Tariq Mahmood Awan
In Pakistan, politicians are often demonized in the public eye, a view that is justified to some extent due to corruption, inefficiency, and unfulfilled promises. However, it’s essential to acknowledge the vital role politicians have played in the creation and continuation of Pakistan’s political landscape. Despite their flaws, they have shaped the country’s governance structure and led efforts for its survival in a complex geopolitical environment.
Recently, the military’s increasing involvement in politics has come under scrutiny. Similarly, the judiciary has faced criticism for its interference in matters typically reserved for the legislature and executive, causing friction within the balance of powers.
Interestingly, one group that has largely escaped the same level of scrutiny is the bureaucracy, including the police. These institutions wield significant power, often controlling day-to-day governance and influencing law and order in the country. However, the influence and responsibility of bureaucrats, especially in maintaining the status quo, have rarely been critically examined. The unchecked authority of bureaucratic elites can perpetuate corruption, inefficiency, and injustice, making them an important but often overlooked aspect of Pakistan’s political and governance issues.
In Pakistan’s governance system, the role of the bureaucracy is often underestimated. While the country’s government is divided into three branches—legislature, executive, and judiciary—the executive itself is split into two components: the political leadership and the bureaucracy. The political executive, elected by the people, sets policies, but it is the bureaucracy that implements them. This makes the bureaucracy the vital machinery of government, responsible for executing laws, implementing policies, and enforcing judicial decisions.
Historically, the bureaucracy has filled the gaps left by ineffective or unstable political leadership. At times, it has even taken on the role of legislative guidance, helping to shape policy when legislators have been unable or unwilling to act. The bureaucracy’s influence has extended beyond implementation to directly shaping governance, often guiding political executives in decision-making. There are also claims that bureaucrats have, at times, manipulated or influenced the judiciary for their own interests, consolidating their power within the state apparatus.
The 1973 Constitution of Pakistan marked a significant moment in the separation of powers, particularly in establishing the independence of the judiciary from the executive. However, the enduring strength and influence of the bureaucracy have made it a key player in Pakistan’s political landscape, often operating behind the scenes to protect its interests and maintain the status quo. This unchecked power of the bureaucracy remains a critical aspect of Pakistan’s governance challenges.
Pakistan inherited a rigid, colonial-era bureaucratic structure at independence—a system designed for control, not democratic governance. The expectation was that this machinery would eventually be reshaped under political leadership. However, this transition never fully materialized, largely due to the weaknesses of political leadership and the persistent influence of powerful non-elected institutions. Politicians have repeatedly failed to reform or replace outdated rules of business at both federal and provincial levels, leaving the administrative framework untouched since colonial times. Despite having the authority, successive cabinets have avoided challenging this entrenched status quo, allowing the bureaucracy to retain its grip on governance.
Politicians often argue that the bureaucracy enjoys the backing of de facto power centers, making it difficult to introduce meaningful legislative or administrative reforms. Regardless of political intent, it is the bureaucracy that continues to lead governance—especially at the federal level, where it often overshadows cabinet decision-making. In provinces, powerful chief secretaries frequently rival chief ministers in influence, effectively neutralizing elected leadership. At the district level, bureaucratic control has obstructed the development of robust local governments, often in collusion with centralized political elites.
Far from being a neutral administrative body, the bureaucracy in Pakistan has become a dominant force, frequently acting in its own interests and resisting efforts toward democratic reform and decentralization.
Pl subscribe to the YouTube channel of republicpolicy.com
In Pakistan, the bureaucracy holds immense unchecked power across all tiers of government—federal, provincial, and district. As administrative heads of ministries, departments, attached bodies, and autonomous institutions, bureaucrats function as principal accounting officers. They control finances, approve and execute projects, and enjoy sweeping administrative, financial, and monitoring authority. Despite being public servants, they operate with little to no accountability from the legislature, political executive, or even the judiciary, which rarely intervenes beyond limited judicial review.
The perks and privileges of bureaucrats—lavish residences, government vehicles, subsidized plots, foreign scholarships, and undeclared gifts—remain largely unregulated. Political leadership has failed to audit or restrict these benefits, enabling a culture of entitlement and impunity. Corruption within the bureaucracy is systemic, yet disciplinary action is virtually nonexistent. A glance at data from the Establishment Division or provincial S&GADs would show how rarely bureaucrats are dismissed or seriously penalized.
Unfortunately, bureaucratic corruption has become sophisticated. Many officers now operate through layers of agents, often more than three degrees removed, shielding them from direct accountability. Despite their control over public resources, Pakistan’s bureaucracy has largely failed to deliver quality governance, often prioritizing personal gain over public service. The result is inefficiency, stagnation, and a deep erosion of public trust in the state. Therefore, there is a pressing need to establish an independent commission to investigate the direct and indirect assets of bureaucrats. A significant number of civil servants enter the bureaucracy from modest, middle-class backgrounds—yet many retire with considerable wealth & dual nationalities, far beyond what their official salaries would justify. This disparity raises serious concerns about illicit enrichment and demands transparent scrutiny of their financial dealings, property holdings, and potential use of proxies to hide assets.
In Pakistan, the bureaucracy consistently fails not only the legislature, political executive, and judiciary, but also the public whose interests it is supposed to serve. Despite being unelected, it wields disproportionate financial and administrative power, making it central to the functioning—or dysfunction—of the state. Politicians are often blamed for corruption, yet it is impossible for them to act alone; bureaucratic support is essential, as they are the ones who approve funds, sign off on projects, and manage the execution of decisions. If bureaucrats refused to comply with illegal orders, much of the political corruption would be impossible.
However, driven by a desire for lucrative postings and personal gain, many bureaucrats willingly enable such actions. From manipulating election results to rigging contracts, the bureaucracy routinely compromises merit, ethics, and the law. The real power lies in files and data—both of which are frequently distorted to deceive policymakers and undermine reform. Rule violations and constitutional breaches are common, carried out with impunity.
Yet, while politicians, the judiciary, and the military are under constant public scrutiny, the bureaucracy escapes deep criticism. This must change. Pakistan urgently needs to reform its bureaucratic system, beginning with a serious evaluation of its role and performance. Empowering honest political leadership over an unaccountable bureaucracy is essential to achieving transparent, efficient, and public-centered governance.
