And finally the Supreme Court spoke through its verdict by disqualifying Nawaz Sharif as prime minister in the Panama case! A larger question has now arisen that whether all the legislators who sit in the national and provincial assemblies fulfill the strictly laid down criteria in Articles 62 and 63 of the Constitution.

The fact that majority of politicians do not have documented sources of income yet enjoy the highest of lifestyles may confuse young minds -- especially those who wish to join politics -- about the question whether politics is a public service project or a vocation for self-service!

Societies and states do not function without politics, even if they claim otherwise! It is ironic to note that the domain of public life and performance that plays the most important roles in building consensus, determining national objectives, initiating vital decision-making processes related to almost every aspect of the society, is considered as the most abominable taboo to be associated with. There is a rising disregard for politicians as a reviled breed of human beings.

White-collar working class regards politics as a dangerous pursuit which has a capacity to deprive them of their routine livelihoods. Blue-collared proletariat usually considers politics as a game of the rich that cannot be played by the poor. Old time bureaucrats, trained in Victorian traditions, regard politicians as eternal harbingers of corruption. Personnel of armed forces, especially the higher ranks, remain suspicious of politicians and their parties for eroding patriotism -- a parameter regularly checked by the yardstick owned and appropriated by the men in khaki. Tales of malpractice, self-service, nepotism, limited and rather declining talent and intellect, unscrupulous operations, moral turpitude, criminal mindsets and many more vices are typically related to politicians.

However, politics as the mainstay of running state affairs remain an undeniable and unquestionable reality. Quite obviously, the politics and politicians return even when whisked away from power with the utmost of authority. And as far as the origin of politicians is concerned, it is multi-dimensional in the true sense of the word.

Landlords, agriculturists, religious leaders, industrialists, bankers and financial executives, retired (and even serving) military and civilian cadres, businessmen, some professionals/technocrats and a few white or blue collared workers dominate the political scene. From large and extended clan webs to powerful individuals, the variety is extensive. However, amidst the tainted images of politicians, most sane souls prefer to keep away from politics. Those who aim to contribute to public good in any form adopt other institutional or individual paths such as social work, philanthropy and non-governmental organisations. Obviously none of these paths are a substitute for a legitimate political process.

Three fundamental questions arise pertinent to this debate which needs to be addressed threadbare without keeping any bones about it. Why politics is considered as a prohibitive avenue for most of the so called enlightened of this country? Why politics is devoid of high calibre human resource despite the fact that many counterpart pursuits of statecraft have a much better human force? And can politics be adopted as a profession? This piece only briefly addresses these questions which require sizable input from concerned quarters of the society.

Profiles of eminent politicians show that majority of them ended up in politics due to a variety of reasons which were very distant from a yearning to choose it as a profession. For instance, a two-time prime minister of this country was on the path of avenging her father’s alleged murder during a military regime. She neither had any direct exposure of politics or political working before that incident nor showed any direct inclination to become a politician. Similarly, another three-time prime minister is a well-known industrialist-businessman, who was handpicked by a military ruler to toe his line during the 1980s.

Several local sardars, jagirdars, khans, pirs and waderas prove successful in various elections due to their influence on their respective subjects. Seminaries and deeni madaris are pivotal to develop a devout force of like-minded followers in economically backward areas of the country and reach the power echelons. On the basis of patronage, patriarchal control on people’s life, coercion or simply ethnic or clan influence, voting process tilts in favour of influential elites -- normally with the approval of the establishment.

These trends very clearly established the fact that apart from accidental entries or support from the military establishments, inherent control on groupings with social, cultural or religious obligations was a key characteristic to enter politics. It does not give any evidence of a guided transition to politics for anyone who does not possess any of the above cited attributes.

It has become obvious that politics is acutely restricted to the upper strata of society. There are continually adding evidences related to this fact. Desire to wield power and acquire a say in decision-making, having control on the systems and procedure affecting one’s own business or trade interests, expansion in the scale of owned and acquired resources and a desire to be well known and recognised are a few reasons to attract the present breed of politicians into the affair.

National interest, patriotism, practicing or implementing the political ideology to which one may belong, attempting to involve in nation-building exercise are bygone entities. The endless failings of state functioning, repeated military takeovers, scores of corruption scandals, character assassinations, allegations of low morals are some of the repeated outcomes. Naturally, the bourgeoisie of this country does not find itself fit to subscribe to this activity of highest risk. It detaches itself to more orthodox avenues of career paths for its kins.

The traditional avenues that produce political workers, activists and managers need to be recognised and strengthened. Trade unions, local bodies, professional associations and press have been the reservoirs of human resource fed to the political process. They must be consolidated in their respective activities with a particular focus on developing future workers and leaders.

It must be remembered that the skills essential for politics such as oratory, dialogue, negotiations, social/mass mobilisation, public contact, legitimate resistance, rallying and lobbying can be acquired in the framework of political parties only. For this purpose, the parties of this country will have to change their approach and performance. Internal democratisation of parties is the first pre-requisite. They should hold public contacts through a targeted strategy by organising contact campaigns of the exclusive professional groups. From professional bodies to business fora, attempt must be made to introduce the manifestoes and party programmes to them in an appropriate manner. On the sidelines, an intellectual and academic activity must be pursued to transform the political charter of political parties.

Issues confronted by the nation and peoples must constitute the centre place of party manifestoes. Debates must be allowed to help develop congruent political philosophies along side defendable arguments. Parties should evolve a transparent and legally correct mode of fundraising to render them immune from any blackmailing from the establishment.

Without compromising on the fundamentals of mass contact and followership, they should adopt ways and means of the modern day corporate world in respect of day-to-day running and management. Unless the whole structure of political institutions and their link with the establishment is revamped, the possibility of able personnel picking it up as a profession or pursuit of life shall remain remote.