Pakistan is Suffering from Crisis of Governance at Institutional Level. Suggest Remedies to Mitigate this Situation?

PMS 2025 Solved Pakistan Studies Past Papers | Crisis of Governance at Institutional Level in Pakistan

The following question of PMS Pakistan Studies 2025 is solved by Miss Iqra Ali on the guided pattern of Sir Syed Kazim Ali, which he taught to his students, scoring the highest marks in compulsory subjects for years. This solved past paper question is uploaded to help aspirants understand how to crack a topic or question, how to write relevantly, what coherence is, and how to include and connect ideas, opinions, and suggestions to score the maximum.

Question Breakdown

In this question, the examiner has asked you to suggest remedies to mitigate the governance crisis in Pakistan. Therefore, most of the focus of your answer will remain on the leading part. However, you need to contextualize the issue separately, as well as along with each remedy part you are going to discuss. Contextualization helps build coherence and nexus in your answer. Besides, the answer will follow the same structured pattern: Introduction, body Paragraphs, and conclusion. Try to examine the issue through an analytical lens and provide analysis-driven answers.

Outline

1- Introduction

2- Understanding the link between Governance and Institutions

3- Tracing the Genesis of the Crisis: Institutional Segregation and Structural Flaws

4- How Pakistan Can Deal Pragmatically with the Crisis of Governance by Reforming Institutions at Different Levels with a Multi-pronged Strategy?

• 4.1  At the Institutional Level
  • ✓ By Bridging the Gap between Civil Society Structure and Societal Expectations
  • ✓ By Reforming Institutional Structure through State-Centric Solutions
• 4.2  At Political Level
  • ✓ By Limiting the Active Role of Establishment in Civil Institutions
  • ✓ By Encouraging Merit-based Allocations rather than Kinship-based Nexus
• 4.3  At Constitutional Level
  • ✓ By Providing Constitutional Limits to Military Inclusion
  • ✓ By Strengthening Constitutional Safeguards at the Grass-Root Level
• 4.4  At Financial Level
  • ✓ By Limiting the Role of Milbus in Civil Institutions
  • ✓ By Equipping Institutions through Financial Means

5- Are only Reforms Required to mitigate or a Structural Change?

6- Conclusion

Answer to the Question

Introduction

A crisis of governance at the social, political, or institutional level automatically engulfs the whole system. It holds the standing of a Tsunami that travels within the system and does not stop until it reaches the utmost point of destruction. Governance is not an abstract force but an output of the state’s institutions, whereas a crisis of governance reflects the failure of the institutions. Likewise, in the case of Pakistan, the country is suffering from a crisis of governance at the institutional level. Therefore, reforms are required at the institutional, political, constitutional, and financial levels while using a multi-pronged strategy. At the institutional level, it can be facilitated by bridging the gap between civil society structure and societal expectations and reforming institutional structure through state-centric solutions. At the political level, limiting the active role of the establishment in civil institutions and encouraging merit-based allocations rather than a kinship-based nexus helps navigate and mitigate the roots of the crisis. At the constitutional level, providing constitutional limits to military inclusion and strengthening constitutional safeguards at the grassroots level support the implementation of reforms. Besides, at the financial level, limiting the role of Milbus in civil institutions and equipping institutions through financial means acts as a catalyst that speeds up the enforcement of reforms.

Understanding the link between Governance and Institutions  

Historically, the concept of the state has evolved around governance. As Max Weber argued, in his lecture “Politik als Beruf” (Politics as a Vocation) delivered at Munich University in January 1919, the state’s legitimacy rests on its effective exercise of authority. Governance is not an abstract force but an output of the state’s institutions, whereas a crisis of governance reflects the failure of the institutions. Comprehensively, a state governs through institutions. It involves both civil and non-civilian institutions at every level of society, built to exercise the legitimate authority of the state. Institutional decay initiates a vicious cycle of crisis of governance reflected in the form of rampant corruption, political instability, governance ineffectiveness, regulatory failures, declined rule of law, and economic downfall, and ultimately leads to state failure. To conclude, a state-centric solution is required, i.e., a combination of structural changes and reforms that align with modern as well as the system’s requirements.

Tracing the Genesis of the Crisis: Institutional Segregation and Structural Flaws

As far as the case of Pakistan is concerned, the country inherited the issues related to governance. For that reason, some scholars, such as Anatol Lieven, called it a Hard Country. The areas inherited through the Redcliff Award-led boundary demarcation in 1947 were not only ethnically diverse populations, but their governance models were also varied. For example, tribal domination was the dominant feature of Baluchistan, Sindh, and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa with highly authoritative tendencies. However, the Jirga system prevailed in Punjab. Adding more, the former encountered acute financial disparities while Punjab, being the agricultural hotspot, was being developed. The creation of Pakistan led to the inclusion of these habitually independent power-exercising units into one state where state-led institutions govern them under a standard structure. However, the country prioritized adjustment, combining a hybrid model of governance to facilitate survival. As a result, survival remained a leading feature of the state’s institutions, whereas development lagged behind that demanded unity. As Ishrat Hussain aptly described in his book Governing the Ungovernable, the culture of patron-client in public affairs is sustained by kinship obligations, whereas civil society is dualistic in nature and divided along two principal tracks: indigenous (Islamized) and modern. Adding more formal organizational culture expectations contradicts the prevalent socio-cultural norms. Apart from this, the inherent security concerns, particularly the India factor, gave the military an exclusive position in the state leadership. The position is often exploited for personal gains, leading to military periodic interruptions in politics. As a result, civil institutions often remained on bad terms with the military, depicting institutional fragmentation.

How Pakistan Can Deal Pragmatically with the Crisis of Governance by Reforming Institutions at Different Levels with a Multi-pronged Strategy?

The country needs to pragmatically deal with the crisis by reforming its institutions at the institutional, political, constitutional, and financial levels. Targeting all levels can help create a multi-pronged strategy that leaves little vacuum for the deterrents to escape. It is indispensable to mention the facts explored by Ishrat Hussain, written in the book Governing the Ungovernable, the prevalent social and cultural norms in Pakistani society also pose a powerful deterrent to reforms, especially in the area of economic governance. Therefore, the governance structure needs to be reformed, considering case-specific criteria.

At the Institutional Level

• ✓ By Bridging the Gap between Civil Society Structure and Societal Expectations

As discussed earlier, the lingering gap between civil society structure and societal expectations needed to be reformed at the institutional level. Bridging the gap needs a long-term strategy in the context of Pakistan because the patron-client culture sustains nepotism and reduces meritocracy. At the same time, the prevalent norms pose a powerful deterrent to reforms. Formal organizations are driven by evidence, due process, neutrality, and ethics, while nepotism restricts the adoption of such principles. Delinking the patron-client nexus demands long-term reforms at the social level, so encouraging merit-based recruitments is the key to tackling this. In this case, even if nepotism prevails, the selection process must follow merit and encourage talent. In the short term, it can be proven beneficial despite having disparities. In the long term, delinking the nexus through encouraging education and reducing financial disparities can help mitigate the crisis. In the context of Pakistan, a nexus with the upper hierarchy helps small shareholders or opportunists to get the position they want. Financial disparities enable upper-class individuals to create a nexus with the lower classes via financial means.

• ✓ By Reforming Institutional Structure through State-Centric Solutions

Adding to the previous, reforming the delinked institutional structure through state-centric solutions is the key to ensuring good governance. It is indispensable to understand that a standard institutional framework cannot work in the existing system. The federating units do not have the same standing in terms of finances, social structure, and development. Besides, most of the units remain accustomed to enjoying independent power. Both short and long-term solutions must be devised to dilute the intensity of the issues. For example, if patron-client culture goes with the inclusion of meritocracy, deterrence to reforms can be mitigated because the social structure remains the same. With the passage of time, meritocracy replaces nepotism because development dilutes narrow-mindedness. Next, the institutions must show success if meritocracy is applied in terms of achieving development goals. For long-term solutions, dilution of the patron-client system is indispensable at the political level via a transparent electoral process, increasing awareness, equipping the young generation, promoting education, and reducing disparities in the existing system.

At Political Level

• ✓ By Limiting the Active Role of Establishment in Civil Institutions

For good governance, policy consistency is indispensable. Unfortunately, in the case of Pakistan, repeated military interventions distorted civilian supremacy, leading to recurrent interventions in the legal elective mandates and the enforcement of martial laws. The establishment has long taken control of several civilian institutions and influenced policy-making that favours them. Milbus, a term used by Ayesha Jalal in his book Military Incl. Inside Pakistan, the military economy plays an active role in facilitating the military’s role in civilian institutions. For illustration, the military intervened four times in the politics of Pakistan, leading to martial laws, of which one lasted for a decade. The repercussions of this democratic pause run beyond a mere interruption. The civilian supremacy is often challenged, leaving a fear of the overthrow of their legal mandate in the minds of civil leaders. The fear led to the sustenance of nepotism and kinship ties in active politics. As far as limiting the role of the military in active politics is concerned, mandate completion is required, which is not an evident case in the history of Pakistan.

• ✓ By Encouraging Merit-based Allocations rather Kinship-based Nexus

Adding to the previous, mandate completion requires the presence of competent leadership. In the case of Pakistan, kinship-based nexus from the grassroots level to the upper hierarchy supports majority availability, i.e., it is inevitable to attain the premiership in a democratic country. However, it reduces the prospects of the presence of competent leadership in mainstream politics. According to Ishrat Hussain, as he writes in the book Governing the Ungovernable, merit-based allocations from the grassroots level dilute the nexus made from kinship ties and ensure democratic governance.

At Constitutional Level

• ✓ By Providing Constitutional Limits to Military Inclusion

As far as military governance is concerned, military governance undertook economic reforms that yielded tangible benefits, but policy gains were reversed after the transition to democracy. Military inclusion in politics still needs the help of that nexus to legitimize their role, as in the case of Ayub Khan and Mussharaf era. They seek help or are allied to confirm their mandate. The introduction of the contested Article 58 2(b) by the 17th Amendment in the Constitution of 1973 has long facilitated the authoritarian rule of the military. However, the 18th Amendment in 2010 abolished it, providing safeguards to civilian supremacy. For fifteen years, these constitutional safeguards successfully prohibited the direct indulgence of the military in mainstream politics, but indirect standing remained evident. The year marked the alteration in this prohibition through the twenty-sixth Constitutional Amendment in the Constitution of 1973 that narrowed parliamentary supremacy. Learning from history, limiting the active role of the military in decision-making through constitutional safeguards is indispensable to mitigating the crisis of governance.

• ✓ By Strengthening Constitutional Safeguards at the Grass-Root Level

Besides, the security aspect needed to be strengthened at the grassroots level because insecurity gives an edge to military inclusion. The military’s exclusive position is contingent upon security concerns. It ensures state survival in the face of both internal security concerns and multi-border insecurity issues. It is evident in the case of Pakistan that policy inconsistency and poor governance of the marginalized, insecure hotspots are the leading factors that have limited the country’s performance in tackling terrorism. So, law-making for security agencies and ensuring law and order at the grassroots level help mitigate the crisis of governance. However, its proper implementation is the case that must be taken into consideration.  

At Financial Level

• ✓ By Limiting the Role of Milbus in Civil Institutions

The crisis of governance emerges from nepotism, corruption, and bribery- all of which are contingent on the flow of money in the institutions. Milbus is associated with the money the army has, which they often use to buy the allegiance of the elected officials. It plays a vibrant role in the overthrow of the elected officials and influences judicial decisions. This economic standing of the military is much attributed to the bandwagoning series in the political history of Pakistan. Therefore, it is required to limit the role of Milbus in civil institutions by increasing meritocracy. Besides, it is indispensable to ensure accountability of the institutions where Milbus grows. Ensuring financial autonomy to the marginalized and underdeveloped federating units holds significance because money plays a pivotal role in building kinship nepotism.

• ✓ By Equipping Institutions through Financial Means

Adding more, allocating financial resources to increase human development, particularly to the underdeveloped federating units, can help reduce the flow of Milbus. Then, it is evident that prosperity reduces narrow-mindedness and promotes meritocracy. In the case of Pakistan, grievances of the marginalized sectors of society play a role in increasing violent nationalism, sectarianism, militancy, terrorism, and kinship nepotism. So, if the state equips the social institutions through fiscal decentralization, it can prove a turning point by increasing trust in the state and reducing the requirement of taking money from wrong means.

Are only Reforms Required to Mitigate or a Structural Change?

In an analysis of the existing and past situation of Pakistan, it is evident that the governance structure has flaws alongside its intrinsic standing on the point that only survival is inevitable, rather than development. However, in the emerging world scenario, only survival capacity with inherent structural flaws does not hold pragmatism. Thus, a state-centric solution is required, i.e., a combination of structural changes and reforms align with modern as well as the system’s requirements. Adding more short-term solutions, if analyzed in the case-specific criteria, may not prove realistic, as the country needs to tackle the issue from the grassroots level. It is also obvious that such a change tests people’s patience, which is already distorted in the case of Pakistan

Conclusion

To conclude, mitigating the crisis of governance requires a holistic approach while considering state-centric solutions. Reforming the system also requires structural change, while focusing on development in the current system may prove to be a bare minimum. It’s not only about state-centric solutions, as third-world countries show proximity in their social systems. Therefore, borrowing such reform strategies also works in favour if applied with the required alterations.  It is noteworthy that governance must be targeted at all levels to bring desired results. Thus, creating new provinces can be considered while considering the standing of violent nationalism that exists in Pakistan. 

PMS 2025 Solved Pakistan Studies

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 Pakistan’s top CSS GSA coach having the highest score of their students.

General Science & Ability Solved Past Papers