An equally important question is whether political parties actually implement the electoral programmes on which they seek votes. In every election campaign, parties make ambitious promises, but once in power, many of those commitments are diluted, postponed or forgotten. Political competition too often degenerates into abuse, personal attacks and malicious accusations rather than a contest of policies and ideas. The bureaucracy is another neglected chapter in Pakistan’s governance crisis. Since the late 1980s, the politicisation of the civil service has increasingly produced a culture in which some officers are rewarded for loyalty to rulers, while those who insist on constitutionalism, merit and the rule of law may be sidelined.
This is contrary to the spirit of Quaid-i-Azam’s clear message to public servants: their loyalty must be to the state rather than to individuals or political rulers. Political involvement in postings, transfers, promotions and appointments, including appointments at senior contractual levels, has weakened the principle of a politically neutral civil service. A politically dependent bureaucracy cannot provide politically neutral advice, enforce laws impartially or resist unlawful pressure. Once postings, transfers and promotions become instruments of political loyalty, the state gradually becomes subordinate to the government of the day.
The reported increase in the cost of running the civil government is particularly disturbing at a time when Pakistan remains dependent on IMF-supported programmes and repeatedly announces austerity and restructuring measures. At a time when ordinary citizens are struggling with inflation and unemployment, government expenditure should be subjected to rigorous scrutiny. Allegations concerning kickbacks, black money and money laundering have further damaged public confidence. The involvement of influential media figures and business interests in political parties has also complicated the democratic environment. The question is simple: can the wealthy and powerful be held accountable for tax evasion and undeclared wealth irrespective of their political connections?
Pakistan needs across-the-board accountability and strict adherence to the rule of law. Accountability should neither be selective nor politically motivated. If the government demonstrates that the law applies equally to the powerful and the ordinary citizen, it will strengthen the writ of the state and restore public confidence. The continued existence of a large informal economy, the persistence of non-filers and inadequate taxation of sectors with substantial economic capacity also raise questions about political will. If ordinary salaried people are taxed at source while powerful economic groups continue to enjoy exemptions or avoid their fair share, public resentment is inevitable.
The common citizen, who may be earning only a few dollars a day, sees a widening gap between the privileged and the poor. This economic inequality is becoming another major source of frustration and distrust in political leadership. Pakistan now needs reconciliation rather than confrontation. To address unrest in Balochistan, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Azad Jammu and Kashmir, political leadership must pursue dialogue, diplomacy, constitutionalism and meaningful political engagement. Opposition parties must also be given legitimate political space. The government and opposition should engage in serious negotiations on matters affecting democracy, fair and free elections, transparent governance, economic stability and national security.
Pakistan is facing multiple challenges on its eastern and western borders as well as severe economic and social pressures at home. We are already dealing with militancy and unrest in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan, while concerns about instability and political confrontation have also emerged in Azad Jammu and Kashmir. The answer cannot always be force or confrontation. Political dialogue must be given every possible opportunity before differences become permanent divisions. The present political leadership therefore has an opportunity—and a responsibility—to prove that it is genuinely the custodian of the Constitution. It must demonstrate that democracy means more than winning elections. It means respecting institutions, accepting dissent, protecting minorities, strengthening Parliament, ensuring merit, controlling public expenditure and delivering justice to citizens.
The best tribute to Quaid-i-Azam is not another speech before his portrait. It is to practise what he preached: integrity, merit, discipline, constitutionalism, tolerance, national unity and loyalty to Pakistan. Until our political leadership transforms these principles into actual governance, we will continue to celebrate the Quaid’s words while failing to realise his dream. Pakistan does not need another declaration of commitment to the Quaid’s vision; it needs the political courage to implement it.—Concluded
—The writer is Senior Retd bureaucrat, based in Lahore.
