The fine line between discipline and discontent

The system, equipped with surveillance cameras and automated ticketing, was meant to instill discipline. Violations like not wearing seatbelts, riding without helmets, and violating traffic signals were swiftly penalized. There is no second view that adherence to such rules is for broader public good and to avoid human loss which often results due to noncompliance with such rules.

Furthermore, automation without human involvement or discretion should have been more encouraging yet the public response was mixed. Whilst some citizens began adhering to rules more strictly, others saw the fines as exorbitant and unfair, especially when compared to cities like Lahore and Islamabad, where similar violations apparently cost a fraction.

The High Court of Sindh has been approached in this regard. A common narrative of the public at large is that the government was more interested in revenue generation than road safety, especially given Karachi’s broken infrastructure and lack of proper signage.

A mirror to tax culture

If one thinks through this, the resistance to fines is not apparently just about traffic, rather it reflects a deeper societal issue: the unwillingness to pay taxes voluntarily. Just as citizens question the legitimacy of traffic fines, they also resist taxation, citing poor governance, lack of services, and perceived corruption.

The logic is strikingly similar: “Why should we pay when the system doesn’t work for us?” Whether it’s pothole-ridden roads or underfunded public services, the sentiment remains compliance feels like punishment, not civic duty.

The paradox of accountability

Interestingly, the e-challan system has shown that when enforcement is strict and impartial, even if police vehicles have been reportedly fined, people do begin to follow rules. But the backlash also reveals a paradox: citizens want fairness, not just enforcement. They want a government that earns trust before it demands obedience. This is perhaps the most telling insight: Karachi’s reaction to traffic fines is not just about driving; it’s a referendum on governance.

The blind spot in public perception

Whilst the government does invest heavily in public health and education, from subsidized hospitals to schooling initiatives, these efforts often go unnoticed or underappreciated because they are either not well-communicated, not equitably distributed, or not immediately visible in daily life for many citizens.

In contrast, the neglect of infrastructure, especially in working-class neighbourhoods, is glaring and unavoidable. Crumbling roads, open manholes, and traffic bottlenecks are part of the daily grind. When citizens see their local streets deteriorating whilst being fined for traffic violations, it breeds resentment. The optics are damaging as it feels like punishment without support.

The disconnect between visible neglect and invisible investment creates a perception gap. People don’t see the good the government may be doing in hospitals or schools if their commute is a daily hazard. Infrastructure is the most tangible form of governance, and its absence speaks louder than policy documents or budget allocations.

Layered governments & public perception

There is a valid argument that the roles of federal, provincial, and local governments along with various regulatory bodies are distinct, and that failures in one domain should not be blamed on another. However, the reality on the ground is different. The public rarely differentiates between these layers of governance. To most citizens, “the government” is a singular entity, and its failures regardless of jurisdiction are seen as collective.

This confusion is exacerbated by the absence of properly functional and empowered local governments. Without clear local representation, people don’t know whom to approach for specific issues, whether it’s fixing a road or addressing sanitation. The result is a sense of helplessness and frustration, which further erodes trust in governance and fuels resistance to civic obligations like taxes and fines.

The private sector illusion

Another factor contributing to this perception gap is the increasing reliance on the private sector for essential services. From education and healthcare to water supply and electricity and in certain cases even to personal security, many city dwellers interact more frequently with private providers than with public institutions. This creates an illusion that the government is absent or inactive.

What often goes unnoticed is that many of these private or charitable institutions, especially in education and healthcare, receive substantial support from provincial governments. Whether these are land grants, subsidies, or operational funding, the state plays a quiet but crucial role. Yet, the public narrative tends to credit only donors and NPOs, overlooking the government’s contribution.

This misperception further alienates people from the idea of public service delivery. If they believe the government does nothing, they are less likely to support it through taxes or compliance even when it is, in fact, enabling the very services they rely on or for their own good.

Reform beyond revenue

Any government that wants citizens to pay taxes or fines willingly must first fix the fundamentals, i.e. infrastructure, transparency, and trust. Enforcement without empathy breeds resistance. But accountability with fairness can foster a culture of civic responsibility.

The e-challan system in Karachi is a technological leap and an encouraging step, but its success will depend on whether it’s seen as a tool for reform, not just revenue. Needless to say, the reform must begin where the public feels it most: on the roads they travel, not just in the policies they rarely see.

Published in Business Recorder, By Muhammad Raza November 16, 2025