratic principles but also erodes public trust in the democratic system. Additionally, intelligence agencies have faced accusations of wielding substantial influence in the political sphere, further eroding democratic institutions and processes.

Corruption as a Hindrance: A Deep-Seated Issue

Another significant challenge is the pervasiveness of corruption within Pakistan. Corruption has become deeply ingrained in the country, with numerous politicians and government officials implicated in embezzlement and bribery. This deeply rooted issue corrodes the legitimacy of the democratic process and erodes public trust in the government. The adverse effects of corruption are most acutely felt by marginalized communities, who suffer from a lack of essential public services and resources.

The Resilience of Democratic Aspirations: Signs of Progress

Despite these formidable challenges, the citizens of Pakistan persistently strive to defend their democratic rights and fortify democratic institutions. In recent years, the country has seen a notable rise in the number of civil society organizations dedicated to advocating for transparency, accountability, and the promotion of awareness regarding democratic rights and freedoms. Additionally, the media has played a pivotal role in promoting democratic values and holding the government accountable for its actions.

The Role of Civil Society

Civil society organizations have emerged as vital agents of change in Pakistan’s democratic landscape. They tirelessly work to bridge the gap between the government and the governed, acting as watchdogs for accountability and transparency. Through advocacy, awareness campaigns, and public mobilization, these organizations have managed to shine a spotlight on the pressing issues of democracy and governance in Pakistan. Their activities range from monitoring elections to exposing corruption and advocating for the rule of law.

Media as the Fourth Estate

The media in Pakistan has undergone a transformational journey, evolving into a vibrant fourth estate that plays a crucial role in promoting democratic values. While media outlets often grapple with challenges such as censorship and intimidation, they continue to serve as a check on government power and a forum for diverse voices. Investigative journalism has uncovered corruption scandals, challenged authoritarianism, and provided a platform for citizens to engage in political discourse.

In conclusion, democracy in Pakistan remains an imperfect yet indispensable system, despite the numerous setbacks and challenges it has encountered. The people of Pakistan ardently safeguard their democratic rights, and the fortification of democratic institutions and processes is pivotal for the nation’s future. The enduring challenges posed by military influence, corruption, and public mistrust can only be surmounted through persistent efforts and sustained citizen engagement in the democratic process. As Pakistan continues its journey towards a more robust democracy, the world watches with hope and anticipation, recognizing the nation’s potential to overcome its challenges and achieve democratic excellence. The path may be long and arduous, but the resilience and determination of Pakistan’s people offer a promising outlook for the future of democracy in the country.

Quotes Related to Democracy

Here are a few quotes related to democracy and its challenges in Pakistan:

“A society that puts equality before freedom will get neither. A society that puts freedom before equality will get a high degree of both.” – Milton Friedman, Economist

“The greatest threat to democracy is not the enemies from without, but the enemies from within.” – Thomas Jefferson, Third President of the United States

“I believe that the real solution to the problems facing Pakistan lies in true democracy and the rule of law.” – Imran Khan, Former Prime Minister of Pakistan

“The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.” – John Philpot Curran, Irish Orator and Statesman.

Ask Your Questions

You might like, islamophobia css essay – understanding, addressing, overcoming.

Islamophobia is a growing problem in many parts of the world. It refers to the fear, hatred, or discrimination against...

My Favourite Personality Essay | 400 & 600 Words

Essay 1 (400 Words) : My Favourite Personality Is My Mother My favourite personality is my mother. She is kind,...

Why I Love Pakistan Essay | 400, 500 & 700 Words

400 Words Essay on Why I Love Pakistan With Quotation Pakistan is a country full of diversity and richness in culture,...

Problems of Karachi Essay | 200 & 500 Words

Explore the multifaceted challenges faced by Karachi in this comprehensive essay. From overpopulation to traffic...

Sir you have used a lot of bitter words in this essay which are enough to awake a nation.😭😭😭😭 But It’s reality I think inshallah one day we will achieve that original democracy which will prevent our basic rights and our motherland…..

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Submit Comment

• class-9-notes
• Friendship quotes
• Scholarships
• Science News
• Study Abroad
• Study in Australia
• SZABMU MDCAT
• UHS Past MCQs
• Universities

Democracy in Pakistan: Of the elite, for the elite, by the elite

One of the most perplexing debates around is on the subject of democracy, where it is easy to confuse concept with practice, form with substance and illusion with reality.

There is another problem. Countries at varying stages of democratic evolution are all called a democracy, which adds to the confusion, as we, in our mind, expect all these models to be equally responsive in meeting the needs of society. That makes us tolerate and endure a system that is not quite democratic and may never become so.

In Pakistan, democracy remains both illusive and elusive. What we have is something that looks like democracy, but does not work like one. Democracy is a dynamic, not static, process but Pakistan’s “democracy” is stuck.

If any “good” has come out of the current crisis, it is hopefully the realisation that the conventional wisdom that Pakistan’s problems are due to a lack of civilian supremacy, or because the “democratic system” has faced repeated interruptions by the military rule, or that elected governments have not been allowed to complete their full term may not be quite true.

Has the current crisis — and the way politicians’ brazen preoccupation with the struggle for power is ripping the country apart while it burns — left any doubt that the “democracy” we have has been part of the problem, not the solution? In fact, it is this very “democracy” that has provided legitimacy to bad governance, produced weak governments opposed to reforms for fear of losing elections, and has kept recycling. Above all, it has lacked substance.

Form and substance

True democracy has both form and substance. The form manifests itself in electoral democracy, sustained by a process of free and fair elections, and peaceful and orderly change of governments. But the form must embody good governance to empower people, and it can do so only by resting on free and representative institutions, constitutional liberalism or any other value-based system, strong rule of law, and a just and equitable social order. That is the substance. Without substance, democracy remains hollow. It has no soul.

The intelligentsia in Pakistan, especially the liberal/secularist segment, is most passionate about the Western liberal model focusing on freedom of choice, free speech, civil liberties, independent judiciary, and of course elections.

Much of this class lives emotionally disconnected from the rest of the population and their harsh challenges of survival and means to cope with them. It feels that all you need is elections, free media, independent judiciary, and the Constitution.

Voila! You have democracy — and it will take care of the nation’s problems, including those of the poor.

Democracy and progress

The secular/liberal class as a whole, and Western-oriented sections of it in particular, are right in seeing a causal connection between democracy and progress in advanced industrialised countries. They are, therefore, justified in emulating a similar democratic political system and having high expectations from it.

Where they are at fault is that they do not grasp the full picture. Most of them forget that democracy, which ostensibly brought progress in the West, was more than a political system. It was also a society’s organising idea, whose substance was equality of opportunity, fairness, rule of law, accountability, safeguarding of basic human rights and freedoms, gender equality and protection of minorities.

In sum, democracy’s core idea was humanism. And the whole objective of giving people the right to choose who will govern them on their behalf was to ensure the implementation of this very ideal.

Otherwise, what is the purpose of self governance? Given the chance to self govern, would people like to bring themselves to grief with their own policies? Certainly this was not the intent.

Unless a nation shows this fundamental understanding of democracy and takes steps to put itself on the road to democracy, it will never get there. It will keep moving in circles or going backwards.

The poor cannot ‘feed’ on democracy

For much of the liberal class in Pakistan, especially its more affluent stratum, the form is the substance. It looks at democracy as simply black and white — there can be no gradation.

The fact is that Pakistan is, and is not, democratic.

Pakistan’s “democracy” is advanced enough to satisfy the liberals’ love of liberty and enjoyment of certain human freedoms, but regressed enough to be exploited by the elite for their purposes at the expense of the people.

In her book, ‘Thieves of State’ , Sarah Chayes focuses on corruption in Afghanistan. Sarah, who spent a decade in Kandahar, concludes that the concerns of most people did not have much to do with democracy. Pakistan is, of course, no Afghanistan but the book has a message that applies here as well.

Democracy is no doubt the best form of government but go and ask the masses in societies that are grappling with serious state and nation-building challenges what is most important in their lives. What is important for them, they will tell you, is social and economic justice, human security and dignity and the hope for a better future. And they will like any government that provides this kind of life.

A USAID official once asked me what the people of Pakistan want. Development or democracy? Prompt came my reply — if democracy brings development, they want democracy; if it does not, they want development.

Basically, you need a democracy that satisfies the human aspirations for freedom as well as improves the quality of life for citizens at large.

Freedoms are meaningless if they do not provide for the whole society’s welfare and progress.

Pakistan’s ‘democracy’ a political tool for power

In Pakistan’s case, “democracy” is just a political tool for the dominant social groups to maintain their wealth and status. The other instrument is military rule.

But the beneficiaries are roughly the same in both models — the whole panoply of power comprising the top tier of politicians, bureaucrats, the military and judiciary, “business folk and the landed”, who among them monopolise the country’s economic resources.

The civil and military leaderships may compete for power, but eventually cooperate to maintain the status quo. Both use each other — the military using the failure of the politicians as a pretext to come to power or to dominate it, and politicians using the alibi of military interruption or dominance for their own failure. They are allies as well as rivals.

In Why Nations Fail , Daron Acemoglu and James Robinson trace the evolution of political and economic institutions around the globe and argue that nations are not destined to succeed or fail due to geography or culture, but because of the emergence of extractive or inclusive institutions within them.

They write:

“Extractive political institutions concentrate power in the hands of a narrow elite and place few constraints on the exercise of this power. Economic institutions are then often structured by this elite to extract resources from the rest of the society. Extractive economic institutions thus naturally accompany extractive political institutions. In fact, they must inherently depend on extractive political institutions for their survival … political institutions enable elites controlling political power to choose economic institutions with few constraints of opposing forces. They also enable the elites to structure future political institutions and their evolution.”

In light of their thesis, we can see how powerful groups or institutions have long dominated Pakistan’s body politic by taking advantage of its security issues, place of religion in its national makeup and its feudal social structure. The political system that emerges from this body politic is designed to empower only the powerful and privileged and does little to foster the rule of law.

Musical chairs

Civilians and the military have taken turns to rule Pakistan, but the system, arguably, has remained the same, ‘unscathed’ by democracy. There was no fear of accountability, and no obstacle to electability. They did not need the people, so they did very little for them. And neither of them faced the full wrath of the public as each deflected the blame on to the other.

When the cost of maintaining a “democracy” led by civilians would become unbearable, we would tolerate the army’s intervention to help us get rid of them. But instead of returning to the barracks, the military would stay on. Then we’d long for democracy, which would let us down yet again. The fact is that no institution is solely responsible for democracy’s misfortunes in Pakistan. They all provided opportunity to each other to come to power and supported the system.

In the civilian edition that now comprises the ruling coalition, politicians may be divided into political parties but are united by the elites. Henceforth, whichever party comes to power when the ongoing bloody struggle for power is over, it will likely be no different from others in being invested in the system. It may disrupt the system, but will not threaten it.

Liberty and order

Even if Pakistan had a fully functional Western liberal democracy, it was not going to solve the country’s fundamental challenges. The fact is the Western liberal democratic model has become too competitive. In their book, ‘Intelligent Governance for the 21st Century’ , Nicolas Berggruen and Nathan Gardels challenge the view that the liberal democratic model is intrinsic to good governance. Examining this in relation to widely varying political and cultural contexts, especially the Chinese system, the authors advocate a mix of order and liberty.

When asked once on the Charlie Rose Show what he thought of Western democracy, Lee Kuan Yew — the inaugural prime minister of Singapore — replied that the system had become so competitive and combative that in order to come to power, the opposition spent all its time planning to undermine the incumbent government by misrepresenting or distorting issues and thus misleading the public. “It would be a sad day when this kind of democracy comes to Singapore,” he said.

In his classic, The Future of Freedom , Fareed Zakaria states that Singapore follows its own brand of liberal constitutionalism, where there are limits on political freedoms — and it happens to be one of the most self-content countries in the world.

It boggles one’s mind that we in Pakistan tolerate the civil-military led political and governance structure, which is rigged in favour of the elite, while using the full freedom of a democratic system to play the game of politics at people’s expense. We put up with it as if this behaviour is an acceptable price to be a “democracy”, which incidentally does not quite happen to be a democracy. Indeed, there are institutions that one finds in a democratic system, but they lack autonomy and integrity. They have failed in the moral strength to serve the people, but not in the capacity to sustain the system.

You can see how millions of good Pakistanis are glued to TV or their phones every day following the comings and goings of politicians as if they were going to solve the country’s problems. We forget that their fights are about themselves, among themselves.

Democratisation is a revolutionary struggle

You cannot change what you do not know. The creation of a true democracy is a revolutionary struggle. And it must begin with the realisation that the “democracy” we have will not solve our problems regardless of who is in power. We cannot also bank on this “democracy” to become democracy by itself.

Countries change not because they have become democratic. They become democratic because they have changed. In many ways, democratisation is a painstaking struggle, indistinguishable from state and nation-building. Progressive movements and the civil rights campaign in America, political and social movements in Europe and the Meiji Restoration in Japan are a few such instances.

How will this change occur in Pakistan?

That is the subject of a much wider and complex debate. Briefly, one can say the following: Pakistan has enormous strengths — remarkable resilience, faith-based optimism, a sense of exceptionalism, a vibrant media and a promising civil society.

There is enormous talent available within the country — academics, journalists, authors (many of them internationally acclaimed), political activists, retired public servants — both civil and military — who all have shown extraordinary knowledge and commitment to Pakistan. They can inspire and mobilise the young generation yearning for true change that could provide stimulus and critical mass for social movements.

I am not advocating for military rule or a technocratic government. Let the current political process for all its flaws continue. It cannot or should not be overthrown but can be undermined over time.

That will be the purpose of social movements — to remove the obstacles to a genuine democracy in Pakistan. These include a misplaced focus on faith that has fostered extremism and hindered openness and tolerance, and a feudal dominance that has inhibited education, gender equality, openness to modern ideas and a credible political process.

Not to mention the military’s pre-eminence that has led to the dominance of security over development. The latter has skewed national priorities and resource allocation. All this is hardly a life-supporting environment for democracy.

Can Pakistan truly become democratic? Yes, it can. Whether it will remains to be seen.

Header image: Shutterstock

The writer, a former Ambassador, is adjunct professor at Georgetown University and Visiting Senior Research Fellow at the Institute of South Asian Studies, National University of Singapore

Democracy and dystopia

Absent democracy

Don’t disrupt democracy

Dear visitor, the comments section is undergoing an overhaul and will return soon.

Essay on “Democracy in Pakistan” for CSS, and PMS

• January 24, 2022
• Essay for CSS PMS and Judiciary Exam

This is an Essay on “Democracy in Pakistan” for CSS, PMS, and Judiciary Examinations. Democracy is a form of government in which the people have the authority to deliberate and decide legislation, or to choose governing officials to do so.” Democracy is a system of government in which power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or through freely elected representatives. As Democracy is a very popular topic so, here is a complete Essay on “Democracy in Pakistan” for CSS, PMS, and judiciary examinations.

What is democracy? Essentials of democracy Democracy in Pakistan

A brief history

• The early period from 1947-58
• Period of General Ayub and General Zia
• Political turmoil and General Pervaiz Musharraf

Causes of failure of democracy in Pakistan

• Delayed Framing of the Constitution
• Leadership Crisis
• Lack of education
• No independence of the judiciary
• Weak political parties and their infighting
• Delayed elections and rigging
• Corruption and nepotism
• Quasi-Federalism and Conflict between Eastern and Western Wings
• Terrorism and extremism

Pakistani Democracy Vs. Western Democracy

Suggestions

• Effective accountability of the politicians
•  Reforming judiciary
• Abolish feudalism
• Eliminate corruption
• Two parties system on the pattern of the USA, UK
• Amendment in the constitution
• Fair and free election
• Increase the education budget to educate people
• Uninterrupted democratic process
• Strengthening the institutions

Essay on “Democracy in Pakistan” for CSS, PMS, and Judiciary Examinations

“You have to stand guard over the development and maintenance of Islamic democracy, Islamic social justice, and the equality of manhood in your own native soil.” -Muhammad Ali Jinnah,

To acquire immunity to eloquence is of the utmost importance to the citizens of a democracy. – Bertrand Russell

Democracy is a form of government in which all citizens have an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives. Ideally, this includes equal (and more or less direct) participation in the proposal, development, and passage of legislation into law. It can also encompass social, economic, and cultural conditions that enable the free and equal practice of political self-determination. While there is no specific, universally accepted definition of ‘democracy’, equality and freedom have both been identified as important characteristics of democracy since ancient times. These principles are reflected in all citizens being equal before the law and having equal access to legislative processes.

For example, in a representative democracy, every vote has equal weight, no unreasonable restrictions can apply to anyone seeking to become a representative, and the freedom of its citizens is secured by legitimized rights and liberties which are generally protected by a constitution.

Many people use the term “democracy” as shorthand for liberal democracy, which may include elements such as political pluralism; equality before the Jaw; the right to petition elected officials for redress of grievances; due process; civil liberties; human rights ; and elements of civil society outside the government. In the United States, separation of powers is often cited as a central attribute, but in other countries, such as the United Kingdom, the dominant principle is that of parliamentary sovereignty (though in practice judicial independence is generally maintained).

In other cases, “democracy” is used to mean direct democracy. Though the term “democracy” is typically used in the context of a political state, the principles are applicable to private organizations and other groups as well.

Democracy in Pakistan

Democracy in its true spirit has never been allowed to take root in Pakistan. Since its independence in 1947, a military-bureaucratic establishment has always governed the country. Army generals usurp power at their own convenience and quit only when they are forced to quit by mass political movements or by sudden unexpected death. When forced by external or internal pressures, democracy is given a chance but in reality, a group of army generals keeps controlling the decision-making.

This direct or indirect military influence is the greatest impediment to the evolution of a stable governing system in Pakistan. Besides, the army is not solely responsible for this mass but it is our inefficient politicians who provide an opportunity for to army to take over.

A brief history of Democracy in Pakistan

Recalling the last 62 years of Pakistan, democracy is found only as an interval before the next military general comes to the scene. The future of democracy was doomed from the start when Liaquat Ali Khan, the first elected Prime Minister, was shot at a public gathering. Nobody knows to this day who did it and why. From now on, the balance of power was to shift in the favor of the military. A comparison tells us how this shift came up. From 1951-57 India had one Prime Minister and several army chiefs while during the same period Pakistan had one army chief and several Prime ministers.

The same army chief, the Sandhurst-trained general, Ayub Khan was to announce the first martial law in the country in 1958 and then a series of military rules were to follow.

General Ayub Khan could not withstand a popular national movement against him and transferred power to General Yahya Khan in March 1969. Under him, Pakistan lost its half which is now Bangladesh. Power was then transferred to Zulfikar Ali Bhutto as the first civilian martial law administrator. Bhutto pursued an independent policy, which was against what generals and the US wanted, and he had to pay with his life.

Charged for compliance in murder, Bhutto was hanged by the next martial law administrator, General Zia ul Haq. The hanging of an elected Prime Minister was shocking news to the world and Pakistan was to have the effects years later. The general died in a mysterious plane crash.

Then came a ten years gap of experimentation with democracy and every two years each elected government was ousted by the special discretionary powers of the president . An end to this ten-year spell came with a new general coming to power ousting the incumbent elected government of Mian Nawaz Sharif. This time the Prime Minister was charged with conspiring against the state and was ousted from the country.

The immediate and foremost requirement of the Constituent Assembly was to frame a democratic constitution for the country. The constitution had to lay down the form of government, and the role of the judiciary, military, and bureaucracy. It had to decide the basic issues about provincial autonomy, religion and the state, the joint or separate electorate, representation of minorities and women in assemblies, fundamental rights, and civil liberties.

The debate over the representation of eastern and western wings of the country and religion versus secularism were the two main hindrances in the way of framing the constitution. As against India, which was able to frame the constitution of the country within two years of independence in 1949, Pakistan took nine years to finalize the constitution in 1956, which did not work for more than two years and was abrogated.

The second constitution was framed by a military ruler General Ayub in 1962 which could last as long as he was in power. Finally, it was after the separation of East Pakistan and a lapse of more than a quarter of a century (1947-1973) that the elected representatives of the people under the leadership of Prime Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto framed a consensus constitution envisaging a  federal, democratic structure for the country and a parliamentary form of government.

This constitution has survived in spite of the breakdown of democracy twice in 1978 and 1999 and hopefully has come to stay. But the delay in framing the constitution harmed the growth of political democracy, as it allowed the authoritarian rule of the Governor-General to continue for seven long years (1947-56), which set this inglorious tradition in the country.

The second obstacle in the way of democracy is the culture of feudalism. Democracy cannot develop in the suffocating atmosphere of feudalism. The history of feudalism in the subcontinent is not very old. It owes its origin to the war of independence in 1857 when different people were awarded large swathes of land by the British government because of their treacherous cooperation with the latter. Those feudal families joined Muslim League when they saw that Pakistan was going to be a reality and inherited power after the death of the founding father. Feudalism has now become a severe migraine for the nation. Democracy and feudalism are incompatible.

Change of faces at the wheel has not served any purpose. Even these feudal lords occupy more than 70 % of our land leaving the people to lead a miserable life. They are senators, ministers, MPAs, MNAs, and also the owners of major industries in Pakistan. There is a crying need to bring some structural changes in order to strengthen the political system. Industrialization has also played a significant role in the strengthening of democracy across the world. Great Britain is considered the mother of democracies on this planet.

Some analysts are of the view that democracy has its origin in the Magna Carta, Bill of Rights and Habeas Corpus, etc. But even after these developments very mighty rulers have ruled Great Britain. In fact, the invention of the steam engine led to the industrial revolution which eradicated the roots of feudalism and the evil of absolute monarchy. All this resulted in the development of democracy. In Pakistan, there is everything from adult franchises to the separation of powers between the three organs of government but no plan for that kind of industrial revolution.

Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah, the father of the nation and the first Governor-General, died just one year after the establishment of Pakistan on September 11, 1948, and his right-hand lieutenant Liaquat Ali Khan, who was the first Prime Minister, was assassinated on October 16, 1951. About the capability of other leaders of the Pakistan Muslim League (PML), the party which had successfully piloted the movement for Pakistan, Jinnah had ruefully remarked that “he had false coins in his pocket”.

Consequently, several ministers appointed initially were not politicians and did not have a seat in the Assembly. Similarly, in 1954, there were several members of the Prime Minister’s cabinet without a seat in Parliament. “The cabinet and other high political appointments reflected a paucity of talent among the politicians.”

It is indeed a sad commentary on the elected members of the first Legislature and Constituent Assembly of Pakistan that they could not find a suitable head of state from among their own ranks. Most of them came from the civil bureaucracy or the military. The civil-military bureaucracy did not have a favorable opinion about the competence of political leaders and often took decisions without consulting them. This adversely affected their political training, development, and growth.

The inability to control the Anti-Ahmadiya Movement in Punjab in 1953 was blamed on inept political leadership. This religious movement was spearheaded by the religious Ahrar Party which had opposed the establishment of Pakistan and now wanted again to come into the limelight. They were supported by other religious parties, i.e., Jamaat-i-Islami, JamiatuiUlema-i-Pakistan, and JamiatulUlerna-i-Islam. The movement was exploited by politicians in their own political interests.

But the civil-military bureaucracy was against the religious parties dominating the power structure either in the provinces or the center. To rescue the city of Lahore where Ahmadis were in a “virtual state of siege” and their properties were being “burned or looted”, General Azam Khan, the Area Commander, was ordered by the Defense Secretary, to impose martial law in Lahore. It was met with the general approval of the people.

It was demonstrated that the civil-military bureaucracy “would not let politicians or religious ideologues lead the country to anarchy”. This also laid down the foundations of the supremacy of the military and orchestrated the initial rehearsal for the recurring imposition of Martial Law in the country and its acceptance by the people.

Lack of education has remained an important impediment to the democratization of countries. This is not just a problem for Pakistan but of the whole Third world. Laski, a famous political thinker said that education is the backbone of democracy. Democracy is a system of governance in which the people choose their representatives through elections. Their strength lies in the ballot box. If people are not vigilant and educated enough to make a better choice, democracy will not flourish in that country.

This is the main reason that even in the countries apparently practicing democracy but the majority of uneducated people are among the under-developed nations. Masses in Pakistan have not found ways of compelling their rulers to be mindful of their duty. Their failures in this regard result from insufficiency of experience and training in operating modem democratic politics. Democracy puts the highest premium on constitutionalism, which is possible only with the predominant majority of people. Pakistan’s democracy can neither improve nor become viable as long as the majority of the population remains uneducated.

Judiciary is one of the most important pillars of a state and in a country where the judiciary is not imparting justice , democracy cannot develop. During the Second World War, someone asked British Prime Minister Winston Churchill whether the British would win the war. The Prime Minister laughed and replied that if the British courts were dispensing justice, no one would trounce the United Kingdom. In Pakistan since 1954 judiciary has remained docile to the wishes of the executive. As Shelley says, “If the winter comes; can spring be far behind”.

In fact, since its birth, Pakistan has been governed by bureaucratic, military, and political elites. The bureaucratic elite generally became more assertive, steadily increasing their power at the expense of the political elite. Ayub’s term of office (1958-69) was the golden era for the bureaucracy, which exercised its powers, unbridled by any political interference. The weakness of political elites can be demonstrated by the fact that during seven years from 1951 to 1958, as many as seven Prime Ministers had been changed.

From 1988 to 1999, four democratically elected governments were replaced on charges of corruption, inefficiency, security risk, etc. The civil-military bureaucracy has dominated governance owing to the inherent weakness of the political parties and their incompetent leadership, resulting in the derailment of democracy thrice in the history of Pakistan, i.e., in 1958, 1977, and 1999.

Pakistan was not created as a theocracy but as a place where an economically marginalized minority could operate a democracy independently. It was to save the people from religious discrimination and domination by an overwhelming religious majority. Moreover, it emerged as a territorial state in the Muslim majority areas of the subcontinent. But the religious and secular groups soon started making conflicting demands while formulating the constitution of Pakistan.

The speech of Mr. Jinnah on August 11, 1947, addressed to the first legislative and constituent assembly of Pakistan, advocated political pluralism and declared that the “religion or caste or creed has nothing to do with the business of the State”. This has not adhered to the Objectives Resolution passed by the Constituent Assembly in 1949, which pacified the demands of Muslim religious parties and elements but was not supported by religious minorities.

The compromise solution attempted to balance the values and the spirit of Islam with the requirements of secularism. Due to a lack of competent and visionary political leadership , and the fact that Muslims constituted 98 percent of the population, the conservative religious leaders, partly due to their conviction and partly owing to their parochial interests, advocated and preached the establishment of a religiopolitical system based on Al-Quran and Sunnah.

They were skeptical of the politico-social development of modem times and western political institutions and forms of government. Their dogmatic theology clashed with the democratic culture envisioned by the founding fathers. Another adverse impact of the adoption of religion as a guiding principle in the constitution, was the promotion of religious sectarianism, especially between the two major sects inhabiting Pakistan, i.e., Sunnis and Shi’as. Some sections of these sects, instead of peaceful negotiations to overcome their differences, often resort to violence, which is against the spirit of both Islam and democracy. These rivalries fostered reliance on the security forces for the maintenance of law and order, which eroded the hold of democratic institutions in governance.

For any healthy constitutional and political system to function smoothly, strong and well-entrenched political parties are essential. Unfortunately, political parties in Pakistan have failed to develop into strong vehicles of national political will. The main responsibility for safeguarding democracy in a country falls on political parties. Pakistan, since its inception, was lacking well-organized and well-established political parties that could carry the representative system of governance forward.

The All-India Muslim League, which had piloted the movement of Pakistan from 1940 to 47, was not a well-organized political party, but it was primarily a movement. Leading a movement and organizing a political party are two different things. Most of its leaders belonged to areas that became part of the Indian Union and their majority did not come to Pakistan. Those who were in Pakistan, barring a few exceptions, belonged to feudal and landowning classes that in their nature were in conflict with the democratic dispensation. In fact “the leadership of the Pakistan movement had few roots in the land that became Pakistan.”

Their incompetence and constant wrangling for power in the initial nine years (1947-1956) were also responsible for the delay in constitution-making. Instead of cooperation and mutual accommodation, there was ceaseless infighting. For instance, as early as 1953, a clash between the leadership of Punjab and the central government led to intense communal riots and the imposition of Martial Law in Lahore, the provincial capital. Even as late as the decade 1988-99 of civil supremacy, the fight between the PML and the PPP led to the repeated dissolution of national and provincial assemblies and the dismissal of prime ministers and their cabinets. Finally, it ended with the military takeover in 1999.

The representative character of the civilian parliamentary government during the first decade of Pakistan’s existence was eroded because the country was governed under the Government of India Act of 1935. The purpose of the Act was “to make the appointed governor-general exert dominance over the elected prime minister.” The Act introduced a representative and centralized system of bureaucratic governance, which was an imperative requirement of the colonial government but not of democratic governance. The first general elections in the country should have been held in 1951, i.e., five years after the previous elections in 1946, but this could not happen till 1970.

The reasons for the delay were that the ruling elite, i.e., civil bureaucrats, migrant political leadership, and weak political parties, had few roots in the masses. As a consequence, general elections could not be held for 23 years (1947-1970) of the country’s initial history. On the expiry of the five years term of Prime Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto (1972-1977), the second general elections on the basis of the adult franchise were held on March 7, 1977, which the PPP won with a vast majority.

The opposition parties alleged that the elections had been “rigged on a massive scale”. It has been commented: Elections in Pakistan had been rigged before, notably the presidential election in 1965 and the Provincial Assembly,y elections in the early 1950s, but rigging in these instances did not arouse the mass uprising as it did in 1977. The people of Pakistan were evidently not of the same mind now as they were in those earlier periods.

Corruption in bureaucracy and among political leaders poses a grave threat to good democratic governance. Quaid-i-Azam had termed corruption as “poison” and asked to put that down with an “iron hand”. Now that the international Reconciliation Ordinance, .vnich had withdrawn from prosecution any person “falsely involved for political reasons or through political victimization” between 1986 and 1999, has lapsed on November 28, 2009, the concerned individuals should get themselves cleared in a court of law in a transparent manner. The tribal nature of society in Pakistan is susceptible to nepotism. As an antidote, accountability and transparency are necessary. It is a challenge to the people to reject those leaders and political parties which indulge in corruption and nepotism.

One of the main bottlenecks in constitutional development in Pakistan was that its two wings were separated by about 1000 miles of hostile territory. The eastern wing consisted of one province but was more populous’ than the western wing which was much larger in the area and had as many as four provinces.

The western wing was not prepared to concede majority representation to the eastern wing in the parliament. After a confrontation of nine years between the two wings, the solution was evolved in the l956 constitution in the shape of parity of representation in a quasi-federal structure, neutralizing the majority of the eastern wing and paving the way for the manipulated domination of the western wing.

The domination of the western wing in governance led to an insurgency in the eastern wing which culminated in the separation and independence of Bangladesh in 1971. In post-1971 Pakistan, it came to be realized that ideological moorings alone could not easily overcome ethnic and economic differences. Yet the anti-ethnic attitude and anti-modem thinking prevalent in certain segments of society lean toward a unitary or quasi-federal state as against a true federation.

The latest threat is emanating from extremism and terrorism, especially in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KPK) and the Federally Administered Tribal Area (FATA). This is the spillover effect of the conflict in Afghanistan and is spreading to Pakistan. It is likely to continue as long as there is no peace and stability in that country. However, the military enjoying the support of the nation is successfully combating the extremists and terrorists under the supremacy of the civilian democratic government. It is hoped that the process would continue to its logical conclusion.

Due to the migration of literate Hindus and Sikhs to India, the literacy rate in Pakistan sharply declined. There was about 95 percent illiteracy in Pakistan in 1947, which acted as a hindrance to the growth of civil and democratic society. Feudalism and economic constraint did not permit any Pakistani government to launch a “crash course to expand literacy and grow higher standards.

The national economy has gone bankrupt and the national budget has become all foreign aid-dependent. Islam was the ideology that gave life to the Pakistan movement and later Pakistan itself but is now infested with sectarianism. Military policies gifted the country with cross-border terrorism and three million internally displaced people. Despite having the largest chunk of the national budget and being the seventh-largest army in the world, the Pakistan army is now in a mess of its own creation with little of its hard-earned prestige left to its credit.

The distorted face of the national system as a whole and the failure of the judiciary to guard the constitution of Pakistan are the major factors contributing to the change in the national mindset. The events of the last two years have clearly shown the preference of the people of Pakistan. The masses want democracy as a political and governing system for the country and a judiciary that guard the rights of the people. The military would be respected more if it stays in the barracks or guarded the national borders. The murder of Benazir Bhutto has taught new lessons.

If one compares Pakistani democracy with Western democracy it is said that for over 50 years, Pakistan remains occupied by three major interest groups in the time, opportunities, and resources of the besieged nation. The army, civil service, and the neo-colonial appointed landlords. If there was any rational tolerance scale, the Pakistani nation would certainly secure high marks on its standard of tolerance and survival under most unfavorable circumstances.

One of the pivotal factors supporting the notion of Western liberal democracies is that it provides opportunities for participation to ordinary citizens, right or wrong to culminate a sense of legitimacy for the election exercise and chose people of their interest to manage public affairs for a specified term. But the principles and standards for evil and good vary between the West and the Islamic world . Strange as is, in Pakistan, those who come to occupy the political offices never intend to quit the political power on their own except implication of military force through a coup.

Comparatively, on occasions, western democracies do” encourage educated and competent citizens to strive for their high ideas and ideals and come to the front stage and demonstrate their intentions and will power to seek the goal of ideal public service agendas. E.H. Carr defines the teaching-learning role of history and its value must not be ignored but preserved. Recall the Pakistani military dictators for the last forty-plus years, they each consumed a decade or more to relinquish power, that was not theirs in any systematic and logical context. Ayub Khan was ousted by Yahya Khan.

General Yahya with the complacency of Z.A. Bhutto surrendered East Pakistan to India (now Bangladesh) to share power with Bhutto but was put under house arrest as Bhutto assumed the power that did not belong to him based on the verdict of the people. Rightfully, it was Sheikh MujiburRehman, leader of the East Pakistan Awami League who should have been sworn in as the new leader of united Pakistan but it was treacherously undone by Yahya and Bhutto.

Both should have been tried as traitors in a court of law and punished. Not so, they were rewarded and Bhutto became the first civilian martial law administrator and self-made president of defeated Pakistan in December 1971. Dr.Ishtiaq Qureshi, editor of the Urdu Digest recorded for the history (“Sukoot-e-Dacca seyPurdhautha Hay”- Facts are revealed after the Dacca Surrender) that “in the quest for its survival Pakistan lost its destiny. Yahya and Mujib stabbed the body of Pakistan with one dagger and Bhutto will stab Pakistan with another dagger.”

Suggestions for Democracy in Pakistan

Fo1lowing are the suggestions for improving democracy in Pakistan:

An impartial system of accountability enhances public trust in the political system. It provides enormous strength to the democratic process. Moreover, it compels thousand who are charged with governance, to transparently discharge their official responsibilities. It ensures good governance and strengthens the political setup. In spite of facing innumerable challenges and showing unsatisfactory performance, Pakistanis have the capability to emerge as a democratic and progressive nation. Pakistan can road to democracy with the dedication, determination, commitment, courage, and patriotism of its political leaders.

Reforming the judiciary and incorporating Islamic laws can also soothe the deprived and poor masses who have been manipulated by the extremists due to the sheer negligence of the elected governments and ruling elite. This natura11y causes bitterness toward the present form of political setup.

Moving on, corruption and selfish attitudes are eating away at the institutional structure of our country and such practices never allow democracy to flourish. There is also a need for mature political leadership, which can think above its own gains. All this can only emerge after the formulation and implementation of strict accountability.

On the contrary, weak public institutions can be made strong and productive if the power and authority seep down. The example of many European countries is in front of us, where institutions are powerful and not politicians. Democracy in actuality can only be achieved through such measures.

Our constitution has been a source of constant controversy. Be it the realization of Islamic laws or the concentration of power in the head of the state, the constitution has served as a tool for the legitimization of alien changes and policies. Keeping the constitution intact has been long overdue. No one in power should be allowed to change it for prolongation of rule or appeasing any particular section. The Pakistani movement envisaged a democratic country with a federal structure.

In all Constitutions of Pakistan (1956, 1962, and 1973) the objectives of governance, in the words of Dr. Ainslie T. Embree, Professor Emeritus of Columbia University, are democracy, freedom, equality, tolerance, and social justice as enunciated by Islam, giving Muslims freedom to live their lives in accordance with the teachings of Islam, but with minorities having full freedom to profess their own religions.

Islam lays emphasis on the concept of Shura, i.e., consultation among people, which is the essence of democratic culture. Quaid-i-Azam, the founder of Pakistan had stated:

“We leamed democracy 1300 years ago. Democracy is i11 our blood. It is ill our marrows. Dilly centuries of adverse circumstances have made the circulation of that blood cold. It has got frozen, and our arteries are not functioning. But thank God, the blood is circulating again, thanks to the Muslim League’s efforts. It will be a People’s government. Culturally, ill the region of Pakistan, there is a concept of Jirga or Panchayat, i.e., an assembly of elders, to settle issues and disputes involving two or more two persons. This system has, been prevalent for ages, much before the advent of Islam. Thus, both religion and age-old tradition advocate the concept of consultation in decision-making through all assembly of people, which is the essence of democracy.”

During the period of British supremacy in the subcontinent, the practice of elections to assemblies (local, provincial and central) was introduced through various enactments. Finally, it was the Government of India Act 1935 under which the dominions of India and Pakistan functioned after independence till they framed their own constitutions. These enactments provided the groundwork for democratic governance. It may be of interest to note that even when the democratic rule was suspended by the armed forces, the military rulers always came with the promise to restore democratic governance .

For instance, in 1970, General Yahya Khan is credited with organizing the first-ever general elections in the country, which led to the establishment of democratic governments both in Bangladesh and Pakistan. Besides holding general elections in 2002 and 2007, General Musharraf’s introduction of a local government system introduced in 2001 is considered a “laudable model of governance” because of its principle that whatever can be done at the local level should not be done at a higher tier of governance.

The country is on the path to achieving full literacy and progress towards a higher standard of education in important disciplines. This is strengthening the civil society in ensuring the prevalence of democratic culture at the lower and higher level of governance. Secondly, the print and electronic media in Pakistan are vibrant and independent. A responsible media educates the masses, raises political consciousness, and thus promotes democratic values, norms, and culture. In addition, a number of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are playing an active role in the field of education and contributing to the growth of a vibrant civil society and good governance.

The essential step seems to stop interruption in the democratic process so that we may see more than promos. To judge something, it has to be allowed a chance to survive and act. The elected government must be allowed to complete its tenure in any case. The military has to play a positive role here and not interfere in the smooth democratic process.

As mentioned before, a part of the population wants greater Islamic character in the Govt. and laws. If we analyze this demand, it will be apparent that the enforcement of Sharia is more related to lawmaking. Therefore, what is immediately required is a change in the judicial setup, which has been unable to gain the trust of people until recently. Encouraging steps have already started in this case, but much more needs to be done.

Sadly, the same corrupted pool of thought keeps appearing with new faces and the deceived masses blindly follow them. This is due to the absence of any kind of accountability. Political compromises enhance this trend. Such practices are against moral, democratic as well as Islamic principles and should end immediately.

Next, the all-powerful bureaucracy and feudal politicians should be stripped of their unwarranted authority. It has been a slow evil that has weakened the country like nothing else. They are elected for serving people not to control them. The criteria of merit; the right to freedom and equal progress for common people have become a joke due to such an autocratic setup.

The people of Pakistan in general lack political psyche and consciousness. This is largely due to poor literacy and a never-ending feudalistic rule over 60% of the country. Therefore, it is necessary to educate the masses and make them aware of their political rights. This can begin with greater political socialization by political parties and media.

In a democratic state, media has rightly been called the fourth pillar of the state. It can play a most important role in the present age for creating awareness. Our media has risen from the ashes like a phoenix. It, however, needs to play a positive constructive role and not become another compromised institution as well.

Finally, the strategic position and now the war against terror call forth unwanted attention from the international community sometimes. In the past, military rule has been covertly or openly supported by many countries to gain their own benefits in this region. The international powers must stop interfering in the democratic process and for that to happen, our own government, people and media need to be equally strong.

Politicians may have learned lessons from their past mistakes and are more mature politically. Consensus politics seem to be emerging in the country. In the past, the constant infighting amongst political parties had often led to interference and take-over by the armed forces.

Now a culture of reconciliation, accommodation, and dialogue is emerging. The ideological polarization is diminishing. After the general elections of February 2008, four major political parties, i.e., Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP), PML – Nawaz (PML-N), Awami National Party (ANP), Jamiat-ulUlema-i-Islam – Fazalur Rahman (JUI-Fl and MuttahidaQaumi Movement (MQM) have joined hands to govern the country and re-establish the supremacy of the Parliament in accordance with the Constitution of 1973.

Our youth constitute 30% of the society they are representative of a new generation. Their participation may ensure structural improvements in the national paradigm. It has been witnessed that during the Pakistan movement youth played a vital role in opinion formation and mass awareness and so is the time now. There is a need to guide our youth to take responsibility for our tomorrow.

To sum up, it is the political leadership that can ensure the permanence of democratic governance. The prospects are, however, not as dismal as sometimes portrayed. Already, the literacy rate in Pakistan has increased to more than fifty-five percent. Efforts are afoot to improve the standard of higher education. Economic growth and industrialization have given birth to a vocal urban society and middle class, which is growing. and gradually lessening the influence of the feudal class.

The vibrant electronic and print media is playing an effective role in constructive criticism of the government and in educating the masses. Elections are being held regularly, representative political leadership and political parties are getting stronger and a peaceful mode of transfer of power is becoming the norm. The bureaucracy (both civil and military), though still powerful, may retreat gradually and submit to the people’s power and will and concede to democratic governance. The democratic process is progressing and, hopefully, will be obstructed and derailed, as in the past.

Expected question about this Essay:

• Why has democracy failed in Pakistan?
• What practical measures do you suggest for strengthening democracy in Pakistan?

You may also like these:

• View other Relevant Essay Topics
• CSS Guide for Beginners for 2022
• PMS Guide: Syllabus, Paper Pattern Compulsory & Optional Subjects
• CSS Past Paper Subject Wise 
• LLB Past Papers

I am interested in writing content for educational purpose.

Most relevant ▼

• Essay on “Innovations are Never-ending Headways” for CSS, PMS
• Essay on “Single National Curriculum Pave the Way for the Desired Ideological Integration in Pakistan Society” for CSS, PMS
• Essay on “Single National Curriculum Paving the Way for the desired ideological integration in Pakistan Society” for CSS, PMS
• Essay on “The cost of inaction is greater than the cost of action” for CSS, PMS
• Essay on “Inflation – A Result of Poor Economic Policies or a Part of Global Economic Woes” for CSS, PMS
• Essay on “Democracy without Justice is Tyranny” for CSS, PMS
• Essay on “Man is Born Free but Everywhere he is in Chains” for CSS, PMS
• Essay on “Power Corrupts: Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely” for CSS and PMS
• Essay on the “Role of Social Media in the Modern World” for CSS and PMS
• Essay on “Terrorism and its Socioeconomic Implications” for CSS, and PMS

Democracy in Pakistan: Challenges, Progress, and Prospects

Democracy in Pakistan stands at a crossroads, shaped by a tumultuous history marked by periods of military rule, political instability, and socio-economic challenges. Since gaining independence in 1947, Pakistan’s democratic journey has been fraught with obstacles, yet it has also seen moments of progress and resilience. This essay seeks to delve deeper into the complexities surrounding democracy in Pakistan, examining its historical evolution, persistent challenges, recent progress, and the potential paths forward.

Democracy in Pakistan: Video Lecture

Historical Evolution: The Democracy in Pakistan

Pakistan’s democratic experiment began with the adoption of a parliamentary system following independence. However, this initial phase of democratic governance was short-lived, as the country soon experienced its first military coup in 1958. Subsequent decades witnessed a recurring cycle of military interventions, with generals assuming power and suspending civilian rule in the name of restoring stability and order. These periods of authoritarian rule stifled democratic institutions, suppressed political dissent, and entrenched a culture of political patronage and corruption.

Also Read: Imran Khan and Bushra Bibi Sentenced to 14 Years in Jail for Corruption

Challenges to Democracy:

Progress in democratic governance:, prospects for democratic consolidation:.

Several interconnected challenges have hindered the consolidation of democracy in Pakistan. Foremost among these is the pervasive influence of the military in politics. The armed forces, often viewing themselves as guardians of the state’s integrity, have repeatedly intervened in civilian affairs, undermining the primacy of democratic institutions and impeding the country’s transition to civilian rule.

Moreover, Pakistan’s political landscape is characterized by fragmentation, polarization, and a lack of consensus among political parties. Ethnic, linguistic, and regional identities often overshadow national unity, leading to political deadlock and governance gridlock. The rise of religious extremism and militancy further complicates the democratic process, threatening the rule of law and civic liberties.

Despite these challenges, Pakistan has made notable strides towards democratic governance in recent years. The restoration of civilian rule in 2008 following years of military dictatorship signaled a renewed commitment to democratic principles. Subsequent general elections, though marred by allegations of irregularities, witnessed a peaceful transfer of power, underscoring the resilience of democratic institutions and the electorate’s determination to uphold democratic norms.

Furthermore, Pakistan has seen the emergence of a vibrant civil society, independent media, and an increasingly assertive judiciary. Civil society organizations, human rights activists, and advocacy groups have played a pivotal role in holding elected representatives and state institutions accountable. The judiciary, particularly the Supreme Court, has demonstrated a willingness to challenge executive overreach and uphold the rule of law, contributing to greater judicial independence and constitutional supremacy.

Looking ahead, Pakistan faces both opportunities and challenges in its quest for democratic consolidation. Strengthening democratic institutions is paramount to ensuring their resilience in the face of internal and external pressures. The parliament, as the representative body of the people, must be empowered to legislate effectively and provide oversight over the executive branch.

Electoral reforms aimed at enhancing transparency, inclusivity, and fairness are essential to bolstering the credibility of the electoral process and restoring public trust in democratic institutions. Measures to combat corruption, improve governance, and promote accountability are critical for building public confidence in the democratic system and fostering a culture of transparency and integrity

Written by Ghaaxe

Text to speech

Does Democracy Have a Future in Pakistan?

• Ayesha Jalal

Select your citation format:

Read the full essay here .

Pakistan marked a watershed in its history on 9 May 2023 with the arrest of former prime minister Imran Khan, sparking nationwide protests and attacks on state institutions. These events, culminating in Khan’s incarceration and a ban from public office, have intensified questions about the future of democracy in Pakistan. Political uncertainties are hardly new in in the country, but the coming together of economic crisis, political strife, and climatic disas­ters such as drought have sharpened age-old concerns about the coun­try’s stability. The chances of a genuine democratic dispensation emerging anytime soon can be ruled out, but if the key institutional stakeholders undertake to work with politi­cians instead of using, exploiting, and defaming them, Pakistan may well succeed in regaining lost ground and return to at least a semblance of normalcy.

About the Author

Ayesha Jalal is Mary Richardson Professor of History at Tufts University and author of The Struggle for Pakistan: A Muslim Homeland and Global Politics (2017).

View all work by Ayesha Jalal

Image Credit: Sabir Mazhar/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images

Further Reading

Volume 19, Issue 4

Pakistan After Musharraf: An Emerging Civil Society?

• S. Akbar Zaidi

The military regime opened up the media sector to more competition and private broadcasters in 2002, and the ramifications turned out to be vast.

Volume 17, Issue 1

Soldiers and Islamists in Pakistan

Read the full essay here . A review of Pakistan: Between Mosque and Military , by Hussain Haqqani.

Volume 12, Issue 1

Pakistan’s Predicament

• Pamela Constable

The military regime of General Musharraf has been less repressive than many had feared, but there is little sign that it is overcoming the deep-seated problems that led to the…

Law, Order, and the Future of Democracy in Pakistan

Subscribe to this week in foreign policy, stephen p. cohen stephen p. cohen former brookings expert.

May 21, 2012

Editor’s Note: Paper presented to the NIC-EUISS Conference on Pakistan “Looking towards 2025: drivers of democratic consolidation and stability,” Paris, France, 20-21 May 2012

The optimistic title of this conference attempts an even more optimistic objective: that we understand the factors that will shape Pakistan by the year 2025, and predict how these factors will influence Pakistan’s slow crawl towards democratic consolidation.

There is also a contradiction: democratic consolidation may be inversely related to “stability” if by that we mean the continuation of an oligarchic political order, usually termed “the establishment”. Over sixty years of an establishment-dominated political order—whether by the army or by the army in cooperation with civilians—has not made Pakistan a democratic country in most senses of the word, except that the aspirations of many Pakistanis are to have democracy Pakistan-style. This aspiration is held by many in the army, which would like to have political leaders that can govern Pakistan up to its own high standards.

The law and order problem is correctly defined in the call for papers as the persistence of ungoverned areas, the continuation of militant and criminal violence throughout the country, and low levels of government accountability. The historically expanded role of the military and the groping of the judiciary for a role somewhere between acquiescence and excessive activism are both symptoms and causes. Indeed, this is the core of Pakistan’s problems: there are many, many problems, they are both causes and consequences, they are interrelated, and there are obvious solutions to each, but Pakistan lacks the capacity to systematically undertake internal reforms.

I think that the reasons for failure vary from issue (or factor) to issue. For example, the existence of “ungoverned” areas did not mean that they were ungovernable. India had such areas in its northeast including a separatist movement supported by other countries and with a sturdy base abroad, but it has slowly and systematically used the strategy memorably described to me as “first we hit them over the head with a hammer, then we teach them how to play the piano.” Pakistan, as we were recently reminded, has never tried this; emulating the British they deemed the Tribal areas and frontier provinces too difficult to manage. In a recent opinion piece the American columnist, David Ignatius, writes that Pakistan has missed the opportunity of the century by not working with the large NATO and American forces across the border in Afghanistan; together they could have launched a project that would have begun to establish the writ of the Pakistani state; instead, a mixture of paranoia and the temptation to use the tribals in a proxy war against both India’s presence in Afghanistan and American and ISAF forces proved to be too great. [1] No one will shed any tears when the backlash sweeps over Pakistan, and there is already talk of the importance of “containing” this new Pakistan, no longer a friend but still a danger to itself and its neighbors. [2]

No one solution fits all problems, there are fifteen to twenty variables (depending on who and how one is counting), and we still have no good idea which are fixable and which are permanently going to cripple Pakistan. Nor do I have a good idea which must come first and which can be deferred: I think both questions should be at the core of thinking about Pakistan’s future.  In short, there is a methodological hiatus in contemporary studies of Pakistan, epitomized in the ambitious title of this conference (why not 2030, 2050, or next year?).  To put it succinctly: if you don’t know where you are going any variable will take you there.

Turning to the law and order sector, there have been numerous—and usually good—studies of what needs to be done. [3] The police have to be depoliticized, they have to be well-funded, they need modern equipment, and they need to be reprofessionalized. They are not hopeless—some policing is done very well in Pakistan, and the leadership of most police services is competent, and some are more than that. There also has to be an effective judiciary, independent and concerned about the administration of justice, so police can deal with professional matters, not worry about becoming either agents of the politicians or de facto law courts on the streets and in the interrogation rooms.

This has not happened for one major reason, and several smaller ones. The major reason is the diffident attitude of Pakistan’s armed services, especially the army, towards the police, or towards any other institution of the state or provinces authorised to carry weapons and use deadly force, and which is not under army control (this seems to apply ambivalently to the various private armies and militia groups tolerated by the army for political and strategic purposes). The army simply will not abide a loss of this monopoly, and all other armed forces must be either so weak or so small as to present no imaginable threat to the army’s monopoly of the legitimate use of force within Pakistan, let alone across Pakistan’s borders.

Another, but less important reason for the failure to reform Pakistan’s police services is that it is not a high priority for the political community itself, which finds a corrupt and incompetent police force more amenable than a highly professional one. And, while raising and arming their own street gangs, politicians have been able to reach an understanding with the police forces on local law and order issues—in plain words, as other weakly-governed regions of the world, there is a nexus between the police, the criminals, and the politicians, all of which confirms for the army its need to maintain a tight lid on all three, lest the army itself become infected.

Pakistan’s courts present a somewhat different picture. Long craven and submissive, the courts—led by the Supreme Court—are attempting to restore a normal balance between them and the political community, while also maintaining good relations with the army. The courts are trying to compress two hundred years of constitutional evolution into one decade, and this will be a long and difficult process under the best of circumstances, but at least the journey has begun. What is problematic is that the natural constituency of the courts, the lawyers, are not the shining liberals that some have portrayed them to be.  Others can speak more expertly on this than I, but will the hard core pro-Jamaat lawyers tolerate a truly independent judiciary? The so-called Lawyers’ Movement was anti-dictatorship, but is it pro-democracy?

Again, we come back to the army. Some very distinguished lawyers came to the army’s rescue in the Ayub years when it needed a “doctrine of necessity,” to justify the imposition of martial law during a period of domestic and international crisis. Will this happen again?

The answer to this question is easy: Pakistan will revert to military rule, including the suppression of the courts and the faulty professionalization of all parts of the law and order machinery unless a new role is found for the armed forces, and the political community begins to perform up to a moderately competent standard. I made this argument thirty years ago, [4] but nothing has changed since then, except that Pakistan’s economic and optician decay has accelerated. In a book published in 1985 I argued that the army had to find a responsible and respectable role, other than that of chief political party and tutor to the Pakistani nation. To do that, normalization with India was necessary, so that the army could devote itself to other worthwhile tasks (I suggested an expanded international peace-keeping role as one such task).

This argument raises two questions of supreme importance—and we do not have definitive answers to either of them. First, have some of the factors that will shape Pakistan’s future reached the point of no return—that nothing can be done to reverse what is generally a negative trend across the board? [5] Second, in the case of the army’s role in Pakistan, is normalization with India possible, and would that divert the army from its dominant position in the state, or merely strengthen it? Since we are some distance from normalization this question is moot at the moment, but may become a live issue should the process go forward.

As for the irreversibility of Pakistan’s economic decline, the huge youth bulge (combined with weak educational assets), the growth of sectarianism, the erratic performance of Pakistan’s politicians, are all unknowns. We can predict likely futures in each instance for a short period, a year to five years, but speculating to 2025 seems to me to be naïve and a waste of time. The NIC did this several years ago when it asked a group of non-officials to predict Pakistan’s future. [6] They were, on balance, quite pessimistic. Was this useful to know?  Obviously, some of us will be more optimistic, some of us more pessimistic, but without a serous analysis of the factors that will shape Pakistan’s future, and how they interact, this will be a feel-good (or feel-bad) exercise that lacks a strong analytic base and has zero policy implications. Knowing that the experts feel one way or another is not very helpful information unless we know what they are expert about, and no one is an expert on events that have not happened. [7]

[1] David Ignatius, “ Pakistan blew its chance for security ,” Washington Post, May 17, 2012

[2] Bruce Riedel, “ A New Pakistan Policy: Containment ”, New York Times, October 14, 2011

[3] See the writings of the former policeman, Hassan Abbas, e.g. Reforming Pakistan’s Police and Law Enforcement Infrastructure: Is It Too Flawed to Fix? ( USIP, 2011), also Hassan Abbas, Pakistan 2020: A Vision for a Better Future (New York: Asia Society Pakistan Study Group Report, 2011).

[4] Stephen P. Cohen, The Pakistan Army (Berkeley: University of California Press 1985), with multiple editions and revisions.

[5] My approach has been to divide about sixteen different factors or variables in to four major clusters and I am indebted to my co-authors for suggesting how these might shape Pakistan’s near-term future, five to seven years from now (about 2017). The first cluster includes  educational and demographic variables, propelled or retarded by the economy, a second includes the different beliefs about the “idea” of Pakistan and what it means to be a Pakistani, a third is Pakistan’s “stateness,” the competence of state organs, including the police and military, and the ability of the political community to organize itself to govern, and, fourthly, the influence of outside states and forces upon Pakistan; this includes not only the obvious candidates, such as India, China, and the United States, but also Pakistan’s vulnerability to the negative effects of globalization. See Stephen P. Cohen, “Pakistan: Arrival and Departure,” chapter in Cohen and Others, The Future of Pakistan (Washington, Brookings Press, 2011).

[6] US National Intelligence Council, Global Trends 2015: A Dialogue About the Future it Nongovernmental Experts, NIC 2000-02, , pp 64 ff.

[7] For my own discussion of what others have written about Pakistan’s future see the Afterword to The Future of Pakistan .

Pakistan South Asia

Foreign Policy

Asia & the Pacific Pakistan South Asia

Strobe Talbott Center for Security, Strategy, and Technology

Elaine Kamarck

February 29, 2024

Bruce Riedel

January 23, 2023

August 9, 2022

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Democracy in Pakistan : Hopes and hurdles

Related Papers

Wajahat Qazi

Pakistan's political crises continue to deepen. The country is in the midst of crises that redound negatively to itself and the world. These crises accrue largely from the absence of democracy on Pakistan. Be it the recent ouster of its Prime Minister, Yusuf Raza Gilani, or the various political convolutions of the state of Pakistan since its inception and founding, the cause(s) can be attributed to the lack of democracy i n Pakistan. This in turn is predicated upon the nature and ideological premise of Pakistan, state formation and state society relations. The question is: What accounts for Pakistan's lack of democracy and the attendant political crises and instability? And given the historical record and its current existential crisis, is there hope for a salubrious democratic future for the country?

Sohail Inayatullah

Mashhood Yousafzay

The word Democracy comes from tow words demo-cracy is derives from the Greek language demos, means people, cracy, means government. In the continuation of this definition we using the famous quotation of President Abraham Lincoln: “Democracy is government of the people by the people for the people” the government of the people will be serving for the people but unfortunately in this country we have a coup d'état (overthrow, takeover) practice again and again. Why we facing these takeovers have some reasons. As human being we Pakistani are authorized for mistake but some time we have blunder in our history. The political parties have a major thought left and right but in our history we find the establishment and military dictators if we think on Pakistan democratic journey so we come on this conclusion that Pakistan run by the establishment, military and Right wing political parties in different shapes, but the left thought parties run this country like the “salt in food” which we see injustice with democracy. Pakistani establishment formed many alliances like Republican Party, IJI, MMA etc. but in few places establishment organized the political parties according to their need.

GreaterKashmir: http://www.greaterkashmir.com/

Tauseef Ahmad Parray

In Pakistan democracy and democratic institutions, in their real spirit, will reach the level of stability and smooth success after holding three to five consecutive fair elections and of course with smooth functioning of governments-in-power. And as the second consecutive democratic regime in post-Musharraf era is already in progress (with Nawaz Sharif as PM and Mamnoon Hussian as President), Pakistan will be on the path of a successful and “stable” democracy in next 10 to 15 years. It is hoped that if it goes on with same smoothness and normality, then by the year(s) 2025-30 Pakistan will be, optimistically, a successful Democratic Muslim Republican Country.

Pakistan Social Sciences Review December 2019, Vol. 3, No.2 [254-266]

Dr. G H U L A M Zikria

Political development modernizes the country by improving institutional functions, national integrity, democratization and political participation. But, this concept could not be sustained in Pakistan due to the domineering behavior of the executive, poor performance of the parliament, lack of judicial independence and military coups. The period 2008-13 saw various events contradicted previous political upheavals. Conduct of continuous elections, the establishment of the coalition government, political cooperation between the opposition and the government on the issues of national importance, increased political participation, vibrant media, restoration of a democratic constitution and abundant law-making, judicial activism to restore constitutional independence of judiciary helped to develop a democratic political system of the country. These political events are explored in this paper which occurred for the first time in the political history of the country and caused political development. This research paper highlights the specific condition of political development in this era and identifies the issues which affect democratic development in the country. It also describes that either democratic political development in Pakistan during 2008-2013 was improved or not?

Sobia Andleeb

International Journal of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development

Suhaib Ahmed

This research note is interested in analyzing the quality of democracy in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. It focuses on the current political state of the nation and how it has developed politically since its origin. Other aspects include the discussion of the democratic and non-democratic aspects of the country, whether it can be called truly democratic and finally, conclude if democracy is the best way forward for Pakistan.

Imran Malik , MUHAMMAD IMRAN ASHRAF

Pakistan holds a very important geopolitical position not only within South Asia but also in relation to the rest of the world. Connecting East and West, and with the potentiality for bridging the Global South with the North, it forms an important locus for discussing the role of democracy and democratic institutions in bringing about and sustaining peace. With attention on the 2013 election season, this article explores strategies for stakeholders within Pakistan, the aim being the improvement of prospects for democracy and prosperity.

Shahnawaz Laghari

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED PAPERS

Najiiterz Wafula

International Journal of Scientific Engineering and Science

Jawaria Ashraf , Muhammad Nazir Khan

SabrangIndia.in

M. Mohibul Haque

Ahmed W . Waheed

saeed shafqat

Muhammad Ibrahim

Mubeen khalid

Journal of Development and Social Sciences

Ammara Cheema

Dr. DHARMENDRA

Publisher ijmra.us UGC Approved

Review Paper

Waqas Kakakhel

Decade of Democracy in Pakistan

Nazeer Mahar

Pakistan: The Contours of State and Society

Farhan H. Siddiqi

Isara solutions

International Res Jour Managt Socio Human

The Government: Research Journal of Political Science Vol. XI,

ARSALAN kARIM

Journal of Public Administration and Governance

Raja Qaiser Ahmed

Global Regional Review

Bakhtiar Khan

Moeen Cheema

The Government: Research Journal of Political Science Vol. IX,

Dr. Sidra Akram

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Essay on Democracy in Pakistan with Quotation

• December 19, 2023

Kainat Shakeel

Democracy in Pakistan has been a system of government that has faced multitudinous challenges and lapses since the country’s commencement in 1947. It’s defined as the” government of the people, by the people, and for the people”. The adult citizens of Pakistan have the right to vote for their favorite candidate, contest in elections, join any party, and form their party. Still, democracy in Pakistan has been hindered by various factors, including corruption, bad governance, institutional imbalance, and the low living norms of the people. 

 “Democracy is the government of the people, by the people, for the people.” (Abraham Lincoln)

Expectations for democracy in pakistan:.

There are opportunities and hurdles for democracy in Pakistan. Some of the positive aspects of democracy in the country include the smooth transfer of powers by popular parties, enhancement in the performance of the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP), and mindfulness among the people regarding mercenary rule. These factors have created a stopgap for democracy in Pakistan.

 “Dictatorships are one-way streets. Democracy boasts two-way traffic.”

Hurdles for democracy in pakistan:.

Despite the positive aspects, democracy in Pakistan has faced several hurdles. These include the circular hindrance of the service in popular governments, the feudal lord’s system, and corruption of popular leaders, the intimidating ignorance rate, and poor frugality. These factors have made it difficult for the republic to flourish in Pakistan. 

“Man’s capacity for justice makes democracy possible, but man’s inclination to injustice makes democracy necessary.”

Key features of democracy:.

The crucial features of democracy in Pakistan include the;

• Electoral System: Pakistan follows an electoral system where adult citizens have the right to vote for their favorite applicant, contest in choices, join any party, and form their own party. 
• Separation of Powers: The separation of powers is one of the crucial features of the republic in Pakistan, with the superintendent, legislative, and judicial branches performing singly to help the attention of power. 
• Checks and Balances: Democracy in Pakistan incorporates checks and balances to ensure that no single branch of government becomes too important, maintaining a balance of power and precluding abuses.
• Multi-party System: Pakistan has a multi-party system, allowing for different political parties to contend in choices and represent the interests of different parts of society. 
• Independent Judiciary: An independent judicatory is a pivotal aspect of democracy in Pakistan, assuring that the rule of law prevails and guarding the rights of citizens. 
• Freedom of Expression: Democracy in Pakistan guarantees freedom of expression, allowing individuals to express their opinions and ideas without fear of persecution or suppression.
• Protection of nonages: The Republic in Pakistan promotes the protection of nonage rights, assuring that all citizens are treated with equivalency and fairness.

Despite these crucial features, democracy in Pakistan has faced multitudinous challenges, including corruption, bad governance, institutional imbalance, and low living norms of the people. To strengthen democracy in Pakistan, it’s essential to address these challenges and make on the positive aspects of the country’s popular system. 

“If you want to raise a crop for one year, plant corn. If you want to raise a crop for decades, plant trees. If you want to raise a crop for centuries, raise men. If you want to plant a crop for eternities, raise democracies.”(Shirin Ebadi)

Main challenges to democracy:.

The main challenges to democracy in Pakistan include the;

• Lack of timely, free, and fair choices: Pakistan has faced issues with conducting timely, free, and fair choices, which are essential for a performing democracy. 
• The gap between the political elite and the public: there’s a significant gap between the political nobility and the general public, making it delicate for politicians to address the enterprises and requirements of their ingredients. 
• Martial laws and civil-military relations: The use of martial laws and pressures between civil and military establishments have challenged the stability and functioning of democracy in Pakistan. 
• Lack of education and mindfulness: A lack of education and political mindfulness among the population has made it difficult for the republic to thrive in Pakistan. 
• Feudal Lords System: The influence of feudal lords in Pakistan has been a chain for democracy, as they frequently ply control over political authorities and opinions. 
• Corruption: Corruption among popular leaders has undermined the credibility and effectiveness of democracy in Pakistan. 
• Economic challenges: Pakistan’s floundering frugality and low living norms have made it delicate for the republic to flourish, as people prioritize introductory requirements over political participation. 
• Politicized corruption trials and repression of dissent: The government has targeted opposition leaders in politicized corruption trials, and security forces have cracked down on differing voices, further eroding the foundations of the republic in Pakistan. 

Addressing these challenges is pivotal for the survival and growth of democracy in Pakistan. By diving issues similar to electoral reforms, perfecting political leadership, and promoting clearness and responsibility, Pakistan can work towards strengthening its popular institutions and assuring a stable and prosperous future for its citizens.

Kainat Shakeel is a versatile SEO-Content Writer and Digital Marketer with a keen understanding of tech news, digital market trends, fashion, technology, laws, and regulations. As a storyteller in the digital realm, she weaves narratives that bridge the gap between technology and human experiences. With a passion for staying at the forefront of industry trends, her blog is a curated space where the worlds of fashion, tech, and legal landscapes converge.

The Future of Democracy in Pakistan: Challenges and Prospects

• Current Affairs , Essays, Outlines
• May 29, 2023
• Noshin Bashir

Table of Contents

Introduction

Democracy is a form of government that rests on the principles of freedom, equality, and participation of the people. In Pakistan, democracy has been a tumultuous journey, with periods of military rule interspersed with civilian governments. As the country continues to navigate its path towards a stable democratic system, the future of democracy in Pakistan presents both challenges and prospects.

Challenges to the Future of Democracy in Pakistan

One of the foremost challenges to the future of democracy in Pakistan is political instability. Pakistan has faced frequent changes in government through military coups, dismissals of elected governments, and political crises. This has resulted in a lack of continuity in policy-making, weak governance, and erosion of public trust in democratic institutions. Additionally, corruption and nepotism have plagued the political landscape, undermining the credibility of elected representatives and diminishing public faith in democracy.

Another challenge is the rise of extremism and terrorism. Pakistan has been grappling with the menace of terrorism for decades, with militant groups posing a serious threat to the democratic process. These groups often seek to undermine democratic institutions, impose their own extremist ideology, and perpetrate violence to disrupt the democratic system. The presence of such radical elements in the country poses a significant challenge to the consolidation of democracy in Pakistan.

Furthermore, socio-economic disparities and inequality are persistent challenges that affect the future of democracy in Pakistan. A large portion of the population lives in poverty, lacks access to basic education and healthcare, and faces discrimination based on gender, religion, and ethnicity. These disparities can fuel grievances and disillusionment among marginalized groups, leading to social unrest and undermining the inclusivity of the democratic system.

Moreover, the issue of political polarization and intolerance poses a threat to the future of democracy in Pakistan. Political parties often engage in divisive rhetoric, promoting sectarianism, and exploiting ethnic, religious, and regional differences for their own gains. This polarization can lead to a breakdown of social cohesion, weaken democratic institutions, and hinder the progress of democracy in the country.

Prospects for the Future of Democracy in Pakistan

Despite these challenges, there are prospects for the future of democracy in Pakistan. One of the key prospects is the growing awareness and participation of the youth in the democratic process. Pakistan has a large youth population, and the increased access to information and technology has empowered young people to demand accountability, transparency, and good governance from their elected representatives. The youth can play a pivotal role in shaping the future of democracy in Pakistan through their active engagement in civic activities, advocacy for democratic reforms, and promotion of democratic values.

Furthermore, the role of civil society and media in Pakistan can also contribute to the prospects of democracy. Civil society organizations, human rights groups, and media outlets have been vocal advocates for democratic principles, exposing corruption, promoting accountability, and safeguarding fundamental rights. Their efforts can help in strengthening democratic institutions, fostering transparency, and building public trust in the democratic system.

Moreover, the consolidation of democratic institutions and processes can contribute to the prospects of democracy in Pakistan. This includes strengthening the judiciary, ensuring an independent and impartial election commission, and promoting a free and fair electoral process. A robust system of checks and balances, effective accountability mechanisms, and respect for the rule of law are essential for the sustainability of democracy in Pakistan.

The future of democracy in Pakistan presents both challenges and prospects. Political instability, extremism, socio-economic disparities, and polarization are significant challenges that need to be addressed to ensure a stable and inclusive democratic system. However, the growing awareness and participation of the youth, the role of civil society and media, and the consolidation of democratic institutions can contribute to the prospects of democracy in Pakistan. As the country continues to strive for a democratic system that upholds the principles of freedom, equality, and participation, addressing these challenges and leveraging these prospects will be crucial for the future of democracy in Pakistan.

Read Also: Failure of Democracy in Pakistan: Causes, Solutions, and Consequences

Share This Post:

Related posts.

11 Signs To Know If He Is Cheating On You?

What is eutrophication.

Indus River

Education System in Pakistan

Recent posts.

What Is D8 Organization? What Does It Aim For?

What Should You Do In Case Of Road Injury?

List of airports in iran, leave a comment cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• ESSAYS: CSS/PMS/PCS
• Current Affairs
• Pakistan Affairs
• English Grammar
• Mathematics
• Scholarship Guide

Polarized politics: the issues and challenges of democracy in Pakistan: CSS ESSAY 2020

Table of Contents

Thesis statement

The polarized politics in Pakistan pose significant challenges to democracy, impacting governance, stability, and societal cohesion.

Introduction

Democracy has had a tumultuous journey in Pakistan since its inception in 1947. The country has witnessed periods of military rule, political instability, and a deeply polarized political landscape. The polarization in Pakistani politics poses significant challenges to the functioning of democracy, affecting governance, stability, and societal cohesion. This essay aims to explore the complexities of polarized politics in Pakistan, identify its challenges to democracy, and propose potential solutions for fostering reconciliation and democratic consolidation.

Exposition: Understanding Polarized Politics in Pakistan

To comprehend the dynamics of polarized politics, it is essential to define and explain its concept. Polarized politics refers to a deeply divided political environment where competing political factions hold extreme and divergent ideologies. In Pakistan, this polarization is rooted in historical and socio-cultural factors, as well as regional and ethnic divisions. It is often fueled by religious, sectarian, and linguistic differences, exacerbating the challenges faced by democracy in the country.

Challenges to Democracy in Pakistan

The challenges posed by polarized politics in Pakistan are multifaceted and have far-reaching implications for democratic governance. Firstly, the weakening of democratic institutions due to inefficiency and corruption undermines the trust of the citizens in the system. The lack of transparency and accountability erodes public confidence in elected representatives and hampers the effective functioning of democracy.

Ethnic and religious divisions further exacerbate the challenges. Sectarianism and religious extremism have perpetuated violence and intolerance, leading to societal fragmentation. Regional disparities and ethnic tensions add another layer of complexity to the political landscape, impeding the formation of a cohesive national identity and hindering efforts to build consensus on key issues.

The role of the military in politics has also been a significant challenge for democracy in Pakistan. Frequent military interventions disrupt democratic processes, leading to political instability and a cycle of power struggles. The influence of the military on governance and policymaking creates a power imbalance and undermines the democratic principles of civilian control and oversight.

Impact on Governance and Development

The polarization of politics has a detrimental impact on governance and development in Pakistan. Policy gridlock and hindered decision-making are prominent consequences of the deep divisions between political factions. The focus on short-term political gains often takes precedence over long-term planning and development strategies, resulting in a lack of coherent policies and delayed implementation of critical reforms.

Economically, the impact of polarized politics is significant. The uncertainty and instability arising from political polarization deter both local and foreign investment. The lack of investor confidence hinders economic growth, job creation, and poverty alleviation efforts. Moreover, the absence of consensus on economic policies further hampers sustainable development and prevents the realization of the country’s full potential.

Socially, the implications of polarization are profound. Divisions along political, ethnic, and religious lines create an atmosphere of hostility and distrust among different segments of society. This fragmentation weakens social cohesion and inhibits collective action towards common goals, such as education, healthcare, and social welfare. Building a cohesive society that respects diversity and promotes inclusivity becomes a considerable challenge in such an environment.

Argumentation: Addressing Polarized Politics for Strengthening Democracy

Despite the complex challenges posed by polarized politics, there are ways to address these issues and strengthen democracy in Pakistan. Firstly, promoting inclusive governance and power-sharing mechanisms can help bridge the gaps between different political factions. By ensuring representation and participation of diverse groups, political decisions can reflect the interests and aspirations of a wider range of citizens, fostering a sense of ownership and inclusivity.

Strengthening democratic institutions and processes is another crucial aspect of mitigating polarization. Efforts should be made to enhance the transparency, accountability, and efficiency of government institutions. This includes electoral reforms, judicial independence, and bureaucratic reforms to reduce corruption and improve service delivery. Strengthening the rule of law and ensuring equal access to justice can build trust in the democratic system.

Fostering inter-party dialogue and consensus-building is vital to overcome political polarization. Political leaders and parties should engage in constructive and respectful dialogue to find common ground on key issues. This requires a willingness to set aside personal and partisan interests for the greater good of the nation. Mediation and conflict resolution mechanisms can play a pivotal role in facilitating such dialogues and fostering a culture of compromise and cooperation.

Civil society participation and engagement are essential for democratic consolidation. NGOs, advocacy groups, and grassroots organizations can provide platforms for citizen participation, civic education, and community empowerment. They can amplify the voices of marginalized groups and contribute to the development of a more inclusive and participatory democracy.

Enhancing media freedom and responsible journalism is crucial in combating polarization. A free and independent media can play a significant role in promoting unbiased reporting, fact-checking, and providing a platform for diverse perspectives. Journalists and media professionals have a responsibility to uphold ethical standards, present balanced narratives, and contribute to informed public discourse.

Description: Successful Examples and Case Studies

Several countries have grappled with political polarization and managed to overcome its challenges. For example, post-apartheid South Africa embarked on a truth and reconciliation process to heal the wounds of a divided society. This initiative aimed at acknowledging past injustices, promoting dialogue, and fostering reconciliation among different racial and ethnic groups. The South African experience demonstrates the power of dialogue, forgiveness, and collective healing in overcoming polarization and building a more inclusive democracy.

Similarly, countries like Finland and Canada have implemented policies and programs that emphasize social cohesion, equality, and inclusivity. These nations have recognized the importance of addressing societal divisions through educational reforms, intercultural dialogue, and proactive measures to bridge gaps between different communities. Their experiences highlight the significance of social integration and building shared values as foundations for a robust and cohesive democracy.

Narration: The Path to Reconciliation and Democratic Consolidation

To embark on the path to reconciliation and democratic consolidation, Pakistan must take certain steps. Firstly, reducing polarization requires a commitment from political leaders to prioritize national interest over personal gains. They must engage in constructive dialogue, demonstrate willingness to compromise, and embrace inclusivity as a core value.

Inclusive political participation is essential to ensure that diverse voices are represented and heard. This includes women, youth, religious and ethnic minorities, and marginalized communities. Empowering these groups through political representation, affirmative action, and access to education can foster social cohesion and strengthen democracy.

Cultivating a culture of tolerance and respect is crucial. This involves promoting intercultural and interfaith dialogue, encouraging empathy, and addressing prejudices and biases. Educational institutions play a pivotal role in promoting democratic values, critical thinking, and respect for diversity. Integrating civic education into the curriculum can nurture an informed and engaged citizenry committed to democratic principles.

The challenges of polarized politics in Pakistan are significant and impact the functioning of democracy, governance, and societal harmony. However, through inclusive governance, strengthening democratic institutions, fostering dialogue, and promoting social cohesion, it is possible to overcome these challenges and consolidate democracy. The path to reconciliation and democratic consolidation requires collective efforts, commitment to the principles of democracy, and a shared vision of a united and prosperous Pakistan. By addressing the issues of polarization, Pakistan can pave the way for a more inclusive, stable, and resilient democracy that serves the interests of all its citizens

SCHOLARSHIP GUIDE

Oxford pershing square graduate scholarships 2024-2025, rosa luxemburg scholarship in germany 2024, yenching academy scholarship in china 2024, fulbright scholarship program for pakistan 2024 |fully funded, xian jiaotong university scholarship |2021-2022| chinese government scholarship, rhodes scholarship at oxford university.

• Privacy Policy

Challenges to Democracy in Pakistan | For CSS & PMS Aspirants

• Rukhsana Khalid
• January 8, 2021
• Daily Write-Ups , Featured , Opinions
• 37997 Views

Written by Rukhsana Khalid

Democracy in the land of pure is in jeopardy. Inheriting it as a political ideology but failing to put it in practice, wholeheartedly, has created problems for its essence and the state.

It is generally considered that many attempts have been made to weaken democracy since the inception of Pakistan. Military overstepping, for instance, and the misuse of constitutional powers has derailed it. There are several challenges that democracy face now.

One key challenge to democracy in Pakistan is dynastic politics. After the 1970s, it overshadows the political system of Pakistan. Although it is an essential feature, elections do not by themselves produce democracy. Since they have no say in the process; illiterate voters only go to vote along ethnic lines that promise them for food and shelter. Also, before 2018, there were only two dynastic political parties which form the majority in the parliament, thus have played musical chairs so far.

Beyond dynastic politics, excessive interference of non-civilian institutions in government affairs has weakened democracy. Landlords have occupied power corridors since the inception of Pakistan; however, being least educated, they failed to provide a national level civilian political leadership. It Provides loopholes to powerful institutions to take over the government. Thus, blocking the way of democracy.

Another challenge to democracy is the Islamization of Politics. Islam itself is not a threat to democracy, for it is the people who project their vested interests by giving the public the Lolipop of religion. By doing so, they could gather the support of masses, which help to prolong their rule in power. For it is illiterate, the public falls prey to tactics of politicians that democracy is anti-Islamic. It does not only harm democracy but also hampers the socio-economic growth of the country.

Moreover, the phenomenon of political polarization drags democracy to the brink of failure. It permanently divides society into segments, as they are illiterate, and cannot build a rational opinion, people advocate for their leaders blindly. At upper-level political heads remain busy in leg pulling of each other, leaving no stone unturned to stop the process of healthy debate which is the beauty of democracy, rather than working for the state’s welfare. Giving ideological refuge to their interests, politicians play with sentiments of the public. As a result, it harms national integration and gives rise to populist leaders that mar the smooth working of democracy.

To conclude, throughout the history of Pakistan, although marred by hitches, still, democracy survived. Its longevity can be increased further by taking some appropriate measures. At the societal level, public awareness should be increased to ensure the participation of all in the democratic process. It would also help people build a rational opinion about the performance of its rulers rather than blindly following them. At the upper level, political heads should co-operate with each other to avoid political polarization. It would not only strengthen democracy but also put country on the way of prosperity and stability.

About the writer:

Miss Rukhsana Khalid is one of the bonafide students of Sir Syed Kazim Ali . – one of the distinguished Grammarian in the world. Under his supervision, she is enrolled in course of Online Creative English Writing and learning Basic to Advanced Grammar. Primarily, she is an engineer and loves to write articles and blogs on various topics- Current Affairs, Pakistan Affairs, International Relations, and Beauty. In case of any query, please reach her at [email protected]

Name of the Student: Miss Rukhsana Khalid Qualifications: B.Sc Chemical Engineering Total Articles/Blogs: 2 English Coach: Sir Syed Kazim Ali Course Taken: Creative English Writing & Article Writing

Like other competitive students, If you have a story to tell, guidance to help, knowledge to educate, or a perspective that can help CSS aspirants daily, welcome to CSSPrepForum. It is free to get your opinions, viewpoints, judgements, and thinking published, whether it is a blog, article, essay, application, letter, precis, comprehension, MCQs, or anything that helps competitive youth of Pakistan. CSSPrepForum is a place that let you connect with thousands of competitive readers, and helps your voice heard across the community. Let’s start writing and get your voice heard to those who are looking for you . Email Your Write-ups at [email protected]

At CSSPrepForum, we upload solved papers, essays, and current affairs blogs daily. To read the best with us, let’s connect with us Twitter Facebook Instagram

CSS 2022 Solved Pakistan Affairs Past Papers

The following are the CSS 2022 Pakistan Affairs solved past papers questions. These questions have been evaluated and checked by Pakistan’s top Pakistan Affairs and Current Affairs coaches, who are either lecturers or officers and scored the highest marks in this paper. They include Miss Saba Baloch (CSS-2021), Miss Aimeen Mirza (CSS 2018), Miss Nirmal Hasni (DD NAB), Sir Rameez Ch. (Lecturer & Deputy Director), and Miss Zaineb Azam (the highest scorer – 76). Moreover, these questions have been attempted on the same pattern taught by Sir Syed Kazim Ali to his students who have been scoring the highest marks for years.

CSS 2021 Solved Pakistan Affairs Questions

More Essays

• Meaning Purposive Education
• Bureaucracy Doldrums
• Is Gender Equality a Myth?
• Pros and Cons of Globalization for Pakistan
• Islamophobia: Causes and Consequences
• Artificial intelligence: Its Merits and Demerits
• IMF Bailouts: Roads to Stability or Recipes for Disaster
• Can Foreign Aid Help A Country Achieve Economic Stability?
• Consequences of American Withdrawal from Afghanistan on South Asia
• Money And Success Do Not Change People; They Merely Amplify What Is Already There
• Almost Always, The Creative, Dedicated Minority Has Made The World Better

Articles Might Interest You!

Recent Posts

Top Categories

Cssprepforum, education company.

cssprepforum.com

Welcome to Cssprepforum, Pakistan’s largest learning management system (LMS) with millions of questions along with their logical explanations educating millions of learners, students, aspirants, teachers, professors, and parents preparing for a successful future. 

Founder:   Syed Kazim Ali Founded:  2020 Phone: +92-332-6105-842 +92-300-6322-446 Email:  [email protected] Students Served:  10 Million Daily Learners:  50,000 Offered Courses: Visit Courses  

More Courses

Basic English Grammar and Writing Course

Extensive English Essay & Precis Course for CSS and PMS

CSS English Essay and Precis Crash Course for 2023

Subscribe to our mailing list to receives daily updates direct to your inbox.

• CSS Solved Essays
• CSS Solved GSA
• CSS Solved PA
• CSS Solved Islamiat
• Current Affairs
• All Courses
• Writers Club
• All Authors
• All Members
• All Teachers
• Become an Author
• Who is Sir Syed Kazim Ali?
• Privacy Policy

CssPrepForum is Pakistan’s largest and greatest platform for CSS, PMS, FPSC, PPSC, SPSC, KPPSC, AJKPSC, BPSC, GBPSC, NTS, and other One Paper 100 Marks MCQs exams’ students. It has become Pakistan’s most trusted website among CSS, PMS students for their exams’ preparation because of its high-quality preparation material.

@ 2023 Cssprepforum. All RightsReserved.

The futures of democracy in Pakistan: A liberal perspective

• December 1997
• 29(10):955-970
• This person is not on ResearchGate, or hasn't claimed this research yet.

• Tamkang University

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations

• Pakistan Dev Rev

• M Z A Ansari
• P A Hoodbhoy
• M A A Maududi
• Nawai-I-Waqat
• Inayatullah
• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up