Tahir Maqsood Chheena

In recent years, the space for free expression in Pakistan has been shrinking at an alarming pace. At Republic Policy Think Tank, we have consistently exercised caution while addressing powerful segments of the state — including the establishment, the religious right, and increasingly, the mainstream political parties. This caution is not rooted in institutional conservatism or editorial restraint, but rather in the harsh realities of operating within a highly securitized and politically polarized media environment. Today, writing critically about the establishment, religious clerics, or Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) requires not only journalistic courage but also a deep awareness of the legal, political, and physical risks involved.

This growing fear is not confined to fringe voices or dissidents. It is now deeply embedded within institutions, academia, media houses, and even civil society organizations. The deterrents are no longer implicit; they are overt and deeply consequential. Whether it is the threat of cyberbullying, legal action, targeted disinformation campaigns, economic pressures, or even direct intimidation, the forces that seek to silence dissent and regulate discourse are multiplying.

The Establishment: The Historical Shadow

Pakistan’s civil-military imbalance has long been a subject of critical discourse, both domestically and internationally. However, speaking out against military overreach — or even analyzing its political role — has always required navigating a minefield. Scholars, journalists, and political commentators have often been labeled as “anti-state” for highlighting unconstitutional interventions in democratic processes. Despite constitutional protections, the unwritten red lines remain potent and deeply entrenched.

For think tanks like Republic Policy, this means applying rigorous self-censorship, not out of choice but necessity. Research papers, editorials, and policy critiques are meticulously reviewed to ensure that they do not cross invisible boundaries. This climate of fear severely undermines the democratic function of academic institutions and policy forums, whose role is to question, critique, and offer alternative visions for the state and society.

The Mullahs: Religion and Repression

Criticism of religious extremism or clerical politics is another area fraught with danger. Pakistan’s complex relationship with religious authority makes it exceedingly difficult to hold extremist ideologies accountable without facing allegations of blasphemy, cultural insensitivity, or social defamation. Several analysts and academics have faced dire consequences for simply advocating secular constitutionalism or religious pluralism.

The religious right, with its deeply embedded presence in media, politics, and public consciousness, wields immense influence. As a result, institutions are often reluctant to publicly engage in critique or reform-oriented dialogue. Instead, most prefer silence — a silence that enables the continued exploitation of religious narratives for political and ideological ends.

PTI: A New Political Red Line?

The rise of PTI and its populist wave initially represented a promising shift in Pakistan’s democratic evolution. However, recent developments suggest that criticizing PTI — particularly its leadership or its institutional support base — now attracts the same level of backlash traditionally associated with establishment or religious critique.

This is a troubling development. When political parties begin to adopt the same intolerance toward dissent as state institutions or religious hardliners, it signals a deeper democratic crisis. Dissent is no longer treated as an essential component of democratic discourse but as betrayal, treachery, or sedition. Supporters, often organized and digitally weaponized, launch aggressive campaigns against journalists, researchers, and academics who question the party line.

It is worth noting that this phenomenon is not exclusive to PTI, but its intensity and coordination under PTI’s digital infrastructure — particularly its massive social media base — have introduced a new level of volatility in Pakistan’s democratic culture. Consequently, institutions like Republic Policy must now tread carefully, even when offering policy critiques or development analyses that involve the party.

Please, subscribe to the YouTube channel of republicpolicy.com for quality content.

A Culture of Fear and Its Consequences

The cumulative effect of these pressures is the erosion of intellectual freedom and democratic dialogue. When establishments, religious groups, and political parties all become “no-go zones” for critique, the result is a culture of silence, fear, and conformity. The very institutions meant to question power become complicit in sustaining it through omission.

This culture also has a chilling effect on younger researchers, analysts, and students. Many are dissuaded from pursuing critical subjects or publishing original research that may be considered controversial. Universities increasingly avoid controversial seminars. Media houses cancel segments. Civil society organizations self-regulate. The broader impact is the steady narrowing of the public sphere — a space vital for democratic engagement, public accountability, and policy innovation.

The Threat to Democracy

The essence of democracy lies not in the mechanical act of voting but in the free contest of ideas, ideologies, and visions for the future. When freedom of expression is compromised — whether through brute force, legal manipulation, or digital mobbing — democracy itself is put at risk.

Pakistan’s current trajectory, unfortunately, points toward greater control and centralization of discourse. Every major actor — from the military to religious clerics to political parties — now seems invested in curbing criticism. Each of them has developed, in their own way, “deterrents” against those who speak out. This convergence of intolerance across ideological spectrums is a dangerous omen. It suggests that repression is no longer the exception, but the norm.

A Call for Democratic Maturity

The way forward must begin with the recognition that disagreement is not disloyalty. Criticism is not sabotage. And dissent is not sedition. For Pakistan to evolve into a genuinely democratic state, its political culture must be able to tolerate — and even welcome — diverse perspectives, uncomfortable questions, and inconvenient truths.

Institutions like Republic Policy remain committed to fostering informed, evidence-based discourse. But this commitment can only thrive in an environment where safety, openness, and intellectual honesty are protected and encouraged. The state, political parties, and religious actors must all recognize their responsibility in cultivating — rather than curbing — the democratic space.

Pakistan stands at a crossroads. Whether it chooses the path of democratic deepening or authoritarian regression will depend largely on how it treats its thinkers, critics, and citizens who still dare to speak.

In conclusion: this is not a good omen for democracy in Pakistan — and it must be taken seriously before the space for free expression disappears entirely.