By Engr. Ghulam Habib
Chairman, Pakistan Professionals Democrats Party (PPDP)
Globe Democracy | Sunday, October 11, 2026
Democracy Is Not a War Between Political Groups
Pakistan’s Broken Democracy is once again exposed by political confrontations in which the struggle for power appears to have become more important than the welfare of ordinary citizens. Political protests, road blockades, security restrictions and the disruption of daily life raise a fundamental question: Is Pakistan practising genuine democracy, or has democracy become a continuous battle between competing political groups?
The recent protests by Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), together with the restrictive measures adopted by government authorities, demonstrate weaknesses in Pakistan’s democratic culture.
On one side, political leaders are demanding justice for their imprisoned leader. On the other, government authorities are attempting to control political demonstrations through road closures, barricades and extensive security arrangements.
Between these opposing forces stand millions of ordinary Pakistanis who have neither organized the protests nor authorized the restrictions, yet must bear their consequences.
Democracy should protect the rights of the people, not turn the people into victims of political confrontation.
PTI Should Use Constitutional Institutions Instead of Public Disruption
Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf has an important democratic advantage: it governs Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and possesses substantial representation in the provincial assembly.
Its principal political demand concerns the release of former Prime Minister Imran Khan, who has been imprisoned following convictions in criminal cases. The legal status of individual cases, appeals and related proceedings must be assessed through the courts.
Every citizen, including a former prime minister, is entitled to due process, impartial justice and the protections guaranteed by Pakistan’s Constitution.
However, the question is whether public disruption is the most responsible method of pursuing those rights.
Why should PTI not make greater use of the constitutional institutions already available to it?
The Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Assembly can debate the issue, adopt resolutions calling for transparent legal proceedings, and express its concerns through constitutional channels. The party’s legal representatives can pursue appropriate remedies before the competent courts.
Although a provincial assembly cannot overturn a criminal conviction or order a prisoner’s release, it can communicate a democratic position without bringing ordinary public life to a standstill.
Where legally permissible, requests for greater openness in judicial proceedings can also be made through appropriate legal procedures.
A political party that believes in constitutional democracy should demonstrate confidence in constitutional institutions.
Political power should be used to strengthen the rule of law, not to place pressure on innocent citizens.
The Federal Government Must Also Respect Democratic Rights
The federal and provincial authorities responsible for maintaining public order must be judged by the same principles.
The use of shipping containers, barricades, roadblocks and extensive restrictions on movement raises serious questions about the proportionality of government action.
Government authorities have a legitimate responsibility to maintain security, protect public property and prevent violence. However, this responsibility does not provide unlimited authority to restrict the freedom of ordinary citizens.
When major roads are blocked, people cannot travel freely between cities and provinces. Businesses experience losses, transport services are interrupted, and essential journeys become difficult.
Why should a peaceful citizen travelling to work, visiting relatives or seeking medical treatment be prevented from using a public road merely because political groups are confronting one another?
Security measures should be lawful, necessary, proportionate and limited to what public safety genuinely requires.
A government cannot claim to defend democracy while unnecessarily restricting the democratic rights of the people.
The Enormous Cost of Containers and Road Blockades
Another disturbing aspect of political confrontation is the financial burden imposed on the country.
Large-scale road closures may require shipping containers, transportation vehicles, cranes, security personnel, fuel, temporary barriers and other logistical arrangements.
If containers are rented daily, the costs may continue to accumulate as restrictions remain in place.
Who pays these expenses?
Ultimately, unnecessary public expenditure reduces the resources available for education, healthcare, infrastructure and other essential public services.
Pakistan already faces financial difficulties, substantial debt obligations and dependence on international financial assistance.
In such circumstances, every rupee of public money should be spent responsibly.
The government should publicly disclose the number of containers used, the duration of their deployment, rental and transportation expenses, and the total cost of related security arrangements.
Any claim that specific expenses were directly financed through IMF loans would require documentary proof. Nevertheless, citizens have every right to question whether such expenditure is justified while essential public needs remain unmet.
Public money belongs to the people, not to political parties or governments.
The Silent Majority Must Not Be Punished
Pakistan has a population of approximately 250 million people, or 25 crore citizens.
Only a portion of this population consists of registered voters, and an even smaller portion actively participates in political demonstrations.
The remaining population includes children, elderly citizens, students, workers, farmers, homemakers, people with disabilities and millions of other citizens who may have no involvement in the political confrontation.
Even among registered voters, political loyalties differ. No political party can claim that every citizen supports its actions.
Why should these millions suffer because political leaders cannot settle their disagreements through constitutional institutions?
A shopkeeper loses income when customers cannot reach the market. A worker may lose wages because public transportation is suspended. A farmer may struggle to deliver agricultural produce. A patient may face dangerous delays while travelling to hospital.
These people are not responsible for political disputes.
Yet they often pay the highest price.
The rights of citizens who do not participate in political protests are just as important as the rights of those who do.
Democracy must protect the whole population, not merely the supporters of powerful political groups.
Educational Institutions Are Suffering from School and College Closures
One of the most damaging consequences of political protests and government-imposed road closures is the disruption of education.
When public roads are blocked and transportation becomes unsafe or unavailable, schools, colleges and universities may be forced to suspend classes.
Students lose valuable learning opportunities, teachers cannot reach their institutions, and parents become concerned about the safety and future of their children.
Students preparing for examinations face particular difficulties. Academic schedules can be disrupted, examinations postponed, and important educational activities interrupted.
Pakistan is already struggling with serious educational challenges, including millions of out-of-school children, inadequate facilities, financial limitations and unequal access to quality education.
Why should political parties and governments add further difficulties to an already struggling educational system?
Children and students have no responsibility for political confrontations between PTI and the government.
Yet their education may be interrupted because adults holding political power cannot resolve their disputes peacefully.
The damage extends beyond individual students. Repeated interruptions affect educational institutions, teachers, families and the country’s future workforce.
Educational institutions should remain accessible wherever safety permits, and authorities should make every reasonable effort to maintain learning, examinations and essential transport.
Political leaders may disagree today, but students must not be forced to sacrifice their tomorrow.
A country cannot build an intelligent and prosperous democracy by repeatedly interrupting the education of its younger generations.
Political Protest Is a Right, Not an Unlimited Power
Pakistan’s Constitution recognizes the right of citizens to assemble peacefully, subject to lawful restrictions in the interest of public order.
This right is essential to democracy. Citizens must be able to criticize governments, express political opinions and organize peaceful demonstrations.
However, the right to protest does not automatically authorize violence, threats, coercion or the unnecessary obstruction of essential public services.
Similarly, the responsibility to maintain public order does not authorize the government to impose arbitrary restrictions or use excessive force.
The same democratic principles must apply to both the government and the opposition.
A political party cannot demand constitutional protection for itself while disregarding the rights of other citizens.
A government cannot demand obedience to the law while failing to respect the constitutional freedoms of the public.
Democracy requires rights, responsibilities and accountability on both sides.
Pakistan’s Broken Democracy Needs Scientific and Intelligent Reforms
The repeated political confrontations in Pakistan reveal a deeper problem.
Democracy is too often understood as a struggle to acquire or retain political power rather than as a scientific, transparent and responsible system of public administration.
An intelligent democracy should be based on constitutional principles, evidence, public accountability, transparent financial management and measurable improvements in people’s lives.
Political disagreements should first be addressed through dialogue, parliamentary debate, judicial procedures and peaceful constitutional mechanisms.
Modern technology can also strengthen democracy.
Digital public expenditure records, transparent government contracts, accessible parliamentary proceedings, electronic public consultation and effective complaint systems can help citizens examine government performance.
Artificial intelligence and modern analytical systems can assist policymakers in evaluating public needs, predicting the effects of decisions and identifying inefficient expenditure, provided these systems operate with transparency and human oversight.
Instead of spending enormous resources managing repeated political confrontations, Pakistan should invest in education, science, technology, healthcare and economic opportunity.
A successful democracy should be measured by the welfare of its citizens, not by the political strength of its ruling groups.
Political Parties Must Put National Interests Above Personal Interests
Political leadership carries responsibilities far greater than the interests of an individual leader or party.
The legal rights of an imprisoned political leader must be protected. At the same time, the welfare of millions of citizens must not be neglected.
Similarly, a government has the responsibility to maintain public order, but that responsibility must not become an excuse for unnecessary restrictions or excessive expenditure.
Political parties should not regard constitutional institutions merely as instruments to be used when convenient.
Courts, assemblies and administrative institutions exist to serve the nation.
Political disagreements should be resolved through lawful procedures, open debate and institutional accountability rather than continuous confrontation.
Pakistan urgently needs a political culture in which compromise is not considered weakness and respect for constitutional limits is not considered defeat.
A Better Democratic Solution for Pakistan
Pakistan needs practical democratic reforms that protect both political freedoms and ordinary citizens.
The following principles should guide government authorities and political parties:
- Political disputes should be addressed through constitutional institutions, parliamentary procedures and lawful judicial remedies.
- Peaceful protests should be protected, but essential roads, hospitals, schools and emergency services should remain accessible wherever reasonably possible.
- Government restrictions should be lawful, proportionate, time-limited and subject to independent scrutiny.
- Public expenditure on containers, barricades and security operations should be disclosed and audited.
- Educational institutions should be protected from unnecessary closures and academic disruption.
- Political negotiations should be encouraged before disagreements escalate into nationwide confrontations.
- Public welfare, justice, education and economic development should become the primary measures of democratic success.
- Modern technology and evidence-based policymaking should be introduced to improve government accountability and public services.
These principles would not eliminate political disagreements, but they could prevent disagreements from becoming national crises.
Conclusion: Democracy Must Serve the People, Not Political Groups
Pakistan cannot progress if every political disagreement turns its highways into battlegrounds and its citizens into unwilling participants in political confrontation.
PTI has the right to seek justice for its leader through lawful constitutional means. The government has the responsibility to maintain security through lawful and proportionate measures.
Neither side has the moral right to impose avoidable suffering on millions of innocent citizens.
The greatest tragedy of Pakistan’s broken democracy is not merely the conflict between political groups. It is the neglect of the silent majority whose daily lives, livelihoods, education and fundamental rights are affected.
Pakistan does not need a democracy that produces endless confrontations between political leaders.
It needs a democracy that protects citizens, strengthens constitutional institutions, promotes education and uses public resources responsibly.
Democracy is not the victory of one political group over another. True democracy is the protection of every citizen’s rights, dignity, freedom and welfare.
Until the people are placed above political power, Pakistan’s democracy will remain broken.
Engr. Ghulam Habib
Chairman, Pakistan Professionals Democrats Party (PPDP)
Globe Democracy
https://globedemocracy.org/
By Engr. Ghulam Habib
Chairman, Pakistan Professionals Democrats Party (PPDP)
Globe Democracy | Sunday, October 11, 2026
Democracy Is Not a War Between Political Groups
Pakistan is once again facing a serious political confrontation in which the struggle for political power appears to have become more important than the welfare of ordinary citizens. Political protests, road blockades, security restrictions and the disruption of daily life raise a fundamental question: Is Pakistan practising genuine democracy, or has democracy become a continuous battle between competing political groups?
The recent protests by Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), together with the restrictive measures adopted by government authorities, demonstrate weaknesses in Pakistan’s democratic culture.
On one side, political leaders are demanding justice for their imprisoned leader. On the other, government authorities are attempting to control political demonstrations through road closures, barricades and extensive security arrangements.
Between these opposing forces stand millions of ordinary Pakistanis who have neither organized the protests nor authorized the restrictions, yet must bear their consequences.
Democracy should protect the rights of the people, not turn the people into victims of political confrontation.
PTI Should Use Constitutional Institutions Instead of Public Disruption
Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf has an important democratic advantage: it governs Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and possesses substantial representation in the provincial assembly.
Its principal political demand concerns the release of former Prime Minister Imran Khan, who has been imprisoned following convictions in criminal cases. The legal status of individual cases, appeals and related proceedings must be assessed through the courts.
Every citizen, including a former prime minister, is entitled to due process, impartial justice and the protections guaranteed by Pakistan’s Constitution.
However, the question is whether public disruption is the most responsible method of pursuing those rights.
Why should PTI not make greater use of the constitutional institutions already available to it?
The Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Assembly can debate the issue, adopt resolutions calling for transparent legal proceedings, and express its concerns through constitutional channels. The party’s legal representatives can pursue appropriate remedies before the competent courts.
Although a provincial assembly cannot overturn a criminal conviction or order a prisoner’s release, it can communicate a democratic position without bringing ordinary public life to a standstill.
Where legally permissible, requests for greater openness in judicial proceedings can also be made through appropriate legal procedures.
A political party that believes in constitutional democracy should demonstrate confidence in constitutional institutions.
Political power should be used to strengthen the rule of law, not to place pressure on innocent citizens.
The Federal Government Must Also Respect Democratic Rights
The federal and provincial authorities responsible for maintaining public order must be judged by the same principles.
The use of shipping containers, barricades, roadblocks and extensive restrictions on movement raises serious questions about the proportionality of government action.
Government authorities have a legitimate responsibility to maintain security, protect public property and prevent violence. However, this responsibility does not provide unlimited authority to restrict the freedom of ordinary citizens.
When major roads are blocked, people cannot travel freely between cities and provinces. Businesses experience losses, transport services are interrupted, and essential journeys become difficult.
Why should a peaceful citizen travelling to work, visiting relatives or seeking medical treatment be prevented from using a public road merely because political groups are confronting one another?
Security measures should be lawful, necessary, proportionate and limited to what public safety genuinely requires.
A government cannot claim to defend democracy while unnecessarily restricting the democratic rights of the people.
The Enormous Cost of Containers and Road Blockades
Another disturbing aspect of political confrontation is the financial burden imposed on the country.
Large-scale road closures may require shipping containers, transportation vehicles, cranes, security personnel, fuel, temporary barriers and other logistical arrangements.
If containers are rented daily, the costs may continue to accumulate as restrictions remain in place.
Who pays these expenses?
Ultimately, unnecessary public expenditure reduces the resources available for education, healthcare, infrastructure and other essential public services.
Pakistan already faces financial difficulties, substantial debt obligations and dependence on international financial assistance.
In such circumstances, every rupee of public money should be spent responsibly.
The government should publicly disclose the number of containers used, the duration of their deployment, rental and transportation expenses, and the total cost of related security arrangements.
Any claim that specific expenses were directly financed through IMF loans would require documentary proof. Nevertheless, citizens have every right to question whether such expenditure is justified while essential public needs remain unmet.
Public money belongs to the people, not to political parties or governments.
The Silent Majority Must Not Be Punished
Pakistan has a population of approximately 250 million people, or 25 crore citizens.
Only a portion of this population consists of registered voters, and an even smaller portion actively participates in political demonstrations.
The remaining population includes children, elderly citizens, students, workers, farmers, homemakers, people with disabilities and millions of other citizens who may have no involvement in the political confrontation.
Even among registered voters, political loyalties differ. No political party can claim that every citizen supports its actions.
Why should these millions suffer because political leaders cannot settle their disagreements through constitutional institutions?
A shopkeeper loses income when customers cannot reach the market. A worker may lose wages because public transportation is suspended. A farmer may struggle to deliver agricultural produce. A patient may face dangerous delays while travelling to hospital.
These people are not responsible for political disputes.
Yet they often pay the highest price.
The rights of citizens who do not participate in political protests are just as important as the rights of those who do.
Democracy must protect the whole population, not merely the supporters of powerful political groups.
Educational Institutions Are Suffering from School and College Closures
One of the most damaging consequences of political protests and government-imposed road closures is the disruption of education.
When public roads are blocked and transportation becomes unsafe or unavailable, schools, colleges and universities may be forced to suspend classes.
Students lose valuable learning opportunities, teachers cannot reach their institutions, and parents become concerned about the safety and future of their children.
Students preparing for examinations face particular difficulties. Academic schedules can be disrupted, examinations postponed, and important educational activities interrupted.
Pakistan is already struggling with serious educational challenges, including millions of out-of-school children, inadequate facilities, financial limitations and unequal access to quality education.
Why should political parties and governments add further difficulties to an already struggling educational system?
Children and students have no responsibility for political confrontations between PTI and the government.
Yet their education may be interrupted because adults holding political power cannot resolve their disputes peacefully.
The damage extends beyond individual students. Repeated interruptions affect educational institutions, teachers, families and the country’s future workforce.
Educational institutions should remain accessible wherever safety permits, and authorities should make every reasonable effort to maintain learning, examinations and essential transport.
Political leaders may disagree today, but students must not be forced to sacrifice their tomorrow.
A country cannot build an intelligent and prosperous democracy by repeatedly interrupting the education of its younger generations.
Political Protest Is a Right, Not an Unlimited Power
Pakistan’s Constitution recognizes the right of citizens to assemble peacefully, subject to lawful restrictions in the interest of public order.
This right is essential to democracy. Citizens must be able to criticize governments, express political opinions and organize peaceful demonstrations.
However, the right to protest does not automatically authorize violence, threats, coercion or the unnecessary obstruction of essential public services.
Similarly, the responsibility to maintain public order does not authorize the government to impose arbitrary restrictions or use excessive force.
The same democratic principles must apply to both the government and the opposition.
A political party cannot demand constitutional protection for itself while disregarding the rights of other citizens.
A government cannot demand obedience to the law while failing to respect the constitutional freedoms of the public.
Democracy requires rights, responsibilities and accountability on both sides.
Pakistan Needs Scientific and Intelligent Democracy
The repeated political confrontations in Pakistan reveal a deeper problem.
Democracy is too often understood as a struggle to acquire or retain political power rather than as a scientific, transparent and responsible system of public administration.
An intelligent democracy should be based on constitutional principles, evidence, public accountability, transparent financial management and measurable improvements in people’s lives.
Political disagreements should first be addressed through dialogue, parliamentary debate, judicial procedures and peaceful constitutional mechanisms.
Modern technology can also strengthen democracy.
Digital public expenditure records, transparent government contracts, accessible parliamentary proceedings, electronic public consultation and effective complaint systems can help citizens examine government performance.
Artificial intelligence and modern analytical systems can assist policymakers in evaluating public needs, predicting the effects of decisions and identifying inefficient expenditure, provided these systems operate with transparency and human oversight.
Instead of spending enormous resources managing repeated political confrontations, Pakistan should invest in education, science, technology, healthcare and economic opportunity.
A successful democracy should be measured by the welfare of its citizens, not by the political strength of its ruling groups.
Political Parties Must Put National Interests Above Personal Interests
Political leadership carries responsibilities far greater than the interests of an individual leader or party.
The legal rights of an imprisoned political leader must be protected. At the same time, the welfare of millions of citizens must not be neglected.
Similarly, a government has the responsibility to maintain public order, but that responsibility must not become an excuse for unnecessary restrictions or excessive expenditure.
Political parties should not regard constitutional institutions merely as instruments to be used when convenient.
Courts, assemblies and administrative institutions exist to serve the nation.
Political disagreements should be resolved through lawful procedures, open debate and institutional accountability rather than continuous confrontation.
Pakistan urgently needs a political culture in which compromise is not considered weakness and respect for constitutional limits is not considered defeat.
A Better Democratic Solution for Pakistan
Pakistan needs practical democratic reforms that protect both political freedoms and ordinary citizens.
The following principles should guide government authorities and political parties:
- Political disputes should be addressed through constitutional institutions, parliamentary procedures and lawful judicial remedies.
- Peaceful protests should be protected, but essential roads, hospitals, schools and emergency services should remain accessible wherever reasonably possible.
- Government restrictions should be lawful, proportionate, time-limited and subject to independent scrutiny.
- Public expenditure on containers, barricades and security operations should be disclosed and audited.
- Educational institutions should be protected from unnecessary closures and academic disruption.
- Political negotiations should be encouraged before disagreements escalate into nationwide confrontations.
- Public welfare, justice, education and economic development should become the primary measures of democratic success.
- Modern technology and evidence-based policymaking should be introduced to improve government accountability and public services.
These principles would not eliminate political disagreements, but they could prevent disagreements from becoming national crises.
Conclusion: Democracy Must Serve the People, Not Political Groups
Pakistan cannot progress if every political disagreement turns its highways into battlegrounds and its citizens into unwilling participants in political confrontation.
PTI has the right to seek justice for its leader through lawful constitutional means. The government has the responsibility to maintain security through lawful and proportionate measures.
Neither side has the moral right to impose avoidable suffering on millions of innocent citizens.
The greatest tragedy of Pakistan’s broken democracy is not merely the conflict between political groups. It is the neglect of the silent majority whose daily lives, livelihoods, education and fundamental rights are affected.
Pakistan does not need a democracy that produces endless confrontations between political leaders.
It needs a democracy that protects citizens, strengthens constitutional institutions, promotes education and uses public resources responsibly.
Democracy is not the victory of one political group over another. True democracy is the protection of every citizen’s rights, dignity, freedom and welfare.
Until the people are placed above political power, Pakistan’s democracy will remain broken.
Engr. Ghulam Habib
Chairman, Pakistan Professionals Democrats Party (PPDP)
Globe Democracy
https://globedemocracy.org/