The evil of populism is well known. Essentially, it tries to look like an admirable pursuit of a solution without actually handling the nettle. Yet, like all short-term solutions, populism captivates audiences for a simple reason: it is tempting, and that temptation comes cheap.

The more intractable the problem, the more buyers it garners. The age of populism, in and of itself, offers a complicated challenge which aspires to resolve an issue or address a concern in a manner that first and foremost prioritises popular sentiment.

Pakistan’s judicial history has recorded a lot of populist litigation for well over a decade. There can be no denying that while it has garnered widespread appreciation, this form of populism has also raised apprehensions. There are those who argue that the constitutional separation among the realms of the Executive, the Legislature and the Judiciary must be respected, and no compromise should be allowed in this regard; no matter what the intention.

But the gravitation is hard to resist. It often makes for reasonably long careers and moderate fortunes. Then there’s the longing for an imagined legacy. Why, then, should the popular tide not overcome humble logic? Who, then, would hold the mirror before the arbitrators?

Given the fact that those duped defy the revelation, accountability is often left to history. The costs to the society and the economy are often catastrophic. Denial overpowers reason. In a celebration of an assumed success the collective loss is left to be grieved by generations that are yet to come.

Also read: The case of populist litigation

Communities with good memories learn to distinguish between the Robin Hoods and the Double Shahs. That, then, remains the only hope.

This week we take the first cursory look at our propensity for populist litigation, and the heavy toll it has taken on the young nation.