Will it be government, opposition, election commission, all or none?
With election year just around the corner and ECP reminding politicians that time is running out for electoral reforms, DNA decided to venture out on a quest to recount the challenges in bringing about electoral reforms and weigh the efforts by various stakeholders i.e. politicians and Election Commission of Pakistan
In the beginning, there were much-touted ‘35 punctures’ that led to four month long dharna which haphazardly ended after 132 students were massacred during a terrorist attack on Army Public School Peshawar.
Their Lordships formed a Commission in April, 2015 to look into the matter of rigging during the 2013 elections. On 22 July 2015, the findings came to the fore. It turned out that other than Election Commission of Pakistan’s few ‘lapses’ here and there the ‘2013 general elections were in large part organised and conducted fairly and in accordance with the law’.
What started as an individual’s paranoia, came of age as a national frenzy, faded away in the background of a mass slaughter and got crucified by a commission’s report. Thus after a whole year of agitation, mudslinging, abuse, sit-ins, accusations, lockdowns, and dharnas better sense prevailed. All parties decided to take the less-travelled, weary road of discussing the ‘electoral reforms’ in Parliamentary Committee on Electoral Reforms.
With election year just around the corner and ECP reminding politicians that time is running out for electoral reforms, DNA decided to venture out on a quest to recount the challenges in bringing about electoral reforms and weigh the efforts by various stakeholders i.e. politicians and Election Commission of Pakistan.
Where exactly are electoral reforms needed?
2013 elections, the one that were given a clean chit by their Lordships, however, brought to the fore many crevices which called for through soul searching followed by implementable suggestions and actionable directions for the future polls.
Opposition parties in general and Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf in particular rue the paper ballots and suggest that electronic voting is the panacea to all that ails our electoral system, also as a sure shot way to put an end to rigging. However, electronic voting has its limitation, as without paper trail there is no way to cross-check, corroborate or verify individual votes. Also the prerequisites for the technology involved can’t be ushered in within a span of a year or two.
Secondly, ECP is a constitutional body and, like all constitutional bodies in our land, is subject to censure and criticism. A more independent, impartial, empowered ECP is demanded by all and sundry, however, how precisely to rein in the changes and legislate constitutional amendments is where either silence reigns supreme or political point scoring takes centre stage.
At present a single individual contests elections from multiple constituencies, thus making the task of scrutiny and verification cumbersome. Experts suggest that a policy of one candidate per constituency will not only ease the scrutiny but also ensure that a greater deal of resources and time will be saved from conducting re-election on vacant seats.
Everybody, be it government, opposition, or election commission, want to bell the cat (read electoral reforms). Ironically, the seriousness and sincerity the task demands is amiss from those who are most desperate to bring in the reforms
The making of electoral rolls, their verification, sifting fictitious and fake from the genuine and correct has proved to be both contentious and time-consuming. The electoral reform committee needs to hammer out a strategy to tackle this issue in an amicable manner. How and what they do about it, it is yet to be seen.
Putting in place strict check and balance on election expenses is another direly needed reform. At present a candidate for MNA and MPA can spend 15 and 10 lac rupees respectively on their election campaign according to Representation of People’s Act, 1976. To develop a mechanism to ensure no candidate exceed this limit and providing a strict penalty for guilty party is one Herculean task that awaits legislators.
Overseas Pakistanis should be given their long overdue right to vote. Admittedly, there are huge numbers of procedural and legal issues involved but with millions of Pakistanis living and working abroad, a mechanism had to be wriggled out for expatriates.
Is ECP really the villain?
“Politicians flout the rules and the ECP is held responsible for their misdeeds,” said Chief Election Commissioner Justice (r) Sardar Muhammad Raza back in May, 2015, while hearing complaints of alleged violations of the code of conduct in KPK Local Bodies election. Many believe Justice Raza has summed up the dilemma faced by Election Commision of Pakistan that ECP is more sinned against than sinning.
ECP was in the eye of the storm last month when it boycotted the proceedings of the Parliamentary Committee on Electoral Reforms after Shireen Mazari, a PTI legislator, indicted ECP for preparing to rig 2018 general election.
Allegations and counter-allegations followed from both sides. While PTI blamed ECP of breaching privilege of the committee members, ECP claimed that not only their institute was maligned and insulted but pointed that the party was the one who failed to bring legislation to the table.
ECP returned to the Electoral Reforms Committee after more than a month on 10 April after Speaker National Assembly reminded it of the larger national interest at stake.
Articles 213 to 221 of constitution of Pakistan deal with the chief election commissioner and election commissions. The longish article 213 delineates office of chief election commissioner, his qualifications, consultation of prime minister with leader of the opposition, forwarding of three names to a parliamentary committee for confirmation and so on and so forth
ECP performs the duty of holding elections, preparing electoral rolls, organising and conducting election to the Senate and fill casual vacancies in assemblies, appointing election tribunals, deciding cases of disqualification of members of parliament and provincial assemblies on receipt of reference from the chairman, speaker or head of the political party,
“The election commission is inherently entrusted with duties of conducting elections in a smooth, free and fair manner. When an exercise is conducted on such a huge scale, minor glitches and misses can’t be ruled out. The thing to be seen is that tables are not tilted against or in favour of one or the other party,” said an ECP officer, who wished not to be named.
Whatever way one looks at it, one thing is certain. ECP has no say whatsoever in matters of legislation, its scope is limited to consultation, proposals, research and chalking out implementation of the whole election process.
What them politicians brought to the table?
Other than accusations, allegations, empty sloganeering and political point scoring, very little at all.
Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf, one of the most vocal proponents of electoral reforms, unveiled its 10-point electoral reforms proposals. The points include change in criteria for the appointment of caretaker set ups, use of Electronic Voting Machines (EVM), doing away with the provision of reporting all donations above Rs0.1 million, appointment of secretary ECP by ECP which was previously done by the government, voting rights to overseas Pakistanis, deployment of army inside and outside of polling stations, among other proposals.
Nothing wrong with the proposals, however, the timing is crucial. As the draft of Election Law, 2017 was presented by Senator Ishaq Dar, who heads the Parliamentary Committee on Electoral Reforms, back in December, 2016. It was expected that after consultation a final draft will be ready within a month. Three months have passed since, still the consensus is nowhere in sight.
At the time of filing this piece, the committee has disposed off 255 proposals, while decisions on 230 proposals were pending.
ECP has time and again told the committee that in order for it to be fully prepared and chalk out various administrative measures like arranging of polling staff, delimitation of constituencies, enlistment of political parties, allocation of symbols, appointment and training of polling staff, security measures, printing of balloting papers, printing of ballot papers for elections a time of six months is required.
Apprehensions related to sheer massive scale of the election exercise coupled with sluggishness on part of legislators paints a dreary picture for the electoral reforms.
Do we really want to bell the cat?
Everybody, be it government, opposition, or election commission, want to bell the cat (read electoral reforms). Ironically, the seriousness and sincerity the task demands is amiss from those who are most desperate to bring in the reforms.
Making Election Commission of Pakistan the fall guy for the faults of legislators won’t serve the purpose. The apple of discord in electoral reforms lies in the fact that all quarters want to bell the cat the way that they get warned before the other. And in it lies the delay and the deception.