The constitution of Pakistan envisions Parliament as the highest pillar of the state. It acts not only as the supreme forum for representation and legislation but also as an oversight body over other governing institutions. Parliament is the voice of the people; it embodies the very soul of a democratic nation and is also a reflection of its values and character. However, the democratic process in Pakistan is still gaining roots due to repeated suspensions and imposition of martial laws. The parliamentary system is still in its early stages of development due to which Parliament as an institution has been unable to perform its basic functions effectively in many areas. The first area which requires the immediate attention of political leadership is our flawed budget process. With a few exceptions, the legislative branch all around the world usually has the ultimate control over all aspects of the money bills. However, according to a research report by PILDAT, Pakistan is the perhaps only country in the world that has a unique clause in Article 84 of its constitution which compromises this unique power of the legislature, allowing the executive to unilaterally alter the budget through “Supplementary and Excess Grants” during the fiscal year after the budget has been passed by the National Assembly. The executive is not even required to obtain prior approval of the Standing Committee on Finance before authorizing these Supplementary/Excess Grants. The Parliament is made aware of the excess expenditures only at the time of next year’s budget session. Since the expenditures have already been incurred at this point, the Parliament has little choice but to approve them. The total amount of such grants approved during the fiscal year 2019-20 was Rs. 544 Billion, almost 60% greater than the amount approved in 2018-19. Second, there is a need to democratize the foreign policy making process by giving Parliament a meaningful role in the ratification of international treaties, something which PTI promised in its 2018 Election Manifesto. At present, Parliament is not required to be consulted at the stage of negotiation, signing or ratification of treaties. Treaties are either ratified by the Cabinet or by the concerned Division after the approval of the Cabinet. Treaties do not become enforceable automatically in Pakistani domestic law simply by ratification. However, their ratification by the government creates legally binding obligations on Pakistan enforceable under international law. Also, the executive may ratify treaties to further its own short-term political objectives which may undermine the long-term national interest and constitutional values of the country Hence, Parliamentary approval before ratification of treaties is in the interest of their legitimacy and transparency in the Government’s foreign affairs. Former Chairman Senate Mian Raza Rabbani had moved a bill in Parliament to implement this suggestion titled Ratification of Foreign Agreements by Parliament Bill, 2018 but it was never passed. Third, the strengthening of Parliament as an institution cannot be achieved without empowering its Standing Committees. These committees act as mini-legislatures with a variety of functions such as drafting and reviewing bills, overseeing government operations through hearings and investigations, etc. Former US President Woodrow Wilson once wrote, “It is not far from the truth to say that Congress in session is Congress on public exhibition, whilst Congress in its committee rooms is Congress at work” – such is the importance of standing committees in a democratic framework. The standing committees in the parliamentary system of Pakistan, however, have remained toothless due to lack of political will. Only a strong parliament can deter the incursion of unelected institutions in the democratic process To give a few examples, unlike other countries, Money Bill is not referred to the relevant Standing Committees in Pakistan for in-depth technical discussion. The committees also don’t have penal powers of civil courts, as is the case in many developed countries, to compel witnesses and government departments to produce testimony and relevant documents. The Parliamentary Committee on Judicial Appointments has essentially become a rubber-stamp after the Supreme Court’s decision in Munir Bhatti Case, rendering it ineffective for any meaningful scrutiny of judicial appointees. The treasury and opposition must forge a consensus to make the standing committees effective by enhancing their powers in the relevant areas in terms of oversight and legislation. To increase their utility, instead of providing the committee chairperson with personal staff, a dedicated committee secretary and at least two research assistants well versed in the subject of the committee should be provided. Fourth, the strengthening of standing committees must go hand in hand with an investment in the Capacity Building of Parliamentarians. Unlike popular public perception, the legislative work is extremely labor-intensive and requires professional support. The scope of work and demands on an elected member have increased tremendously in the recent past. In the USA, each congressman has a technical staff of around 15 persons to help him/her in carrying out the legislative work. The British parliament secretariat is staffed with graduates from Oxford and Cambridge with good incentive structures to encourage the bright graduates to support their MPs. Although Pakistan Institute of Parliamentary Studies (PIPS) exists as a general research and capacity building institution, the absence of adequate technical staff for individual legislators undermines their ability to perform duties effectively and efficiently. Finally, the executive power to legislate through Ordinances under Article 89 of the constitution should either be abolished or be subject to strict terms and conditions. There has hardly any government since the passage of the 1973 Constitution which has not undermined the integrity of parliament by resorting to ordinances. The power represents a colonial legacy which was meant to concentrate powers in the executive with a distrust in the people’s ability to govern themselves. Only a handful of countries have retained such a provision in their Constitution from colonial times. The very idea of an executive ordinance negates the system of checks and balances which the multi-staged and multi-step process of routine legislation ensures. Such ordinances also constitute a violation of out constitutional scheme that intentionally wants the government and the opposition to engage with each other so that a broader agreement on legislation may develop. Pakistan is a diverse multicultural country and the parliamentary system was envisioned by our Founding Fathers as a way to minimize polarization by distributing political power across a broad spectrum of interests. However, Pakistan has historically faced the problem of an over-powered executive branch and a weak parliament even during the tenures of democratic regimes. The consistency in the electoral process has shown a ray of hope for the parliamentary system. It is in the best interests of all political parties now to join hands to make Parliament an effective institution because only a strong parliament can deter the incursion of unelected institutions in the democratic process. The writer is a public speaker, educationist and a former member of Youth Parliament Pakistan