Governance Issues in Pakistan
Pakistan has been facing governance crisis for the past many decades. Governance issues in Pakistan include legislative, political, economic, financial and administrative ones.
Administrative Governance
1. Good Governance is not mere Management
People at the helm of affairs need to understand that good governance is more than mere management. It is not only about decision-making and policy formulation but also about priority settings, implementation and getting results. Transparency, legitimacy, merit and the rule of law are the important pillars of good governance. Politicians and other state officials make illegal appointments in various public offices. They could appoint inept people without merit on political grounds, for the sake of money, favouritism and nepotism.
2. Individuals or Institutions?
“Without strong watchdog institutions, impunity becomes the very foundation upon which systems of corruption are built.”
Rigoberta Menchu Tum, Nobel Laureate
Good governance comes through strong and independent institutions of the state. These institutions need to be built, sustained and got to be stronger than individuals. Unfortunately, little effort has been made to build institutions on a stable footing in Pakistan since independence. And individuals have taken precedence over institutions. Pakistan is faced with a number of crisis. But the crisis of good governance is on top because it is the core of all other problems. Our country is suffering from various maladies like weak institutional setup, political instability, rampant corruption, lack of accountability and transparency and bad law and order situation. All these issues have seriously pushed off the country to an abysmal state of poor governance.
3. Current Scenario and Media Findings about Administrative Governance
The state of the administration has been extensively scrutinised by the judiciary, civil society and the media over the past several years. And much has been found that is unforgivable and which ordinary citizens don’t like. The main areas of concern are favouritism, huge scales of wages to officials chosen for jobs in autonomous corporations and public limited companies, disregard for the rules and regulations while taking decisions — especially those involving financial transactions, circumvention of accountability processes and a general contempt for the rights and privileges of the people with low-income.
4. Role of Public Service Commissions
One of the main reasons for this sorry state of affairs is the apparent decline of the institution of the Public Service Commission. In the past, the Federal Public Service Commission (and the provincial commissions) enjoyed the services of highly-qualified persons of integrity and such persons may still be there. But the general impression is that public service commissions are used by the political authorities to accommodate the chosen ones from amongst the retired civil and military officers. Besides, the reports prepared by the commissions on the quality of human material and the standard of education and training available in the country are not given the attention they deserve. It would not be a bad idea to place the report of each public service commission on the table of the relevant legislature and reserve some time for a debate on it.
The key to good administration is putting the right person on the right job, which is easier said than done. Very often rumours are heard about the civil service reforms but nothing has been promulgated and implemented so far. In Pakistan, the principle of “right man on the right job” is shown little respect. It is decades since the Cornelius Commission identified the discretionary powers of the decision-makers as the principal cause of inefficiency and corruption, and the finding is still valid. The entire service structure is in need of reform. Enforcement of the rule of merit in matters of postings, transfers and promotions could cure the administration of many of its chronic ailments.
5. Need for Honesty but Efficiency Also
Sometimes, great emphasis is placed on civil servants’ austere habits and honesty but, while these qualities do give an edge to the value of one’s work, they are no substitute for efficiency. Pakistan needs public servants in all areas of state employment who are both efficient and honest.
Political Governance
1. Good Governance and Equal Distribution of Resources
Merit or fairness is essential for good governance and the both support each other. But in our country merit is given least importance. Nepotism and favouritism are the order of the day. Our once very strong institutions like PIA, Pakistan Railways, Pakistan Steel, etc. are now in state of paralysis. All the cities in any province are not getting equal share of development. Developing one city in any province at the cost of basic facilities like hospitals schools and colleges, clean drinking water, etc. of the other cities is another example of bad governance. One city gets the road network, underpasses and overhead bridges and the others don’t have even the basic road network. This disparity has created resentment among people living in small cities. Similarly, unemployment, illiteracy are other under-invested areas which speak volume about sorry state of governance.
2. Poverty Alleviation Programmes need Good Governance
Good Governance stands for poverty alleviation as well. It has always been a favourite buzzword in Pakistan’s economic and social development circles. Almost every government has launched poverty reduction programmes but all proved futile and ended in corruption. Accountability is a crucial point in good governance – the rulers and the institutions of the state are accountable to people. But, it is very hard to find it in Pakistan’s weak institutional setup. Prime Minister Imran Khan launched the Ehsaas Programme to alleviate poverty from Pakistan. There is no doubt that Ehsaas Programme played significant role in dispensing funds to deserving people during the lockdown caused by Covid-19 pandemic. However, transparency, efficiency and good governance is the prerequisite to achieve any sustainable results of programs like Ehsaas.
3. The Paradox of De-politicisation of Police
Police reforms is what the prime minister had built his governance style on in KP, and rightly so, because improving police performance has a maximum beneficial impact on the lives of the common man. One was hoping that in the presence of an individual who had fixed the KP police recently and who is aware of the realities of Punjab having served in the province for 30 years, the task would be doable. What went wrong?
The lynchpin of the reforms carried out in KP was to give all powers of postings and transfers and reward and punishment to the IG. That is how it should be in all departments, especially in a uniformed force. The army is as effective as it is because no politician can interfere in its internal working. This proposed independence has not found favour with the MPAs/ MNAs in Punjab or with coalition partners. But then, that was to be expected.
Economic Governance
1. Backdrop of Pakistan’s Economic Governance
Pakistan was one of the top 10 economic performers among the developing countries in the world during the first 40 years of its life. Given its life very weak economic base at the time of independence in 1947, and a tumultuous period of nation-building marked by continuing political instability in the aftermath of the death of its founder, Pakistan’s record of achievements in its first four decades was impressive.
The emergence of a populist political regime that indulged in a massive nationalization of private assets in the 1970s accompanied by an external shock of major oil price increases gave a big blow to business confidence and contributed to the dislocation of the economy. Close involvement with the United States to oust the Soviet Union from Afghanistan in the 1980s and the associated fallout—including the spread of sectarian violence, drugs and Kalashnikovs—shook the social fabric of the country. Despite these and many other challenges, internal and external, Pakistan was able to register a 6 percent average annual growth rate during the first 40 years of its existence. In fact, Pakistan was ahead of India and Bangladesh in all economic and social indicators.
Since 1990, however, the country has fallen behind its neighbouring countries and has had a decline in the growth rate from 6.5 percent to 4.5 percent. This period has featured both booms and busts. The booms-have been short-lived and could not be sustained over extended periods of time. Political instability and frequent changes in governments in the 1990s may have created uncertainty for investors, thus slowing down the pace of economic activity. While there has been a smooth and orderly transition of power from one elected government to another twice since 2008, economic and social indicators have not shown much improvement.
2. The Co-relation between Good Governance and Economic Growth
Available evidence across countries suggests a positive relationship between good governance and economic growth. A World Bank study found a high correlation between governance quality and per capita income. Better maintenance of the rule of law and political stability affect economic growth. The rule of law indicator is positively and significantly correlated with the growth in per capita incomes of the poorest quintile. Political stability and rule of law exhibit negative and significant relation with inequality as measured by the Gini co-efficient. World Bank analysis concludes that rule of law and accountability were both positively correlated with growth. Some research argues that pro-poor reforms cannot have the intended impact unless there are significant changes in the institutions of governance. Cross-country studies have demonstrated that political instability, corruption, poor bureaucratic quality, absence of rule of law, and expropriation risk are strongly correlated with lower investment and growth rates.
3. New Institutional Economics
A new branch of economics, coined by Douglass North as New Institutional Economics, has identified institutional capabilities that states need to make markets function efficiently. North has defined institutions as “humanly devised constraints that structure political, economic and social interactions and include the laws, rules, customs [and] norms constructed to advance and preserve social order.” Regarding the connection between institutions and economic development, his view is as follows:
How do we account for poverty in the midst of plenty? We must create incentives for people to invest in more efficient technology, increase their skills and organize efficient markets. Such incentives are embodied in institutions.”
Other analysts demonstrate that institutions determine the fate of nations. Success comes when political and economic institutions are “inclusive” and pluralistic, creating incentives for everyone to invest in the future.
4. Why Nations Fail?
In their famous book, ‘Why Nations Fail’, Acemoglu and Robinson say that nations fail when their institutions are “extractive,” protecting the political and economic power of only a small elite that extracts income from everyone else. Institutions that promote good governance and facilitate broad-based and inclusive growth have come to occupy the current consensus on development strategy. According to one study, good institutions ensure two desirable outcomes: relatively equal access to economic opportunity (a level playing field) and the likelihood that those who provide labour or capital are appropriately rewarded and their property rights are protected.
In sum, both theoretical and cross-country empirical evidence, coupled with Pakistan’s own experience, lend a lot of weight to the argument that poor governance manifested in weak institutions is the predominant explanation for the unsatisfactory economic and social performance of Pakistan over the last few decades. The evidence to substantiate this point of view is the gradual decline in Pakistan’s ranking and score on the following indices:
Security Governance
What is Security Sector Governance? Security sector governance implies at least a basic understanding of two conjoined concepts: security and governance. Both concepts have undergone change in recent decades, particularly the notion of security. During the Cold War, analysts typically understood security in state-centric terms, which privileged militarized definitions based on a state’s ability to defend its peoples, supreme national interests and territorial borders. With the demise of the Cold War, analysts, scholars and even some policymakers increasingly argued for the need to expand the concept of security from the “level of the state to societies and individuals, and from military to non-military issues”.
Proponents of security governance increasingly focus on a state’s ability to provide security defined more broadly to include economic, social, environmental and political issues affecting both states and peoples, in addition to traditional military concerns. Turning to governance, Rosenau explains that in its most basic formulation, the concept comprises the “structures and processes whereby a social organization — from the family to corporate business to international institutions — steers itself, ranging from centralized control to self-regulation.”
Role of Police in Internal Security
Initiatives like the National Action Plan (NAP), Internal Security Policy (ISP) and National Counter Terrorism Authority (NACTA) can only help counter extremism, radicalisation, violence and terrorism with the resolve that a stringent leadership possess. And the pivotal issue which threatens peace and order is bad governance in the form of corruption, nepotism, lack of accountability, absence of the rule of law, corrupt justice system and the police which augment insecurity, anger, antagonism and frustration among people, particularly youth.
Pakistan’s police remain predominantly equipped with .303 bolt action rifles; they lack even the most basic of body armour and travel in soft-skin vehicles that are vulnerable to attack. Police stations and training facilities remain a frequent target of terrorists and most police infrastructure lacks the most elementary of hardening to protect them against such attacks. The various forces are poorly trained, often barely literate, lack even the crudest forms of forensics capability and are generally loathed by the public they ostensibly serve for their avarice and corruption.
It should be noted, however, that there have been improvements amidst this generally bleak state of affairs. Both the Punjab and KP police have increased police pay, expanded the force, equipped select units with modern light and heavy weapons, and have acquired better — yet still inadequate — ground mobility and communications equipment. The Islamabad Police have made important strides in professionalization and have won back the confidence of Islamabad’s residents. The well-paid and well-disciplined Motorway Police are respected for their integrity and professionalism, but remain exceptional within a police system mired in decrepitude.
Ostensibly, policing responsibilities in the four federal units are vested in the provincial governments and the provincial police structures act independently of each other without any national integration. The Interior Ministry does, however, exercise overall supervision.
Challenges in Pakistan’s Policing
Not only has Pakistan demurred from making the critical investments in its police forces, the state has also failed to provide a modern policing framework. Until 2002, Pakistan still operated under the Police Act of 1860 — a colonial era dispensation designed to control citizens rather than protect them. President Musharraf’s Police Order of 2002 was an important move to professionalize the police and remove them from the influence of politicians who used them to advance personal agendas. When the Parliament convened in 2002, however, it undermined some of the ordinance’s most important measures pertaining to the political neutrality of the police force. In the intervening years, Pakistan’s national and provincial assemblies, as well as the various police forces, have been unable to agree on a concept of policing for a modern state. Without this framework, there will be limits to the marginal improvements to police training, equipping and professionalization.
Bad Governance Breeds Widespread Corruption
One of the most damaging effects of bad governance is the prevalence of corruption that ultimately results in lawlessness which is the biggest hindrance in the way of development. The absence of impartial and independent accountability has resulted in the growth of this monster. Unfortunately, corruption has become a norm in society rather than an exception.
Suggestions and Recommendations
1. A Long-term Governance Reform Agenda
A long-term roadmap to achieve a better and enduring system of democratic governance would have to contain certain essential ingredients. Their pace, sequencing and implementation would depend upon a consensus among the major political parties, as the time horizon would cover several electoral cycles. No government in power can afford to take upon itself the sole responsibility to carry this forward, knowing well that there would be resistance by their opponents or that the process would be disrupted after a change in government. Partial, incomplete and half-hearted actions would not alter the course set out.
2. Legislative Governance
Implement legislative reforms geared toward improving Parliament’s ability to carry out its three core functions. These functions are:
- Drafting and passing legislation.
- Providing oversight of the government.
- Representing citizens and their interests.
Reforms should include increasing the number of working hours for parliamentarians; strengthening parliamentary committees so they can provide more robust oversight of legislation; empowering a petitions committee to take in complaints from the public; and providing more transparency by televising relevant Parliamentary deliberations more widely and giving public more information, including MPs’ voting records.
3. Reforms in the Electoral Process
First, there is a need to reform the electoral process whereby constituencies are delimited afresh on the basis of the new population census. Electoral rolls should be prepared from the new data generated through this census. The Election Commission and the Chief Election Commissioner should be given unfettered powers to organize the elections by directly taking over the administrative apparatus of the provincial and district governments. Electronic machines should be used for voting. After careful screening, candidates for the national and provincial assemblies who do not meet eligibility criteria should be disqualified by the Election Commission from contesting elections. This weeding out process would improve the quality of elected representatives.
4. Intra-party Democracy
Second, political parties should institute more democracy within. In the 1950s, for example, elections for party office-bearers were held at the grassroots level. This process has been substituted by the discretionary choices conferred upon the powerful top party leader, who selects office-bearers of the party at all levels, nominates central working committee members, and allocates party tickets for the national and provincial assemblies along with the Senate. This leader also chooses ministers for federal and provincial governments if the party gains power. Such high concentration of power in the hands of a single individual are inimical to the essence of democratic governance, which is based on debate, consultation and consensus. Hence, internal dissent has yielded to sycophancy. Moreover, merging the roles of the party chief and chief executive in a single individual has eroded the already limited accountability.
5. Parliamentary Oversight over Executive
The Parliament is supposed to provide checks and balances to counteract the excesses of the executive branch. But this is hardly the case in Pakistan. There is little legislative accountability to citizens, weak market oversight, and indifference in responsiveness to citizen demands. Parliamentary committees such as the Public Accounts Committee can, through public hearings, exert a sobering pre-emptive influence on government departments, ministries and agencies by ensuring that waste, inefficiencies and irregularities are minimized. However, the partisanship exhibited in the committees’ deliberations and the lack of technical expertise among the staff assigned to these committees have weakened their watchdog and oversight functions. Strengthening these committees would help place effective controls over the misuse of power and resources by the executive branch.
6. Good Governance and Devolution of Power
“Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” Lord Acton
The 18th amendment to the Constitution and the 7th National Finance Commission have very rightly devolved administrative, legal, and financial powers and authority from the federal to the provincial governments. However, this devolution remains incomplete. The provinces have not transferred powers and resources further down to local governments, where most of the interaction between an ordinary citizen and the government takes place. Since 2008, the powers of local governments have been assumed by provincial governments.
With the exception of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa administration, provincial governments enjoy tremendous power under newly-enacted laws, making elected local governments subservient to them. This disconnect between the wishes of provincial governments to centralize power in their own hands and the aspirations of the people to access basic public services at their doorsteps needs to be resolved. Attempts to strengthen democratic governance are bound to fail in the absence of the decentralization of decision-making, of the delegation of powers, and of the devolution of authority and de-concentration of resources.
7. Reforms in Civil Services
The administrative machinery of the civil services as a whole has broken down. Reforms in the police, administrative services, land management, the judiciary and the delivery of social services need to be undertaken to set the country in the right direction. The capacity of civil servants to remain neutral and objective, which used to be their hallmark, has to be rebuilt and their morale and motivation revitalized so that they are able to once again assume their lost space in the country’s governance structure and processes. Institutions that promote skill formation, higher education, scientific research and technology transfer have to be brought to the front burner.
a). Civil Service Reforms in ‘Naya Pakistan’
Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf’s (PTI) 2018 manifesto calling for the transformation of governance through civil service reform unleashed a flurry of opinions on what exactly Pakistan should be doing to fix the public sector.
Observers have offered their thoughts on the outdated colonial structure; the civil service’s excessive reliance on generalists, lack of tenure options, bloated size, unequal opportunities for career advancement, low salaries and housing perks, corruption, need for e-governance, primacy of the federal service over the provinces and even meta-critiques on the process of reform itself.
b). Performance Incentives for Civil Servants
The federal and provincial governments need to strengthen performance incentives within the civil service. Consider the use of financial awards (such as simple bonuses) and non-financial rewards (such as the offer of new postings) to recognize good work. Ensure that these incentives are structured appropriately, so that they are not deployed excessively, or not enough. At the same time, strengthened incentives will also require mechanisms—such as rigorous auditing processes or third party verification systems—to ensure that strong performance incentives do not create an enabling environment for bribery and other forms of corruption within the civil service.
8. Modernization of Governance Processes
Management practices in the government need to be modernized and overhauled. Over-centralization and the concentration of power in the hands of the prime minister and provincial chief ministers have resulted in diffused responsibility, an absence of clear accountability, inertia and a lack of commitment. Overly long hierarchical chains, consultation for the sake of form and procedure rather than substance, turf building and turf protection, and the tendency to pass the buck have created a big gap between promises and performance. The rules of business have to be rewritten to assign clear responsibilities to ministries, giving them the requisite authority and resources to fulfil their obligations and holding them accountable for results. Inter-ministerial coordination and conflict resolution should take place at the level of the cabinet secretary, secretaries’ committees, cabinet subcommittees, and the cabinet itself. E-government tools would help ensure transparency and the expeditious pursuit of business and coordination efforts.
9. Process of Privatization
The government may adopt a three-step process to oversee the privatization of eligible state-owned enterprises. First, corporatize them by converting them into companies. This will bring more uniformity and standardization in their legal structures. Second, commercialize these new companies by streamlining their finances and labour pool, bringing an end to their non-commercial activities, introducing modern technology, and phasing in a more commercial mind-set and culture. The third step, the actual privatization, will be easier to complete after getting through the first two steps.
10. Judicial Reforms
The dispensation of justice in Pakistan has become time-consuming, expensive, convoluted and unnecessarily layered. A backlog of millions of cases pending in the lower courts has taken away the deterrent effect of punishment for criminals, defaulters and other violators of laws. State revenues and bank loans, amounting to hundreds of billions of rupees, are held up due to litigation. Property titles and exchanges of deed have lost their sanctity because of prolonged disputes and complex processes prescribed by courts. Detection, investigation and prosecution of cases are sloppy, making conviction rates too low. The whole value chain of the administration of justice needs to be overhauled.
11. De-politicisation of Police and NAB
The civil servants, police and NAB are not fully autonomous in their decree to work. All are under severe political pressure. None of them is granted full independence, to bring the criminals to justice and inquire the cases of big guns. These are powerful institutions, which need considerable attention to de-politicise their structures. These institutions should be given functional autonomy to bring the corrupt people before the law.
12. Right to Information for Public
The federal government’s Freedom of Information Act does nothing to facilitate the flow of information into public hands. The Right to Information Act in India has played a major role in keeping public servants and political leaders on their toes, because their actions and deeds could become the object of public knowledge and thereby lead to embarrassment. Civil society organizations and the media in India have played a critical role in accessing information and data under the Act. Similarly effective legislation in Pakistan, coupled with the curtailment of the Official Secrets Act—which vitiates open government—could go a long way in ensuring transparency in government affairs. Provincial legislation, particularly in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Punjab, has sought to bring improvements. However, the requisite institutional arrangements have not yet been put in place.
13. Need for Gradual and Incremental Reforms
The government needs to emphasize gradual, incremental actions over rapid, comprehensive measures. This can be done by singling out for reform a small group of institutions. The chosen institutions should be those that, once successively reformed, can also have positive crossover and spill-over effects on other institutions. These institutions should be focused on accountability (such as the National Accountability Bureau and the Auditor General), security (such as the National Counterterrorism Agency and the Federal Investigation Agency), growth (such as the Federal Board of Revenue and the Trade Development Authority) and equity (such as the Pakistan Agriculture Research Council and urban development authorities).
14. Local Government Elections
So far, Sindh is the only province to have elected local governments in place but the provincial law does not allow them to function independently and without the approval of the provincial government, which controls the spending of most of its budget lines and functions.
In other provinces, the local government elections have been delayed due to one pretext or the other. In Punjab, the Local government Act 2019 was passed from the assembly in May 2019 and the incumbent local government dissolved. The Act stipulated that local government elections happen before May 2020. However, even administrative steps towards the holding of local government elections in the province are painfully slow. The situation in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa is also not very encouraging. Local governments in KP completed their term in August 2019 and elections should have taken place before December 2019. Similarly, the local government in Balochistan completed its term in January 2019 and the government like in other provinces is taking little effort to work to hold elections.
15. Learning from Other Countries
Pakistan should draw lessons from success stories in Pakistan and beyond. Provincial government institutions in Punjab have used technology—at relatively low expense—to strengthen capacity in disease prevention, education and anti-corruption efforts. In Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province, officials have implemented a promising local government reform plan that uses a third-party monitoring body to document gaps and failures in reform efforts. Additionally, a range of very different types of public institutions, including the National Highways and Motorway Police, the State Bank of Pakistan, Indus Hospital, and Aga Khan University— have garnered praise for their strong performance. The reasons for their success are worth studying.
Further, Bangladesh and India offer lessons in how a handful of countries have still managed to perform relatively well economically despite major institutional constraints. In both of these countries, several key factors—prolonged macroeconomic stability, the continuity of economic policies even amid political transition, and (in the case of Bangladesh) the empowerment of nongovernment organizations to help with service delivery—have all ensured relatively robust growth. Additionally, legal precedents in India provide useful guidance on what role the courts should play in cases where state-owned enterprises are being privatized.
Conclusion
Good governance is a prerequisite for social harmony, public order, political stability, economic prosperity and certainty about future. It delivers the fruit of progress and development evenly to all and sundry. Good governance is required at all levels of society and state. Government needs to focus seriously on this issue to accomplish satisfactory results. The country must not allow the erosion of institutions through the idiosyncratic behaviour of rulers. No state is free of all crises but it is the quality of governance that ensures its survival through any crisis.
Good governance is an ideal which is difficult, though not impossible, to achieve in its totality. Very few countries and societies have come close to achieving good governance in its totality. However, to ensure sustainable human development, actions must be taken to work towards this ideal with the aim of making it a reality.
