deally, democracy and governance should go hand in hand. Being a process and a culture, democracy is measured by the yardstick of governance. This is a flawed measure lacking rational justification. Respect for people’s choices and inclusion and equal opportunity in every field of life should be the markers of an established democracy rather than good governance. The latter may not be directly related to a democratic culture.

The irony is that in Pakistan the parameter by which a democratic polity is measured is delivering on promises of development. When we say that democracy is a process and a culture, it means that it will take time in delivering on its core dividends both at the political and socio-economic fronts.

In Pakistan, elected governments are judged by the number and size of development projects they undertake and by populist economic measures instead of its pathways towards strengthening democratic norms.

Political parties’ performance at the federal and provincial levels is judged on what should be a benchmark for evaluating the performance of municipalities. This shows that most of our people are ignorant of democratic values and parliamentary traditions, the bulwarks of their rights and just living.

There is a dire need to promote an understanding of the dichotomy between how people are governed and how governance impacts people’s choices. In Pakistan, where the democratic process is often disrupted by extra constitutional and apolitical forces, an efficient governance and speedy development project undertaken by a non-democratic regime can influence the public into giving up resistance to tyranny and demanding democracy. Resultantly, the culture of democracy and constitutionalism recedes and that of governance takes greater credence.

If a democratically elected government is delivering on the development front, it does not necessarily mean that it will be fortifying the democratic and parliamentary norms as well. There is no denying the fact that democracy underpins the responsiveness of the government towards the public needs but in a democratic polity people aspire for much higher and sublime goals like the rule of law, social and economic justice, political liberty, protection of human rights, inclusive and accountable institutions, civic participation, a robust civil society and peaceful transfer of power through electoral processes from one elected government to the next.

So between good governance and democracy, which comes first? The simple answer is that they should go hand in hand. No democratic polity can give its fruits to the public unless it is complimented by good governance. Conversely, no governance model can be sustainable, no matter how successful it is, unless it takes into consideration people’s choices and represents their general will, which lends credence to any governance model.

Political parties’ performance at the federal and provincial level is judged on what should be a benchmark for evaluating the performance of municipalities.

There is thus an inextricable link between the two. Political parties’ manifestos often chart out governance plans but how these plans will be blended with the general will or inclusivity, is often missing. Pakistan is among the countries which cannot ignore either; however, keeping in view the political urgency preference to democracy over governance is the need of the hour.

If Pakistan successfully overcomes its political crisis and ensures a smooth transition between elected governments and inclusivity in its policy and decision-making, upholds the sovereignty and dignity of the parliament, and ensures timely free and fair local government elections, most of the governance issues will be resolved. Bad governance is an outcome of a dysfunctional democratic system.

The major governance issues in Pakistan, including the economic crisis, uneven development, dysfunctional and loss-making public corporations, unplanned urbanisation, selective use of law and accountability, myopic planning and uneven development follow disruptions of a democratic polity and prevalence of an exclusionary mindset among the ruling elite. It is unfortunate that the twin crisis of democracy and governance has greatly impacted the social fabric of Pakistan. Today, political polarisation has descended to streets and homes, making the common people hateful and intolerant.

In a culturally and ethnically pluralistic society like Pakistan, democracy is a sine qua non. It is essential for its national and political integrity. An equitable distribution of economic resources as well as environmental resources like water and gas, etc, among the provinces is possible only through fiscal federalism.

In Third World economies like Pakistan, good governance is measured only in terms of development projects. The tangle, however, is that good governance is considered by some as an independent criterion of democracy. Hence, decision-making in the realm of economy becomes, specifically in the case of Pakistan, the sole preserve of apolitical actors, mostly economic wizards, having no stakes whatsoever in the polity. The dynamics of governance at the national level then determine the role of political as well as apolitical actors involved in the formulation and implementation of decisions.

It’s a job for the people of Pakistan to make their politicians responsible for the continuity and robustness of the democratic process. They must form good teams for governance and undertaking development. Ideally, governance should not be the job of politicians but apolitical technocrats and the institutions of the state in general.

In a society where people’s choices and preferences count for more than their leaders’ whims and wishes, inclusivity and continuity of democracy is jealously protected and institutions are insulated from political interference, the governance model cannot suffer any chronic malaise. Democratic political parties, a vigilant civil society and the public at large must ensure a stable and democratically governed Pakistan, instead of a Pakistan dominated by a political junta or a cult.

The writer is an advocacy officer at a non-governmental organisation