Pakistan's young people need political power

The staggering absence of youth in power

Muzamil opens the episode by noting the absence of young people in Pakistan’s political leadership. Shaheera Jalil, a Fulbright scholar and organizer, frames the core problem: a country where 64% of the population is under 30 years old has almost no representation in government. “Pakistan is 64% under 30 population,” Jalil says. “We have never been so young as a country.”

The data is stark. In the federal cabinet of 26 people, only two are under 35. In Punjab’s cabinet of 36, only two are young. Sindh has one. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa has one. Balochistan has none. Even the Special Assistant to the Prime Minister for Youth Affairs is 46 years old. This is not accident. It is structural.

The youth demographic window

Time is critical. Pakistan’s youth bulge represents a historic demographic dividend, but it is closing. Thirty-three percent of the country is between 15 and 29 years old, the highest this ratio has ever been. By 2040, Jalil explains, this opportunity will shift. The country will never again be this young. That window is now.

Muzamil presses for clarity on the practical scope. “What’s the situation in the national assembly or provincial assemblies?” The deeper problem emerges: age data on elected representatives is not even compiled or publicly available. No one knows how old parliament actually is. The system does not bother to measure what it excludes.

Why old ideas fail

Jalil articulates a core thesis: old ideas have been tried and tested. They have failed. “There is no new idea in the current system, and why can’t it work? It doesn’t work because people say that it can’t happen,” she says. “Generally there is a 50+ babu, whether he is elected or a bureaucrat, and he is vetoing it.”

New approaches need new people. When someone spends enough time inside the system, they begin echoing the system’s reflexes. They repeat that things cannot happen. What Pakistan needs is young people ready to take the risk on ideas that elders reject.

Muzamil pushes back gently. He asks Jalil to name 10 potential young leaders in the country. She pauses. The gap between rhetoric and roster is real. Leadership requires structure and opportunity. “I differentiate between activism and leadership,” Muzamil says. “Activists have disagreements on a particular thing. Leaders unite people around an ideology.”

The four-point quota proposal

Jalil’s answer is direct: a 30% youth electoral quota. It has four components. First, every political party must reserve 30% of electoral tickets for candidates under 35 years old. Second, once elected, parties must guarantee 30% of young people in cabinet ministries and party leadership. Third, priority should go to youth from socio-economically marginalized backgrounds. Fourth, parties must provide financial support for these young candidates’ campaigns.

The 30% figure is a concession. Jalil notes the irony: “I took this proposal and they told me if you want 30 percent, if you want 3 percent, you’ll probably get it.” Young people are asked to accept half their population share. Yet even that compromise faces resistance.

The woman quota precedent and its limits

Muzamil raises a cautionary parallel. Pakistan has reserved seats for women in parliament for years. Yet the system filled them through political patronage. Women from elite families received the “reserved” seats while ordinary women never broke through. “Khawaja Asif was a family member who didn’t have any politics in life,” Muzamil recalls. “Only 1000 people exist like this whose experience may be more in terms of actually knowing the problem, but they can’t come because those people can’t come as a competitor.”

A 30% quota without structural support simply shifts the same families into youth slots. Jalil acknowledges the trap but returns to first principles: “Even if 5% of the working class, actual, ordinary, Pakistani young people come, 5%, then it will be better from 0% now.”

Grassroots organizing already exists

When Jalil posted her proposal on social media, the response surprised everyone. Young people from Tuba Tek Singh, Rahimyar Khan, Kashmir, and Jhal Magsi reached out. Areas with almost no internet access had young people mobilizing their communities on local issues. “On the grassroots level, how many times, and how many issues are mobilizing the community,” Jalil says. “They’ve been doing it, despite the fact that no mechanism exists.”

These young organizers are hustling without structure. They lack platform and media amplification. But they are real. Muzamil hears this and shifts his stance slightly: “In 22 crores, how many did you say? 135 million. In a 135 million population, you’re saying that if I say I’m not a leader, then that’s a wrong thing.”

The case for idealism in politics

Jalil makes an ethical argument rather than a purely practical one. Realism has not served Pakistan. Old, careful incrementalism has presided over the country’s slow deterioration. “Be realistic, be realistic, that’s not really done anything fantastic for this country,” she says. “If you have to think about the four boundaries of realism, then what is the benefit? That will not give you that alternate world.”

She points to young people already transformed by the digital age. They are globally connected, uncompromising on rights, and unimpressed by hierarchy. “Today’s young people, because they were either born into or grew up in the digital space, they will not compromise on their rights and on their citizens.” They do not expect a seat at the table. “You have to earn their respect.”

Next steps: legislative and judicial routes

Jalil has filed public petitions to the President, Prime Minister, Election Commission, and State Minister of Parliamentary Affairs. She has met with nine senators across PTI, PPP, and PML-N. Many had not read her two-page policy brief before the meeting. Several spent the time discussing their own lives. One said yes immediately; others deferred.

She is exploring two legal avenues. Legislatively, she is building a bill through the Pakistan Institute for Parliamentary Services. Judicially, she believes Articles 17 (freedom of association), 18 (freedom of trade and profession), 25 (equality), and 27 (safeguard against discrimination in services) could form a strong public interest litigation case.

---

041 | Youth Electoral Quota Ft. Shaheera Jalil | Shaheera Jalil | 1,087 words