AS Pakistan unveils its first-ever fully climate-tagged federal budget, a pressing question arises: will these high-level commitments actually improve the daily lives of the millions living below the poverty line? While fiscal measures like Climate Budget Tagging and new carbon levies are presented as progressive steps to address climate challenges, they risk becoming hollow victories if they fail to ensure that the poorest Pakistanis can breathe cleaner air, drink safe water and survive the next devastating flood.
In a country where more than 40 percent of people still lack basic services and climate disasters strike the most vulnerable the hardest, our climate spending must deliver real, tangible results — not just satisfy global checklists. Islamabad itself reveals how the gap between bold promises and ground realities remains wide. The Margalla Hills National Park, meant to be a sanctuary of biodiversity and a shield against urban expansion, faces steady encroachment and the mismanagement of guzara forests on its edges. This neglect is a stark reminder that while we debate big climate targets abroad, we allow local ecosystems to erode at home, turning manageable challenges into full-blown crises.
At this crucial moment, Pakistan’s judiciary has emerged as an unlikely yet vital guardian of climate justice. Judicial activism, often criticised for overstepping, has proven its worth in upholding the constitutional right to a clean and healthy environment. By expanding the interpretation of fundamental rights under Articles 9 and 14, our higher courts have reminded us that the right to life and dignity means access to clean air, safe water and a climate that does not threaten our survival. Public interest litigation and suo motu powers have empowered citizens and civil society to challenge neglect — from unregulated construction to illegal logging. Yet courts alone cannot bridge the gap between policy and action. Parliament must reclaim its role as the primary watchdog over climate finance and policy execution. Unfortunately, our parliamentary committees often lack timely access to finance bills, sufficient resources and the mandate to demand accountability. The recent budget process made this painfully clear: while mitigation funding increased, committees failed to challenge severe cuts to pollution control and agricultural research — both vital for resilience — and barely questioned the 18 percent tax on solar panels that undermines our clean energy ambitions.
These oversights are not technical details — they have real consequences for communities who rely on secure water supplies, fertile soils and predictable seasons. Pakistan cannot afford climate policy that sounds good on paper but stalls in practice. Imagine if our parliamentary committees could amend budgets, extend deliberation periods and consult stakeholders before funds are approved. Imagine if they worked with local governments and civil society to ensure adaptation funding, such as for flood defences or nature-based solutions, truly reaches those who need it. A big reason we keep repeating the same mistakes is that we govern in silos. The judiciary defends rights, parliament signs budgets, the executive drafts policies and civil society protests — but these pillars rarely move together. This leaves room for poor coordination, political shortcuts and bureaucratic inertia. Islamabad, as the nation’s administrative nerve centre, has an opportunity to do things differently. Courts can enforce deadlines and progress reporting to push ministries out of comfort zones. Parliament can strengthen its committees and learn from global examples like the UK’s Environmental Audit Committee, which holds government accountable for its climate promises.
We also need innovative financing. Meeting Pakistan’s estimated $348 billion climate investment need by 2030 cannot be done through public funds alone. Municipal bonds, green trust funds and private capital for restoring ecosystems and building resilient infrastructure must complement government spending. At the community level, guzara forests must be protected from exploitation. Why not pilot community-led trusts that generate livelihoods while conserving biodiversity? If Margalla can be a model for balancing urban growth with conservation, it can inspire provincial frameworks for other protected areas. The judiciary, too, can broaden its role. Beyond verdicts, courts can help identify legal gaps, encourage reforms to boost technical capacity and clarify federal-provincial responsibilities that so often stall progress. Imagine if the courts required annual public hearings where ministries present climate progress, communities share concerns and experts suggest solutions. Such accountability would keep governments focused on long-term climate goals, not short-term political gains.
Ultimately, this is about reimagining democratic governance in the age of climate crisis. The people of Islamabad — and Pakistan — cannot afford to let climate resilience remain the domain of policy talk and occasional court rulings. We need a robust system of checks and balances that ensures every rupee spent brings us closer to a safer, sustainable future. Our judiciary and parliament must collaborate and share insights to build governance that matches the scale and urgency of the challenge. Climate change will not pause for us to catch up. Our cities, forests, rivers and communities are counting on us to act. As citizens, we must insist that our courts keep defending our rights, our parliamentarians step up as true climate guardians and our policymakers embrace new financing, better governance and genuine accountability. Only then can we close the gap between words and action — and ensure the next generation inherits a Pakistan resilient enough to face the storms ahead.
—The writer is a policy analyst and researcher with a Master’s degree in Public Policy from King’s College London.
(sohanisar@sdpi.org)
