Authoritarianism is going with democracy in Pakistan. Being a democratic country one must not be surprised by democratic practices, one needs no arguments for a policy, practice, or regime that it is democratic but on the other hand, it is really surprising that along with democracy it is authoritarian as well. Now to understand simply there is authoritarianism where there may be in writing but not in practice free and fair election, freedom of speech, freedom of association, access to information, accountability, independence of the judiciary, and where the power holders use the state institutions for their own purposes and benefits. From its independence (1947) till now it did not practice a successful and real democratic regime. To exclude military leaders ruled by Pakistan, even democratically elected leaders instead of democratic, went on the path of authoritarianism. Because due to this they were able to get and maintain the power they were struggling for.
To go back hundreds of years in history, the region currently known as Pakistan with some other states was ruled by different rulers from different places with different backgrounds but no one practiced democracy or tried to introduce it in his regime. Because these were not in their interest and the very foundation of their regimes or dynasties and the way they came to power was undemocratic. As one rightly stated that ʺfrom the Mauryan ruler Asoka to the Mughals, all rulers have practiced authoritarianism in one way or another. Because democracy could dethrone them and decrease their power.
ʺThe British were no different they practiced their own set of authoritarianismʺ. It is beyond the discussion that how it was, but in reality, from the fear of democracy the movement for the creation of Pakistan was started. The Muslims of India were thinking that after the British rule in India from the installation of democracy, we are going to lose the power we had before and we might be oppressed because Hindus are in majority and can easily win the election.
Without considering how the history, movement, and creation was, after the independence, it was the time of deciding the future of the new state and to put it on the path in which it will go but unfortunately ʺBoth India and Pakistan inherited the colonial legacy of authoritarianismʺ. So without democracy which is the best form of government, having to be introduced in the country to go parallel with and get the support of the world, there was no alternate form. But not just to name it a democratic state but to implement democracy in each and every aspect, because it is not as simple and easy as it seems. But no one tried for real democracy.
Now political parties and democracy are complementary and supplementary to one another and are essential for a healthy democratic political system, but these parties themselves should be democratic. Internal democracy is possible through internal elections for the leadership within a political party. Now in this regard, our major political parties are undemocratic internally. Although the internal election to be held is written in their constitutions they conduct just a nominal and perfunctory election or even do not conduct it completely. That is why if we look at these parties most of them are hereditary in whichʺ personalities counted rather than ideologies or party constitutionalismʺ. It was written about the Pakistan Muslim league but the same is the case for Pakistan People’s Party, Pakistan Tehreek-E- Insaf, etc. So how an undemocratic party can bring democracy to our country?
Do we know who is an authoritarian leader? we should know. First, ʺa person who rejects in words or action, the democratic ruleʺ for example using extra-constitutional means like insurrections or mass protest forcing a change in the government and undermining the legitimacy of the election or refusing to accept the result. Second a leader who ʺdenies the legitimacy of opponentsʺ like describing them as foreign agents, criminals, and threats to the country and disqualifies them from participation in the political arena. Third a leader who ʺtolerates or encourages violenceʺ. And fourth ʺindicates a willingness to curtail the civil liberties of opponents including media ʺ support or make laws that restrict protest, criticism of the government, certain civic or political organization and take action against critics in the rival parties, civil society, or media.
To eliminate authoritarianism from our country and bring democracy we need some changes ʺcountries to change not because they have become democratic; they become democratic because they have changed ʺ. Pakistan needs reforms that can strengthen democracy through free and fair elections, freedom of speech, association, and access to information because the authoritarian government fails to hold free elections and fail to give freedoms to its citizens, independence of the judiciary, accountability, and other requisites of democracy. The political parties need to be democratic, by ensuring internal election, bottom-up policy-making, and democratic practices with norms within parties. If we did nothing in this regard then we will face the music as one wrote ʺ if authoritarian rulers are not challenged, the state becomes weak, and when the state becomes weak the people get restless, which would lead to the state collapse ʺ.
