Decades of civil service reforms have ignored the fact that real change is impossible without placing power where it matters most: in local hands.
Despite decades of reform and promises efforts, the Pakistan government system is not delivered. Again and again, ambitious agendas are announced, however, institutions remain tarnished by rooted inefficiencies, generalized corruption, bureaucratic inertia and a poor service provision. You can ask, what are we still wrong? The problem is that we have been looking for answers everywhere than inside.
Although civil service initiatives have been repeatedly proposed and implemented, its impact has been diluted by a lasting centralization of power that resists significant change. In the heart of the failures there is a truth often overlooked: no reform can really succeed without a genuinely empowered local, autonomous, robustly and constitutionally protected local government system.
The case of local government empowerment
Local governments form the basis of democratic governance and the provision of receptive services. They are uniquely positioned to identify and address the specific needs of communities, provide specific solutions and allow the direct participation of citizens. However, in Pakistan, these governments have been historically undermined or co -opted by the provincial and federal powers that see decentralization as a threat instead of an opportunity.
Throughout the world, decentralized governance has demonstrated its value. The decentralized administrative model of Germany delegates central services such as education and health to local authorities, ensuring the capacity for response and efficiency. In Brazil, the participatory budget, which gives citizens a direct opinion in local spending, has improved transparency and reduced corruption.
In the Pakistani context, academic research has emphasized the strategic importance of local governance. A historical study on decentralization reveals that local government reforms often originated from non -democratic regimes, seeking legitimacy instead of a lasting institutional change. However, such reforms, including the Bajo Ayub Khan and Musharraf, lacked permanence due to the absence of constitutional support and the deep entrenchedness of the central authority.
The Musharraf model and its lessons
The return of the power plan of General Pervez Musharraf (2000) remains one of the most ambitious local government initiatives in the history of Pakistan. Implemented through the Local Government Ordinance (2001), the system introduced a three -level structure (District, Tehsil and union councils) with elected representatives that manage local development, finance and public services.
Under this system, together of the citizen community (CCBS) and Musalihat Anjumans They were introduced to institutionalize citizen participation and the resolution of local disputes. For the first time, bureaucrats became subordinated to elected officials at the local level. However, the lack of constitutional protection meant that the system was dismantled once Musharraf left power. Democratic governments after 2008 had no timely elections, and provincial governments resisted genuine decentralization.
Despite its defects, the return of the Musharraf era revealed the transformative potential of local governance. District governments took possession of development planning, citizens dedicated themselves to the selection of projects and marginalized communities had greater access to public services.
Why the reform of civil service is not enough
The reform of the civil service generally focuses on recruitment based on merit, performance evaluation, training and corruption reduction. However, without the corresponding decentralization, these reforms are limited to the higher levels of governance and rarely affect the results at the base level.
The Pakistani civil service remains highly centralized, with officers frequently rotated in provinces and ministries. This practice discourages specialization and undermines local responsibility. Without empowered local governments, even the most efficient bureaucrats cannot address local challenges effectively.
In addition, civil officials in Pakistan often operate in a political vacuum, isolated from the constituencies to which they should serve. This disconnection hinders its ability to respond to local needs and encourages a sense of alienation among citizens. In my recent article for the weekly business and economic magazine RevenueI maintain how local institutions can play a crucial role in counteracting extremism. By providing essential services, creating employment opportunities and improving community participation, can address the fundamental causes of disappointment: tasks that remote and centralized bureaucracies are poorly equipped to administer.
A comparative perspective
Throughout the world, governments are discovering that the path to national progress begins at the local level.
The Panchayati Raj system of India shows the power of basic democracy. Its structure of the local government demands regular elections and assigns a significant administrative and financial authority to local agencies. The integration of public officials in this framework guarantees responsibility, response capacity and deeper citizen participation.
Urban governance of Türkiye is another example. The transformation of Istanbul through empowered municipal leadership illustrates how decentralization can stimulate urban renewal, the development of infrastructure and economic vitality.
The Estonia Electronic Government Revolution demonstrates the potential of digital integration at the local level. By rationalizing services and improving transparency, it has significantly reduced corruption and greater efficiency. Countries like Pakistan can resort to this approach to modernize civil services and train local institutions.
This is what should be done
To truly empower citizens and transform governance from scratch, Pakistan must reinvent and revitalize their local government systems. The Foundation lies in granting constitutional safeguards that demand regular elections and clearly define the authority of local agencies, and the Supreme Court guarantees provincial compliance. A specialized municipal civil service, as seen in India, can instill professionalism and continuity in the local administration. Equally critical is the return of finance: empower local governments with control over property taxes, municipal services and a fair part of national income.
In addition, the digitalization of the administration at the level of Tehsil and union will bring a very necessary transparency, while the institutionalization of public participation and supervision through citizen jurors, community joints and participatory budget will make governance more inclusive. Finally, a performance -based bureaucracy, where public officials are evaluated in the results of the provision of services instead of tenure or connections, can promote a culture of responsibility and effectiveness.
Without bold reforms, Pakistan runs the risk of perpetuating a system that maintains the distant power of the people to whom it is intended.
A holistic approach
These examples highlight that the empowerment of the local government, combined with the reform of the civil service, creates a government architecture capable of addressing complex social needs. Pakistan can attract valuable lessons of these experiences to navigate for their own reform trip.
Civil service reform in Pakistan cannot, and should not, isolated in isolation. The country’s administrative challenges are deeply intertwined with their political and governance structures. The absence of empowered local governments has not only aspired to democratic participation, but has also undermined the effectiveness of the civil service.
To build a receptive, responsible and citizens oriented governance system, Pakistan must adopt an agenda of double -track reform: transform civil service and at the same time transfer power to the bases. Only then can we expect to resolve the governance crisis that continues to affect this nation. It is imperative that political leaders, civil society and international partners support the cause of local governance, not only as an administrative reform, but as a democratic need.
