International reports of the last five years indicate that bad governance within Pakistan is gaining continuous attention of the watchdogs, lenders, and investigative media.
The issue of governance in Pakistan has become a global concern where economic pressures, political strain and restriction of free expression started to meet. The HRW and Amnesty International reports allege that the pressure is increased on the journalists, activists and opposition staff since the 2024 elections. According to the reports, there are three major trends, namely arrests, made on the law of cybercrime, threats to newsrooms, and attacks on journalists. Based on the HRW World Report 2026, hundreds of cases had been opened in the months following the vote as authorities reprimanded the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act. The attacks against journalists reporting on protests and corruption cases are also reported by the local press organisations.
Another issue that is raised by the human rights groups is the abuse of blasphemy laws in domestic contests. The HRW World Report 2026 refers to the findings provided by the National Commission for Human Rights Pakistan, which reported hundreds of cases when blasphemy charges were employed to resolve personal or monetary conflicts. Some of these allegations and the question were discussed in courts in Islamabad. The marginalised communities are usually at the risk. There are numerous instances where mobs assault accused people before the court could hear the case. In other cases, police would take a long time to arrive, or they were unable to surround the targeted areas. These are not isolated cases, as loose applicability alongside social pressure become the causes of the increasing rate of vigilante violence.
Economic governance has also drawn strong criticism from international lenders. The IMF has also examined corruption and elite capture that weaken the economy. According to the IMF Governance Diagnostic 2025 an approximated cost of governance failures is between five and six point five percent of the gross domestic product of Pakistan every year. The report attributes this loss to the existence of a weak procurement system, powerful sectors enjoying tax benefits and weak management of state owned enterprises. Many state owned enterprises control major assets but continue to operate at a loss. When the resources of the state are lost to corruption or political favours, governments often respond by borrowing more or raising indirect taxes. The impact then reaches ordinary citizens through inflation and reduced public services.
Some international reports and investigations also examine the military’s business networks. Reporting by the regional media and analysts has attracted interest over alleged financial scandals in the areas of foundations and joint ventures in connection with military institutions. Reports cited by Indo Asian News Service also mentioned that some investment deals fell and some commissions were made to the officials who were related to the navy related projects in Karachi. Although the Pakistani government disapproves a lot of these allegations, the news reports do not go unnoticed since the military occupies an influential niche in the political and economic life of the country. The analysts give an explanation of why transparency would be harder to organise when one organisation has both the economic power and political power.
The reports of the large media houses in the world reported on the availability of the court documents, press releases, and eyewitness accounts of those who agreed that there was unethicalness in the process. Another issue that concerned human rights organisations was the constant delay in releasing former prime minister Imran Khan and the re-arrest of activists like Ali Wazir. The Amnesty International Pakistan report confirms that military courts were handling a few cases of civilians following unrest associated with previous protests. Such trials are readily deplored by international experts involved in law, since they do not have open hearings or independent cheques and balances. Government officials argue that serious security threats require strong measures. This divergence in view is what has been the point of contention of the rest of the world today when it comes to Pakistan.
Investigative journalism has also shaped how Pakistan’s political economy is viewed abroad. The International Consortium of Investigative Journalists conducted the Pandora Papers investigation which revealed how politicians and military officers’ family members owned offshore assets. The investigation reviewed millions of leaked files shared with newsrooms around the world. It indicated the way shell corporations and foreign trusts were involved to keep the property and assets overseas. Even some officials claimed that there is no necessary violation of the law when people own offshore assets, but the revelations still created some doubts about transparency and conflict of interests. For many Pakistanis, the revelations reinforced a long standing public belief, which is that wealth always goes elsewhere and the institutions of the state are struggling back home.
These issues are reflected in global governance ratings. Pakistan ranks in the lower tier of the Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index which is evaluated on an annual basis. A mark of 28/100 is an indication that even the professionals and business thought leaders perceive corruption to be rampant in the government. The ratings of the journalistic freedom provided by Reporters Without Borders demonstrate the same trend with Pakistan being near the bottom of the global list over the last few years. When several datasets point in the same direction, foreign governments and lenders tend to pay closer attention.
Officials in Islamabad reject many of these claims and question the methodology of some reports. According to Government PR mouthpieces, watchdog reports do not capture the fact that a country is engaged in war against militant and complex security situations. It is said the state must strike a balance between the civil rights and the necessity to avoid violence and false information. In other instances, authorities also argue that foreign organisations use too much activist testimony. Nevertheless, critics observe that the rebuttals provided by the authorities seldom contain minute-by-minute evidence that goes against the reported cases that are being reported by international organisations. The lenders, investors, and diplomats of the international community are now balancing both the denials and the written reports when evaluating the stability of Pakistan.
The recent history of Pakistan illustrates that governance, rights and economics intersect. Reports by watchdog groups, lenders, and investigative journalists highlight the gap between state authority and public accountability. There are also real security risks and economic shocks posing a hindrance to reform in the country. Long term stability depends on trust in state institutions and equal application of the law. The lack of plausible accountability and open debate by the state means that criticism of the state by foreigners might only increase and the disconnection between citizens and the state might only become greater.
The post Pakistan Under Global Scrutiny appeared first on Dissident Voice.
This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Syed Salman Mehdi.