sham democracy

 A political system that claims it is democratic without really being democratic is referred to as sham democracy. Is it possible to call what's happening in the nation now a democratic process when it looks like this? People from the general public probably have no idea what democracy is. They only believe that because of this, they are entitled to all the privileges owed to them.

Democracy is Pakistan's bedrock value, yet military rulers have run the country for more than half its existence. The remainder of the lives of the civilian government is spent working on the contents of Washington, DC, and the army of the establishment. The failure of democracy, which is costing us a lot of money these days, is typically the product of failed talks between civilian governments and established institutions like the army and the establishment.

With the approval of Quaid e Azam and thanks to the British Parliament Act of 1935, we were able to establish a parliamentary system modelled after that of the United Kingdom. After we gained our independence, it took us another nine years of vicious internecine conflict before we could finally create our own Basic Law and constitution in 1956. We were provided with a constitution that was not very strong, and it was provided to those whose political leadership was in chaos at the time. In 1958, shortly after the first two years had passed, Ayub Khan instituted a state of martial rule. In addition, the original constitution was overturned, and a new one was drafted and implemented in 1962. 1970 was the year when Pakistan conducted its first general elections on a nationwide scale. But after nine months of elections, the operations of the army and a conflict with India over East Pakistan led to the country's partition into two separate states.

Can we say this period is democratic?

Despite all the upheaval and setbacks, it is evident that our love affair with democracy will not end. This is because we cannot comprehend the more profound significance of democracy. In our dearly cherished country of Pakistan, we have a democracy that is flexible enough to allow the commander-in-chief (Ayub) to be appointed as the defence minister of civilian governments while also allowing a civilian politician (Bhutto) to be appointed as the administrator of martial law.

As a result of the military's engagement in a significant number of governmental activities, Pakistan's democracy is steadily falling apart. A mockery of democracy prevails in Pakistan, given that the previous government of Imran Khan granted General Bajwa an additional three years in office and that General Kiyani was granted an identical extension by the government of Gillani. The government leaders are nothing more than stooges for the army, which is Pakistan's primary power source. The military is so deeply embedded in civilian life that nothing can occur without receiving approval from the army. They can overthrow any government anytime they want. It should come as no surprise that the military can do anything. They are fearless in using the country's money or resources to advance their agenda. The national debt has reached an all-time high of 63 trillion dollars, but the government has no plans to address the issue. The nation is heading in the direction of defaulting on its obligations. The whole system turned into an exploitative one merely because of these people's actions.

The media is beating out a steady beat with no rhythm, and they have no desire to calm the problems, although political leaders are engaged in a power struggle. Those who speak out for the development of Pakistan and to educate the general population about the truth are silenced. The judicial system is reluctant to intervene when resolving political conflicts.

What kind of a future is in store for a democracy that doesn't even have a history? After decades of labour, Western nations have been instrumental in establishing democracy in other parts of the world. This is why democracies in the West have been so successful and are now in a stronger position. The citizens there are making the most of their rights and are happy with their way of life.

On the other hand, there is no economic, social, or political progression toward democracy. That is the reason why we engage in extraction. The instructions that come from Washington are the ones that ultimately stand, and the house of the COAS is the most powerful in Pakistan. No political leadership is in place capable of operating independently and bringing advantages to the nation. There are leaders in our world whose only motivation is to amass power and wealth for themselves. Most of our political leaders have been labelled by foreign media as being among the most corrupt politicians in the world.

Where will we go from this?

There has been a failure of administration in Pakistan for seventy-five years because of a craving for power or political leaders, corruption, ignorance, and an inability to comprehend what colonisation did to us and our society.

What we are seeing now in Pakistan is just a vacuum, along with the expectation of improved political leadership, the elimination of the military's role in the state's decision-making process, increased economic growth, and more effective policy-making.