Do the structures of Pakistan’s bureaucracy resist progress? The MHRC, in collaboration with Raaye Saazi, hosted a public debate that sought to reconsider the role of bureaucracy in Pakistan and its relation to democratic and developmental progress.

The proposition mainly discussed how the structures of the superior bureaucracy were problematic. Mr Ahmed Bilal Mehboob, founder and president of the Pakistan Institute of Legislative Development and Transparency (PILDAT) distinguished between the superior and the civil bureaucracy, where the former holds more power. Dr Soufia Siddiqi, an Assistant Professor at the LUMS School of Education and the Director of Research at the Mahbub ul Haq Research Centre, asked the audience to consider the structures that facilitate the power embedded in these institutions. She argued there is no clarity on budgetary allocation. The bureaucracy is not elected by the people and is endowed with generous privileges by the state. The next speaker of the proposition, Atta Malik, highlighted how during the colonial era, accountability used to exist in the bureaucratic structure as it reported to the Viceroy and other channels of power. He argued we must be critical of the overarching structure which enables this.

The opposition argued failures within the bureaucracy are a symptom of a larger problem. Shamshad Ahmad Khan, a seasoned diplomat and expert in foreign relations, argued the country is only held together by the bureaucracy and the army.  Ms Baig, SP Police Islamabad, highlighted how the system does not operate based on merit, and rather, is based on the whims of politicians. The last speaker of the opposition, Bakth Jamshed Baryar, a Customs Officer, pointed to how the problem is essentially one where people join the bureaucracy for the privileges that the position rewards them with rather than a genuine desire for public service.

The debate concluded with a lively question and answer session. As concluding remarks, Dr Siddiqi highlighted how pensions play a huge role in the allure of the civil service. The everyday experiences of people with members of the bureaucracy frame their attitudes towards the institution, at large. At the end of the session, participants voted, using a poll, to reflect on the debate.