Pakistan’s political landscape is a tapestry woven with threads of military interventions, dynastic rule, judicial complicity in undemocratic governance, and a persistent struggle—particularly for democratic consolidation and the protection of people’s rights.

But why has Pakistan even after 75 years failed to establish a truly democratic system? Why do the same patterns of governance continue to undermine the aspirations of its people?

A colonial legacy and the trichotomy of power

Pakistan inherited a political structure dominated by colonial bureaucracy, with political parties that were either non-existent or lacked strong leadership at the time of independence.

This void allowed the military and civil bureaucracy (judiciary included), trained in colonial traditions and governance, to assert themselves from 1951 onwards as the dominant force in national decision-making. Why did this colonial mindset persist, and why were political institutions unable to reclaim their rightful space?

The answer lies in the nature of power consolidation—where generals, bureaucrats/judges, and a select selection of political elite formed a trichotomy that systematically excluded the people from governance.

Are Pakistan’s political parties genuine representatives of people?

On the surface, Pakistan appears to have a multi-party system with prominent players like the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), and Pakistan People’s Party (PPP). However, a deeper analysis reveals that these entities function more like family-run enterprises or personality cults rather than democratic institutions.

Why is it the case? The Bhutto and now Zardari family’s dominance in PPP, the Sharif dynasty in PML-N, and Imran Khan’s undisputed control over PTI exemplify a system where leadership is inherited or individually controlled rather than merit-based. Such a structure prioritizes loyalty over competence, fostering patronage networks that weaken institutional governance.

Many of their supporters argue that the establishment (comprising the military, intelligence agencies, and status-quo-driven forces and groups) does not allow these political parties to function independently. While there may be some truth to this claim, a more pressing question emerges: are these so-called political parties truly........

© Business Recorder