The Path to Democracy: Why Pakistan Lags Behind India

The journey of Pakistan and India towards democracy post-independence diverged significantly due to a range of socio-political factors deeply rooted in the foundations of each nation. This article explores why Pakistan has not been a consistently democratic country as opposed to India, highlighting the key disparities in their constitutional frameworks, socio-economic structures, and leadership influence.

Religious Influence and Constitution

The answer to Pakistan's inconsistent path to democracy lies in the basic premise of its creation - religion. In stark contrast to India, which was founded as a secular state, Pakistan was conceptualized as a theocratic nation. This inherent divisive factor played a critical role in shaping Pakistan's trajectory.

India's constitution makers ensured that India would be a secular nation, with a commitment to upholding principles of equality, justice, and human rights. India's constitution upheld a secular ethos, guiding its political and social structures. On the other hand, Pakistan's initial founding document did not allow for the same level of plurality and inclusivity, leading to systematic exclusion and discrimination.

Strong Constitutional Framework in India

India's strong constitution has played a crucial role in making its civilian government more robust compared to the military. Despite the ruling party in the civilian government, the military remains apolitical and submissive to the state. This consistent adherence to civil governance has been instrumental in maintaining democratic processes in India.

The Indian constitution has been the bedrock of democratic governance, with influential figures like Jawaharlal Nehru, Indira Gandhi, and others who were committed to upholding the principles of democracy and secularism. Their dedication to these values helped anchor India firmly in the democratic framework, fostering a culture of political stability and respect for the law.

Socio-Economic Disparities

Besides the religious and constitutional differences, the socio-economic disparities also contributed to Pakistan's lagging progress towards a consistent democratic framework. Indian leaders like Jawaharlal Nehru implemented the Zamindari Abolition Act, which aimed to redistribute land from absentee landlords to landless cultivators. This act was challenged in court but eventually passed through the First Amendment to ensure its legal validity.

The act granted millions of peasants ownership of their land, breaking the cycle of debt bondage and fostering a sense of ownership and empowerment among a significant majority of the Indian population. This direct stake in the nation's success has been a cornerstone of India's democratic stability.

In contrast, Pakistan continues to grapple with feudal landholdings, where many cultivators remain landless laborers. Attempted reforms by Zulfikar Bhutto notwithstanding, the system of land distribution and ownership remains skewed, perpetuating economic disparities and social unrest.

Language and Expression

The decision to designate Urdu as the national language in Pakistan, despite a significant portion of the population being illiterate and speaking different languages, reflects another critical obstacle to democracy. This decision neglected the linguistic and cultural diversity of Pakistan, marginalizing various linguistic groups and stifling freedom of expression.

In India, while the literacy rate was also low, efforts were made to ensure that the constitution respected the diversity of languages, allowing for the official recognition and promotion of various Indian languages. This inclusive approach has supported the growth of a more diverse and pluralistic society, which in turn strengthens democratic institutions.

Moreover, the West Pakistani perception of racial superiority and subsequent power divisions within the states further eroded the democratic fabric. The 5-state system, which allocated equal power regardless of population, was inherently undemocratic and unequal, leading to a imbalance of power and resources.

Conclusion

United we stand divided we fall. The disparities between India and Pakistan highlight the crucial role of constitutional frameworks, socio-economic policies, and leadership commitment to democracy. Pakistan's journey has been marked by persistent challenges that have hindered its progress towards consistent democratic stability.

India's success in maintaining democracy can be attributed to its strong constitution, committed leadership, and efforts to empower the majority of its population. By understanding these factors, it is possible to draw valuable lessons that can be applied to further enhance democratic practices in Pakistan and other countries facing similar challenges.