Pakistan and Its Pseudo Democracy

Following an extended period of tension, the populace headed to the polls on February 8 to cast their votes for their preferred candidates. However, Pakistan quickly found itself engaged in post-poll rigging shortly after emerging from pre-poll manipulation. As a result of the delayed and tampered results, protests and sit-ins have been erupted nationwide. The shutdown of internet and social media platforms has made it challenging for the ruling elites to manage the public outcry sparked by ubiquitous electoral irregularities. The nation’s economy, political landscape, judicial system, and societal norms are facing unprecedented challenges.

What began as bat-snatching has escalated into the curtailment of votes. The transition from the February 8 election to a selection process in the early hours of February 9 was overwhelmed by disgraceful manipulation. Esteemed publications such as The Economist, Times, The Guardian, Al Jazeera, and others have labelled the polls as fraudulent. The state has relinquished all credibility due to the actions for the selection of few influential figures. When the public loses faith in politics, the judiciary, the executive branch, and the media, nation suffers profoundly.

“For, if liberty and equality, as some persons suppose, are chiefly to be found in a democracy, they will be attained when all persons alike share in the government to the utmost.”
—Aristotle

On February 8, the prevalence of sympathy or emotional voting outweighed pragmatic considerations, resulting in a split mandate for the country. None of the parties secured even simple majority necessary to establish a stable government. The prospect of a coalition government or a hung parliament signifies a lack of civilian authority, national unity, and provincial autonomy, as well as skewed relations with neighbouring countries. The events of February 8 indicate a continuation of the challenges endured by the state over the past seven decades. The elections merely served as a prelude to the ongoing power struggle between PDM (Pakistan Democratic Movement) 1.0 and PDM 2.0, though with minor variations.

None of the party leaders appear content with the election results. Jahangir Tareen, the chief of Istehkam-e-Pakistan Party (IPP), has retired from politics, Siraj-ul-Haq has resigned as Jamaat-e-Islami’s (JI) chief, Pervez Khattak has stepped down from Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf Parliamentarians’ (PTI-P) chairmanship, and Nawaz Sharif’s hopes of securing a two-thirds majority and becoming prime minister for the fourth time have been shattered. The outcome of the polls has left Fazal-ur-Rehman in a precarious position. Imran Khan’s reluctance to engage in dialogue with mainstream political parties, Nawaz Sharif’s willingness to accept a fragile coalition government, and Fazal-ur-Rehman’s decision to sit in the opposition may all turn out to be political missteps.

The February 8 polls have reflected numerous undeniable lessons. They have demonstrated the peril of employing force, highlighted the principle of action and reaction, emphasized the significance of public opinion, reaffirmed the sanctity of the vote, and showcased the maturity of voters. Furthermore, they have depicted that only a genuinely representative mandate possesses the authority to shape the nation’s destiny. These elections have rejected the dynastic political approach and confronted the overt interference of the establishment in the politics. Voters have come to recognize that a vote is not merely a ballot but a reflection of their aspirations for education, healthcare, economic prosperity, peace, and national identity.

Pakistanis have been exhausted of compromised judiciary, subservient parliament, biased media, dynastic politics, corrupt bureaucracy, and exploitative establishment.

Political leaders in Pakistan often exhibit antagonistic behaviour towards one another, lacking the ability to forgive, engage in a dialogue, or unite for public interest. Prior to assuming power, they seek support from the establishment, only to forget their true position once in office. The establishment is a stakeholder, neither above nor below the status of other stakeholders. The primary weakness of political leaders lies in their reliance on their offspring, which only invites non democratic forces to interfere in politics.

It is regrettable that a nuclear-armed nation with a population of 240 million cannot be entrusted to the notion of inexperienced and incompetent ruling elites. Political parties must internalize democratic principles before demanding non-interference from the establishment. Either democracy must be restored or the consequences will be dire. True democracy necessitates sacrifices—of self-interest, ego, and the desire for revenge.