— Most of the renowned theories about human society have lost their true essence in Pakistan. Typically, human society is considered a complex structure, interwoven with various segments such as social, economic, cultural, ethnic, political, and ideological dimensions. Each of these segments is backed by theories developed by scholars after extensive research, aiming to establish globally accepted principles for building a stable and progressive society best suited to human lives. Before delving into Pakistani politics, it is important to understand how theorists have conceptualized and defined “politics.”
Politics is generally considered a process of decision making in groups, while the different forms of government are structured systems by which societies are governed, known as democracy, monarchy, dictatorship, and various other mixed or hybrid systems. Renowned political scientist Harold Lasswell defined politics as “who gets what, when, how” and narrated that politics exists wherever people interact with one another to make decisions that affect them collectively. D. Alan Heslop, further defines the political system by evaluating it as a set of formal legal institutions that constitute a “government” or a “state.”
Democracy is generally considered the most effective system of governance because it not only empowers people but also refines the decision-making process. Unlike authoritarian regimes where decisions rest in the hands of a few, democracy ensures collective wisdom, leading to more balanced, inclusive, and well-thought-out policies. Political theorist John Dewey emphasized that ‘democracy is not just a form of government but a way of life, fostering public participation and continuous learning.’ The supporters of democracy advocate by stating that it enhances the quality of decision-making by allowing competition among leaders and accountability to the electorate. It is also believed that in a diverse society where differences in opinion and conflicts are inevitable, democracy provides a structured and peaceful mechanism to address and resolve them through debate, discussion, and consensus rather than coercion or force.
A prominent advocate of pluralism, Robert A. Dahl, asserted that democracy ensures political equality, allowing competing interests to coexist and preventing the concentration of power in a single entity. One of democracy’s greatest strengths lies in its ability to uphold the dignity of citizens, recognizing them as active participants rather than passive subjects. It grants individuals the right to voice their concerns, generally known as freedom of expression, choose their representatives, and hold them accountable. Democracy’s biggest advantage is its ability to remove ineffective leaders without violence, making it a self-correcting system through the power of the vote. Consequently, democratic societies thrive because they encourage innovation, reform, and adaptability. Justice, equality, and progress are the essence of democracy. The most widely cited definitions of democracy, symbolizing a system where power ultimately rests with the people, came from Abraham Lincoln, the 16th President of the United States, who on November 19, 1863, during the American Civil War in his Gettysburg address stated, “Democracy is government of the people, by the people, for the people”. Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah, the founder of Pakistan, was the strongest supporter of democracy, and his speeches to the national assembly are part of history where he openly advocated democracy. One of his famous sayings was, “Islam and its idealism have taught us democracy. It has taught equality of man, justice, and fair play to everybody.”
Considering the blessings of democracy, no one can easily hate this form of government, but as soon as we unite democracy and Pakistan in one frame, incertitudes run through the mind. Before cursing democracy in Pakistan, the question arises: Have we ever tasted real democracy? The obvious answer is “No”.
Since its independence in 1947, Pakistan’s democracy has been more theatrical than functional, a never-ending cycle of civilian rule, military takeovers, judicial interventions, and political betrayals. While the country was envisioned as an Islamic democratic republic, its history tells a different story, one where democracy has been used, abused, derailed, and revived repeatedly. Pakistan’s founder, Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah, dreamed of a democratic state, but his early demise left a power vacuum. The country’s first decade was marked by political instability, constitutional delays, and the dismissal of elected governments. In 1958, General Ayub Khan imposed martial law, setting the stage for military dominance over civilian politics. Pakistan’s first real attempt at democracy came in 1970, when Zulfikar Ali Bhutto won elections in West Pakistan while Sheikh Mujibur Rahman won in East Pakistan. The refusal to transfer power led to the creation of Bangladesh in 1971. Bhutto’s government brought economic reforms but also political suppression, leading to his overthrow and execution by General Zia-ul-Haq in 1977. After General Zia’s death (1988), Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif played a game of political musical chairs, each being dismissed twice due to corruption and political manipulation. Democracy became a façade, controlled by the establishment and judiciary.
General Musharraf’s rule (1999-2008) introduced a “controlled democracy”, while the post-2008 period saw elected governments completing terms but with deep institutional interference. The ousting of Nawaz Sharif (2017) and Imran Khan (2022) further exposed democracy’s fragility, and in recent years, a new term was introduced— “hybrid regime”. Pakistan’s democracy has always been a puppet show, where real power lies elsewhere. Votes matter, but only within limits set by non-democratic forces. The system survives, but the question remains: Is it truly democracy or just a well-disguised illusion of it?
Democracy brings freedom, accountability, and public empowerment. Pakistan’s history tells a different story of manipulation, controlled leadership, and institutional interference. Pakistan has gone through the electoral processes, the formation of parliaments, and allied democratic symbols, but it has never experienced true democracy. Pakistani political leaders either complained about the lack of power or misused it, and elite groups enjoyed the power instead of the people. Democracy, in its true form, is a system where the people hold power, where governments are accountable, and where policies are shaped for public welfare, not for personal gains.
Democracy in Pakistan has repeatedly failed, not due to the lack of elections but because of systemic flaws, institutional interference, and political immaturity. Corruption and dynastic politics has crippled democracy in Pakistan; as political parties operate like family enterprises rather than institutions promoting governance. Leaders prioritize personal gain over public service, making democracy a means to power rather than a system of accountability. Military intervention, which has toppled civilian governments through direct coups or behind-the-scenes manipulation, is considered a major hurdle, too. Since independence, the military has positioned itself as the ultimate power broker, ensuring that no civilian leadership can function independently. Another big reason is judicial complicity, where courts have often validated military takeovers and disqualified elected leaders under vague legal pretexts. The absence of strong democratic institutions and the lack of political tolerance have fueled constant power struggles. Instead of strengthening parliament, politicians rely on backdoor deals and establishment support. Moreover, media manipulation and a weak civil society fail to hold power players accountable. Ultimately, democracy in Pakistan remains a ceremonial process, where the real power lies elsewhere. In reality, democracy in Pakistan neither originates from the people, belongs to the people, nor serves the people.
In a real democracy, elected representatives govern freely, making independent decisions in the interest of the people. But in Pakistan, civilian leaders often operate under invisible pressures, with key decisions influenced or dictated by non-democratic forces. Governments come and go, but power remains in the hands of a few, not the masses. A true democracy guarantees free and fair elections, where every vote genuinely counts. But in Pakistan, RTS (2018) or Form-47 (2024) decides the fate of elections. Democracy also thrives on judicial independence, where courts uphold the constitution and protect democratic norms. However, in Pakistan, the judiciary has often sided with non-democratic forces, and instead of protecting democracy, it has at times facilitated its downfall. Freedom of speech is considered a significant pillar of democracy, allowing people and media to criticize the government without fear. But in Pakistan, censorship is routine, journalists are silenced, and speaking the truth can come at a heavy price. Instead of an open exchange of ideas, there is controlled information and suppression of dissent. Perhaps the greatest betrayal of democracy in Pakistan is the lack of accountability. In a true democracy, leaders are held responsible for corruption, incompetence, and broken promises. But in Pakistan, the powerful remain untouchable, and corruption cases are used as tools for political engineering rather than justice. It can be easily concluded that in Pakistan, we have the labels and rituals of democracy but not its essence.
To bring real democracy to Pakistan, we must go beyond symbolic elections and political rhetoric. True democracy demands free and fair elections, independent institutions, an accountable judiciary, and a strong rule of law. Citizens must actively engage in the political process with courage and patience, rejecting corrupt and dynastic politics while demanding transparent governance. The military and establishment also need to review their strategies in the context of security challenges to Pakistan, allowing elected representatives to govern the country in an accountable framework. The military’s role in Pakistan is pivotal and important, excluding politics. Freedom of speech and a strong, independent media are crucial to ensuring accountability. Most importantly, Pakistanis should vote for the country’s future, not for personalities. Blind loyalty to individuals and political dynasties has kept Pakistan in a cycle of corruption, incompetence, and instability. People should vote for policies, progress, and prosperity, not for leaders who exploit emotions for personal gain. Pakistan needs informed, responsible voters who choose leaders based on merit, vision, and national interest. If we truly want to taste real democracy, then we must vote wisely, hold leaders accountable, and resist non-democratic forces that manipulate the system for their benefit. Only then can Pakistan move towards a strong, just, and true democratic future.
