A Critical Analysis of the Zardari Era

 Governance Failure and Democratic Decay in Pakistan (2008–2013):

A Critical Analysis of the Zardari Era

Abstract

The presidency of Asif Ali Zardari (2008–2013) marked Pakistan’s transition from military rule to civilian governance. This period was widely expected to restore democratic norms, strengthen institutions, and stabilize the economy. Instead, Pakistan experienced deepening corruption, economic decline, governance paralysis, and erosion of public trust. This paper critically examines the Zardari era through the lenses of constitutional practice, political economy, institutional performance, and democratic legitimacy. It argues that poor leadership choices, systemic corruption, and the prioritization of political survival over national interest inflicted lasting damage on Pakistan’s state capacity and democratic credibility.

1. Introduction

Pakistan’s return to civilian rule in 2008 occurred amid extraordinary circumstances: political instability, terrorism, economic crisis, and the assassination of Benazir Bhutto. Asif Ali Zardari assumed the presidency not through a direct popular mandate but through a parliamentary election, raising immediate concerns about legitimacy and leadership capacity. While the transition itself was historically significant, the subsequent governance record raises serious questions regarding democratic consolidation and state performance.

This research evaluates the Zardari presidency as a case study of democratic failure caused not by the absence of elections, but by misgovernance under an elected leadership.

2. Methodology and Sources

This study employs a qualitative analytical approach, relying on:

  • Parliamentary debates
  • Supreme Court judgments
  • Auditor-General reports
  • Economic surveys
  • Scholarly books and peer-reviewed articles.

3. Ascension to Power and Legitimacy Deficit

Zardari’s rise to the presidency was largely facilitated by political sympathy following Benazir Bhutto’s assassination rather than personal credibility or public trust. His past association with corruption cases significantly weakened the moral authority of the office he occupied. Scholars argue that leadership legitimacy is essential for democratic consolidation; without it, governance becomes transactional and defensive.¹

The presidency increasingly functioned as a political command center, not a constitutional symbol of unity.

4. Institutionalized Corruption and Accountability Collapse

4.1 The National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO)

The NRO, validated temporarily during this era, effectively suspended corruption cases against political elites. The Supreme Court later declared it unconstitutional, holding that it violated equality before the law.² The damage, however, had already been done: public confidence in accountability institutions collapsed.

4.2 Administrative Consequences

Transparency International consistently ranked Pakistan among the most corrupt countries during this period.³ Bureaucratic decision-making became risk-averse or rent-seeking, resulting in poor service delivery and stalled development projects.

5. Economic Mismanagement and Fiscal Fragility

5.1 Rising Debt and IMF Dependence

Between 2008 and 2013, Pakistan’s public debt increased dramatically. The government relied heavily on IMF bailout programs without undertaking structural reforms.⁴ This dependency reduced fiscal sovereignty and burdened future governments.

5.2 Inflation and Poverty

Food inflation reached double digits, while unemployment rose steadily.⁵ The absence of coherent economic planning worsened income inequality and weakened social cohesion.

6. Energy Crisis and Industrial Decline

Pakistan’s energy crisis deepened significantly during this period. Circular debt escalated due to poor governance, power theft, and delayed reforms.⁶ Manufacturing output declined, and foreign investment fell sharply. The failure to invest in long-term energy solutions represents one of the most economically damaging legacies of the Zardari era.

7. Federalism, the 18th Amendment, and Governance Failure

While the 18th Constitutional Amendment restored parliamentary supremacy and provincial autonomy, its implementation lacked administrative preparedness.⁷ Provinces received powers without effective accountability frameworks, leading to governance breakdown, particularly in Sindh.

Karachi’s law-and-order collapse, deteriorating public services, and political violence exemplified this failure.⁸

8. Law, Order, and Internal Security

The period witnessed increased terrorism, sectarian violence, and targeted killings. While militancy pre-dated 2008, weak political resolve and fragmented governance limited the state’s response. Analysts note that political interference in policing severely undermined counter-terrorism efforts.⁹

9. Foreign Policy Drift and Sovereignty Erosion

Pakistan’s foreign policy lacked coherence, marked by over-reliance on the United States and inability to prevent violations of sovereignty, including drone strikes.¹⁰ Parliamentary oversight of foreign affairs remained weak, reinforcing perceptions of compromised independence.

10. Democratic Disillusionment and Long-Term Impact

Perhaps the most damaging consequence of the Zardari era was the erosion of faith in democracy itself. When elected governments perform worse than authoritarian regimes in public perception, democratic legitimacy suffers.¹¹ Political cynicism, institutional mistrust, and voter alienation remain enduring legacies.

 

11. Conclusion

The Zardari presidency stands as a cautionary example of how democratic rule can fail without ethical leadership, institutional reform, and public accountability. Despite historic opportunities, governance during the period of 2008–2013 deepened Pakistan’s political, economic, and institutional crises.

This paper concludes that the damage inflicted during this era was not accidental but structural, rooted in corruption, mismanagement, and prioritization of political survival over national interest. The consequences continue to shape Pakistan’s fragile democracy.

Footnotes

1.     Christophe Jaffrelot, Pakistan at the Crossroads (Columbia University Press, 2016) 112–114.

2.     Dr Mobashir Hassan v Federation of Pakistan, PLD 2010 SC 265, 312–315.

3.     Transparency International, Corruption Perceptions Index 2012 (TI 2012) 4–6.

4.     Government of Pakistan, Economic Survey of Pakistan 2012–13 (Ministry of Finance 2013) 89–92.

5.     State Bank of Pakistan, Annual Report 2012 (SBP 2012) 37–40.

6.     Ahmad Faruqui, ‘Pakistan’s Power Crisis’ (2011) 30 Energy Policy 230–233.

7.     Hamid Khan, Constitutional and Political History of Pakistan (3rd edn, OUP 2017) 412–418.

8.     International Crisis Group, Karachi: The State of the City (Asia Report No 194, 2010) 9–15.

9.     Hassan Abbas, Pakistan’s Drift into Extremism (Routledge 2014) 167–171.

10.                        Tariq Ali, The Duel: Pakistan on the Flight Path of American Power (Simon & Schuster 2008) 214–218.

11.                        Dietrich Reetz, ‘Democracy and Legitimacy in Pakistan’ (2013) 52 Asian Survey 336–339.

 

Post a Comment

Previous Post Next Post