By Dr. Muhammad Kaleem

Democracy is the most appreciated form of government in the world; even totalitarian regimes and military dictatorships resort to it to garner popular support. According to most definitions, ‘Democracy’ is “a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.” In a democracy, the power rests with the people and is exercised through the people they elect.

Democracies fall into two categories: direct and representative. In a direct democracy, all citizens, without intermediaries elected or appointed officials, can participate in making public decisions. However, due to its size and complexity, modern society offers few opportunities for direct democracy. It is so because, in a democracy, decisions are made based on majority rule. But such a decision may not necessarily be democratic. No one, for example, would call a system fair or just that permitted 51 percent of the population to oppress the remaining 49 percent in the name of the majority. In a democratic society, majority rule must be coupled with guarantees of individual human rights that, in turn, protect the rights of minorities, whether ethnic, religious, or political.

The creation of Pakistan was a catalyst for the most significant demographic movement in the world’s recorded history. Scarred from birth, Pakistan’s quest for survival has been as compelling as it has been uncertain. Despite the shared religion of its overwhelmingly Muslim population, Pakistan has been engaged in a precarious struggle to evolve a political system for its linguistically diverse population. This diversity has caused chronic regional tensions and successive failures in forming a constitution. Moreover, since its inception, the country has been oscillating between military rule and democratically-elected governments.

A Major Cause of Sham Democracy, Poor Governance, and Rampant Corruption is the elite culture and undemocratic institutions. In Pakistan, the political culture of dissensus is so strong that politicians work only for their patronage groups and kinship. Pluralism, an essential norm of democracy, is sorely lacking in society. Pakistani political elite, especially in rural areas, relies for their strength not just on wealth but also on their leadership of clans or kinship networks because kinship plays a vital part in maintaining the dominance of the ‘feudal’ elites and many of the urban bosses. The importance of kinship is rooted in collective solidarity for interest and defense. Political factions are significant for nurturing democracy, but in the case of Pakistan, they exist chiefly to seek patronage and have kinship links as their most important foundation. The bureaucracy and law-enforcement agencies have become mere tools in the hands of the ruling elite.

This status-quo position is the culmination of hereditary, or more rightly dynastic, politics in the constituencies and political parties. This menace also begets corruption which, in Pakistan, should be cut out of the political system, but insofar as the political system of patronage and kinship that also intertwines corruption has prevailed across the political landscape. Combating corruption would mean gutting Pakistan’s society like a fish. It is due to this curse that Pakistan has a rather medieval look. The state is appalled at providing modern services such as clean water, medicine, public transport, and education because it is too weak to force much of the population to pay taxes or to control corruption on the part of state officials.

In an ideal administrative system, it is not possible for the rulers, be they elected politicians or military dictators, to engage in the misappropriation of public funds and assets, the violation of laws and procedures, and the arbitrary use of power without collaboration of a large number of civil servants, subordinate officials or military and intelligence personnel. Hence, the root cause of all corruption is the combination of abuse of power and misappropriation of state resources. The rulers seek arbitrary power for themselves, while the masses want it to be used to advance their interests. Senior government officials repeatedly allot themselves pricey plots of land at about one-fourth of the market value. It is to be remembered that all this is only possible with the government’s blessing. Moreover, the cost of providing perks and privileges to the senior bureaucrats is also exuberant — a secretary rank officer costs as much as four hundred thousand rupees per month to the national exchequer.

From the constable and Patwari to the local council and lower courts, paying bribes is almost inevitable to get the machinery to move. Even then, it moves slowly and often needs further inducements. With the officers who are party to this corruption or are simply unable to perform the supervisory tasks expected of them, the subordinate staff is a disorganized, turbulent, and anarchic mess of the incompetent, the corrupt, and the vicious. Organizational corruption is so rampant that it has become a norm now. Public sector corruption is the harshest reality of our state structure. More importantly, corruption is a dense political narrative in Pakistan, but political parties hardly do a severe restructuring in this regard when given power. It has disillusioned the majority of people in the state apparatus.

To be continued…

The writer holds a PHD degree in Political Science.