Governance in Pakistan: A Comparative Study of Civil-Military Regime (1999-2012)

Abstract

This study is an attempt to understand the concept of governance and to evaluate its Micro-Macro level application on governance in Pakistan by the model of McCawley theory 2005. On the basis of this theory leads as a model to the formation and testing of hypothesis. Why the civil and political elite destroying autonomy of institutions, they were preparing the ground for their own downfall. This manuscripts sheds light on the overall performance of governance regimes in the history of Pakistan with a major focus of the economic and administrative consequences of the decision and policies of all the regimes. Pakistan’s industrial growth, social development and political stability have remained a victim of rent-capturing of its elite and interest groups. Weak political leadership created space for civil-military bureaucracy. This led to the curt-off periods in democratic governance, which was derailed thrice in 1958, 1977 and 1999. The objective of the present study are to explore the performances of democratic and military governments during 1999-2012; to evaluate socio-political and economic development during both civil-military regimes in Gen. Pervez Musharraf and Asif Ali Zardari Government to identify the operating differences of civil-military governments during 1999-2012 to critically analyze, the success: failure of both governments and reason for it; to identify the reason due to involves both descriptive and analytical techniques to affect the requirement of the research topic due to the immeasurable nature of the concept of governance the qualitative and quantitative methods are used in this study. The major part of the study is to attain through the analysis of documents, books electronic, materials journals and scholarly papers and therefore it includes textual interpretation or ‘content analysis’ as well. Quantitative analysis also predicts through survey study after getting opinion of the students at University level in Pakistan. Out of 500 respondents majority of respondents were BS level students while majority of the students were males on the other majority of respondents belonged to Punjab. However, majority of respondents disagree in respect of Musharraf government that he controlled terrorism in Pakistan. Even the majority of respondents disagreed that Asif Ali Zardari government controlled terrorism in Pakistan. Of 500 respondents, majority of respondents agreed that Musharraf government in respect of domestic policy gave a 2 relief to the common man. But majority of the respondents disagreed that Zardari government domestic policy gave the relief to the common man. In respect of foreign policy of Musharraf government majority of respondents agreed that it improved the image of foreign policy of Pakistan at global level. However, the majority of the respondents disagreed that Zardari government improved the Pakistan image at global level. The majority of the respondents agreed that during Musharraf regime the judiciary was strong. Majority of the respondents agreed that Musharraf government increased economic progress in Pakistan however, the majority of the respondents disagreed that Zardari government increased economic progress in Pakistan. In respect of Musharraf government the majority of respondents agreed that he dealt well with the issues of governance of Pakistan. At present, the country is partially developed, the middle class is growing and civil society is assertive; a vibrant media have come up, and majority of the population is illiterate. External and internal determinants who got domination and affected brief history of different kinds of political setback in Pakistan. There is an overall urge for peace. The Pakistani people have evaluated governance in shape of constitutional development to save the human rights and the rule of law in Pakistan, and to have an independent judiciary to strengthen democratic governance. The crisis of governance in Pakistan is extensive and it is almost in a state of collapse all discretionary power at all government levels should be withdrawn and all decision should be regulated by law and merit. All government jobs should be filled through merit to end the culture of approach and bribery, Kalashniko culture, drug trafficking and smuggling should be eliminated through a systemic and effective reform program the key to good governance lies in the fact that all state institutions should work within their limits for example the legislature should legislate, the executive should execute laws and policies and the judiciary should interpret the constitution and laws.