Looking for the CSS 2006 essay “Personalization of Pakistani Politics“ Cssprepforum is Pakistan’s largest community with all CSS past paper essays and CSS solved essays. Continue reading!
Tayyaba Sarwar, a student of Sir Syed Kazim Ali, has attempted the CSS 2006 essay “Personalization of Pakistani Politics” using Sir Kazim’s proven essay writing pattern and strategy. As Pakistan’s leading CSS and PMS English Essay and Precis coach, Sir Syed Kazim Ali has been the only English mentor with the highest success rate of his students in Essays and Precis for over a decade. The essay is uploaded to help other competitive aspirants learn and practice essay writing techniques and patterns to qualify for the essay paper.
Outline
1-Introduction
Although some argue that personalization injects charisma into political leadership, strengthens public mobilization, and facilitates decisive action, the personalization of Pakistani politics has in reality weakened democratic institutions, intensified political polarization, entrenched dynastic control, and undermined merit-based governance, harming the country’s overall political stability and democratic evolution.
2-Understanding the term “Personalization” in politics
3-Historical roots of personality-centered politics in Pakistan
4-Weak institutional framework and the rise of leader worship
5-Current overview of the personalization of Pakistani politics
6-Factors contributing to the negative impact of personalization in Pakistani politics
- ✓Wakening of democratic and political institutions
- Evidence: Dominance of the Bhutto and Sharif families showing loyalty to individuals over institutions, weakening democracy and accountability
- ✓Undermining good governance and meritocracy
- Evidence: During Musharraf’s regime, appointments based on loyalty rather than merit undermining good governance and institutional neutrality
- ✓Exacerbating polarization in politics
- Evidence: During Imran Khan’s tenure, rivalries between leaders like Imran Khan and Nawaz Sharif deepening divisions, fueling political polarization and weakening national unity
- ✓Promoting dynastic politics
- Evidence: The Bhutto family dominating the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) for decades, with leadership passing from Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto to Benazir Bhutto and later to her son Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, reflecting the persistence of dynastic control
- ✓Focusing on personalities in electoral campaigns
- Evidence: Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) is centered around Nawaz Sharif while the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) is built around Imran Khan.
- ✓Eroding party ideology and internal democracy
- Evidence: PILDAT (2023) and Gallup Pakistan (2022) reveal that party leadership in Pakistan is inherited, and that most citizens identify parties by their leaders’ names, indicating the erosion of ideology and internal democracy.
- ✓Demonstrating authoritarian tendencies
- Evidence: General Zia-ul-Haq’s regime, exemplifying authoritarian tendencies
7-On what ground do the opponents argue that personalization has positively influenced Pakistani politics?
- ✓Counterargument: Personalization brings strong leadership, unity, and effective decision-making in politics.
- Refutation: Strong leadership based on personality often weakens institutions, concentrates power, and discourages collective decision-making, harming democratic governance.
- ✓Counterargument: Personalization in politics allows leaders to gain international attention, which strengthens diplomatic leverage.
- Refutation: Excessive reliance on a single leader for international recognition is fundamentally unstable as changes in leadership or personal controversies can compromise a country’s diplomatic credibility.
8-Solutions to overcome the negative influence of personalization in Pakistani politics
- ✓To strengthen institutions
- ✓To promote merit-based leadership
9-Conclusion
The trajectory of Pakistan’s political development has long been shaped not by the strength of its institutions but by the dominance of influential personalities who command public loyalty and shape national discourse. While proponents argue that charismatic leaders galvanize public support, create political unity, and drive policy decisively, such personalization has historically produced more harm than benefit within Pakistan’s fragile democratic framework. Instead of strengthening democracy, personality-driven politics has marginalized institutions, discouraged merit-based leadership, and fostered entrenched political divisions. From dynastic party structures to centralized decision-making, the state’s political landscape has repeatedly revolved around individuals rather than systems, resulting in weak democratic consolidation and inconsistent governance. Moreover, the public’s emotional investment in individual leaders has deepened polarization, disrupted continuity in policymaking, and impeded the development of a stable political culture. Consequently, the overemphasis on personalities has not only eroded internal party democracy but also undermined institutional checks and balances essential for responsive and accountable governance. This essay argues that the personalization of Pakistani politics has adversely affected the country’s political stability, democratic development, and institutional integrity.
Before presenting the current overview, it is essential to define the concept of political personalization. It refers to a system where political authority is concentrated in an individual rather than in institutions or political parties. In such a system, personality-driven leaders dominate decision-making, and political power revolves around a single figure. From feudal lords and religious scholars to military rulers and dynastic politicians, personalization has remained a deep-rooted phenomenon that centralizes authority in individuals and undermines the democratic framework of the state. Consequently, supporters often prioritize their leaders’ narratives over institutions’ policies. This excessive focus on individual personalities reshapes political loyalty and public opinion, making them dependent on the leader’s image rather than on their actual performance or governance.
Moving towards a historical perspective on personalization in Pakistani politics, the roots of personality-driven politics can be traced to the colonial and post-independence periods. Under British rule, political focus was often on charismatic personalities rather than institutions, fostering leader-centered politics. Similarly, the charismatic personality of Muhammad Ali Jinnah reinforced the emphasis on individuals, setting a precedent for personality-centered politics. After independence, weak political institutions and repeated military interventions further intensified reliance on single personalities. During Ayub Khan’s military regime, Pakistani politics was marked by personalization and the concentration of power in his hands. He bypassed democratic institutions and used the basic democratic system to strengthen his personal authority rather than strengthening institutions. Likewise, Zia-ul-Haq and Pervez Musharraf reinforced this trend by prioritizing individual authority over democratic norms. Dynastic politics in major parties like the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) and Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) further entrenched the notion of leader-centered politics. Consequently, Pakistani politics has historically emphasized individual leaders over institutional strength.
Furthermore, Pakistan’s weak institutional framework has significantly contributed to the rise of leader-centric politics. Political, legal, and administrative institutions lack proper accountability and independence, which reinforces the dominance of individual leaders. Consequently, these institutions often follow rules set by powerful personalities, prioritizing personal interests over collective governance. In addition, public perception of corruption or ineffectiveness in existing institutions further enables charismatic leaders to present themselves as the sole solution. Further, consolidated power allows leaders to suppress dissent and marginalize other political actors, cementing their dominance. For example, regulatory and accountability bodies, intended to ensure transparency, often act in favor of those in power, targeting political opponents while overlooking the misconduct of allied leaders. Such practices undermine public confidence in the system and weaken the rule of law, further entrenching leader-centric politics and impeding the development of democratic norms and independent institutions.
Currently, Pakistani politics has become highly personalized, with powerful leaders controlling most political activities. Strong personalities dominate major political parties. People blindly follow their favorite leaders, inspired only by their personalities. Moreover, the absence of policy debates in political forums and in parliament has contributed significantly to the rise of leader-centric politics. In Pakistan, most discussions revolve around personalities, with little consideration for the development of ordinary people. Furthermore, the emergence of social media has played a pivotal role in exacerbating personalization in Pakistani politics. Lastly, social media platforms like Twitter and Instagram are used to promote leaders’ personalities positively. Thus, people tend to be inspired emotionally rather than through logical reasoning.
To understand the negative impact of personalization in Pakistani politics, it is important to examine the factors contributing to it. First, personalization in Pakistani politics weakens both democratic and political institutions. Parliament, a key democratic institution, often focuses on individuals rather than on policies, undermining legislative effectiveness. Similarly, institutions, such as the judiciary and the Election Commission, are influenced by personal loyalties, compromising their neutrality. Political parties also tend to revolve around a single leader rather than a shared vision or coherent policies, leading to bureaucracy and governance that prioritize the leader’s interests and short-term agendas over long-term national priorities. For instance, the dominance of the Bhutto and Sharif families demonstrates loyalty to individuals rather than institutions, weakening both democracy and accountability. The dominance of these families exacerbates a leader-centric political culture and undermines institutions. Thus, democracy becomes symbolic rather than functional, and political institutions become weaker.
Similarly, governance is affected when decision-making is centralized in the hands of a few individuals. This fosters favoritism and nepotism, undermining the principles of meritocracy. As a result, appointments to key positions are made based on personal preference rather than merit. For example, during Musharraf’s regime, loyalty-based appointments, instead of competence, undermined good governance and institutional neutrality. This exacerbated the neglect of public interests, led to a decline in public trust, and left ordinary citizens feeling deprived of equal opportunities. It also led to widespread inefficiency in education, healthcare, and economic management, resulting in rising unemployment, brain drain, corruption, and a lack of accountability in public institutions. Thus, policy decisions are shaped by individual preferences rather than institutional consensus, resulting in inconsistent governance in Pakistan.
Furthermore, another pivotal factor that contributes to personalization in Pakistani politics is political polarization. The public often follows their preferred leaders uncritically while showing rivalry toward other leaders, and supporters of opposing leaders tend to engage in disputes among themselves. As a result, political competition turns into personal rivalry rather than policy debates. This leader-centric culture weakens democratic institutions and diverts public focus from principles to political figures. For instance, during Imran Khan’s tenure, rivalries between leaders, such as Imran Khan and Nawaz Sharif, deepened divisions, fueling political polarization and weakening national unity. The situation is further exacerbated by social media, where supporters of opposing parties frequently attack each other’s leaders and post abusive comments. Therefore, personalization in Pakistan’s politics deeply divides society, leading to intolerance and political instability.
Additionally, dynastic politics in Pakistan aggravate personalization in politics. Many prominent political parties are controlled by families where leadership is passed down through generations. This dynastic structure strengthens personalization by constraining the emergence of new leaders. Leader-focused political systems tend to privilege the kin of established politicians, allowing them to secure high-ranking positions without merit. In Pakistan, the Bhutto family has dominated the Pakistan People’s Party for decades, with leadership passing from Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto to Benazir Bhutto and then to her son Bilawal Bhutto Zardari. Leadership remains within the Bhutto family, demonstrating how power concentrates in one family rather than being based on merit. Thus, personalization in Pakistan’s politics fosters dynastic politics and undermines merit-based leadership, limiting opportunities for new leaders.
Moving further, electoral campaigns in Pakistan often revolve around individual personalities rather than political ideologies. Political parties tend to promote the personal appeal of figures like Imran Khan and Nawaz Sharif instead of focusing on manifestos or governance plans. This trend weakens issue-based politics and encourages voters to make choices based on emotions, loyalty, or family legacy rather than a critical examination of political programs and achievements. Similarly, the media, especially social media, plays a pivotal role in glamorizing political leaders. For instance, the 2018 general elections largely revolved around Imran Khan’s personal image as an anti-corruption figure while the PTI’s policy agenda received less public attention. This excessive focus on personalities overshadows party ideology and issue-based debates. Thus, leader-centered politics has negatively affected electoral campaigns by shifting the focus from party manifestos to leaders’ personal charisma.
Similarly, personalization in Pakistani politics has eroded party ideology and weakened internal democracy. Political parties often revolve around charismatic leaders, prioritizing loyalty to them over ideology, leading to political inconsistency and a lack of long-term vision. Supporters frequently vote to endorse a leader’s personality rather than policies. Furthermore, personalization weakens parties’ internal democracy. In Pakistan, political parties have rarely conducted internal elections fairly or in full compliance with legal provisions. According to PILDAT (2023) and Gallup Pakistan (2022), party leadership in Pakistan is inherited, and most citizens identify parties by their leaders’ names, indicating the erosion of ideology and internal democracy. Most internal elections are conducted merely as a formality, lacking proper transparency and fairness. Therefore, personalization in Pakistani politics entrenches dynastic leadership, undermines merit-based advancement, and hinders the growth of institutionalized party structures, making the country’s parties heavily dependent on individual leaders.
Lastly, a significant factor contributing to the negative impact of personalization in Pakistani politics is the demonstration of authoritarian tendencies. In this system, strict obedience to authority is enforced nationwide, and political freedoms are limited in it, with any form of dissent actively suppressed. Moreover, the country’s power is maintained through rigid rules, laws, fear, or force. And many authoritarian regimes restrict its free speech, elections, and the media. For example, General Zia-ul-Haq ruled the country for more than 11 years, like a true autocratic ruler. He banned political parties and their activities by using the name of Islam, and elections were conducted in 1985 after seven years of martial law on a non-party basis. In Pakistan’s authoritarian regime, a single person has absolute power and makes decisions unilaterally, without input from others. Therefore, the personalization of politics in Pakistan demonstrates authoritarian tendencies, concentrating its power in the hands of individual leaders.
However, contenders argue that personalization in Pakistani politics brings strong leadership, unity, and effective decision-making. A popular leader can implement reforms more effectively in the country than a fragmented party system. For example, during the 1965 war with India, Ayub Khan’s centralized leadership enabled swift military and diplomatic decisions, maintaining national stability.Nevertheless, strong leadership rooted in personality often weakens Pakistani institutions, concentrates its power, and discourages its collective decision-making, harming democratic governance. For instance, during Musharraf’s era, the judiciary was pressured to endorse executive decisions, showing how personal leadership can undermine judicial independence. Therefore, while personalization in Pakistan’s politics can enable decisive leadership and national unity, it often comes at the cost of institutional strength and democratic accountability, negatively affecting Pakistani politics.
Similarly, recognizable leaders can enhance a country’s international image and diplomacy, making it easier for the government to negotiate trade deals, alliances, and investment agreements. For instance, Benazir Bhutto, as a globally recognized figure, helped Pakistan secure international support and aid in the 1990s, leveraging her personal profile for diplomacy. Nonetheless, excessive reliance on a single leader for global recognition is inherently unstable as changes in leadership or personal controversies can undermine a country’s diplomatic credibility. For example, during Imran Khan’s tenure, Pakistan’s global image was strongly linked to his personal charisma and international popularity. His removal in 2022 led to diplomatic uncertainty. Thus, while charismatic leaders can temporarily enhance a nation’s diplomatic profile, lasting international credibility depends on strong institutions and consistent foreign policy rather than individual popularity.
In light of the above discussion, the following suggestions are proposed to address the sectors contributing to the negative impact of personalization in Pakistani politics. First, Pakistan must prioritize the empowerment of its democratic and administrative institutions so they can operate independently of individual influence. Moreover, the country must reinforce the separation of powers to prevent political actors from concentrating authority in personal networks. Additionally, Pakistan should revitalize transparent decision-making mechanisms, such as parliamentary oversight committees and public accountability forums, to curb arbitrary governance. Furthermore, it must introduce institutional reforms, including digitization, audit systems, and performance evaluations, to limit discretionary powers. Thus, when Pakistan’s institutions become stronger than personalities, the country gains consistency, continuity, and credibility, reducing the negative impact of personalization in politics.
Second, Pakistan must dismantle patronage networks that reward loyalty over competence and weaken its political culture. Moreover, the country’s political parties should adopt internal democratic procedures that prioritize qualifications, integrity, and proven performance when selecting candidates. In addition, Pakistan must protect civil service appointments from political interference so capable professionals can rise through transparent examinations and objective criteria. Likewise, the country should invest in leadership development programs that train young people in ethics, governance, and conflict resolution. Therefore, when merit becomes the foremost criterion for leadership, Pakistan strengthens its decision-making capacity and reduces the dominance of personalized politics.
In conclusion, personalization in Pakistani politics has deeply undermined democratic institutions, weakened governance, and fostered polarization. Moreover, excessive reliance on charismatic leaders has shifted the political focus from policies to personalities, limiting institutional growth and accountability. Furthermore, dynastic politics, centralized decision-making, and authoritarian tendencies have entrenched this system, preventing the emergence of merit-based leadership. However, Pakistan can counter these challenges by strengthening institutions, promoting internal party democracy, and ensuring transparent, merit-driven governance. Thus, when institutions are stronger than individuals, Pakistan can achieve political stability, uphold democratic norms, and foster sustainable national progress.
CSS 2006 Solved Essays!
Interested in learning all the CSS 2006 Solved Essays? Click on any to continue reading. Each essay is meticulously attempted by Sir Syed Kazim Ali’s students, who have either qualified for CSS or PMS or secured the highest marks in the essay paper.
| 1- Truth in Short Supply |
| 2- Liberalism |
| 3- Humour in Udru Literature |
| 4- Foreign Direct Investment in Pakistan |
| 5- Personalization of Pakistani Politics |
| 6- Global Warming |
| 7- Nuclear Weapons are ‘not Only a Great Peril, but a Great Hope’ |
| 8- Brain, like Hearts, go Where they are Appreciated |
| 9- ‘Lots of Folks confuse Bad Management with Destiny’ |
| 10- There comes a Time to put aside Principles and Do What’s Right |
| 11- ‘We grown Too Old soon and Too Late Smart’ |
| 12- ‘Every Solution breeds new Problems’ |
CSS Solved Past Papers’ Essays
Looking for the last ten years of CSS and PMS Solved Essays and want to know how Sir Kazim’s students write and score the highest marks in the essays’ papers? Then, click on the CSS Solved Essays to start reading them.
CSS Solved Essays
CSS Solved General Science & Ability Past Papers
Want to read the last ten years’ General Science & Ability Solved Past Papers to learn how to attempt them and to score high? Let’s click on the link below to read them all freely. All past papers have been solved by Miss Iqra Ali & Sir Ammar Hashmi, Pakistan’s top CSS GSA coach having the highest score of their students.
