Elections: myth and reality

In my opinion, the highest form of rigging is an attempt to keep people uneducated, ignorant and dependent.


Shabbir Ahmad Khan February 18, 2013
The writer is a PhD Scholar at West Virginia University in the US

The most remarkable contribution of political thinkers to humanity is the discovery of ‘elections’ to sustain or transfer power without war or bloodshed. However, most people in Pakistan only have a vague idea about elections. In modern history, elections do not happen to bring in ‘change’ but to renew the people’s mandate. The ruling party or incumbents also have an equal right and opportunity to come back to power. Research findings, arrayed from recent election data of developed democracies, show that voters mostly choose incumbents, particularly after the expiry of their first term. The incumbency rate in the US and other western democracies is extremely high (over 90 per cent in the US since the 1964 elections).

As far as qualifications of a candidate in developed democracies are concerned, there are only two qualifications — the lower age limit and the nationality/residency. For the voter, adult franchise is the only rule. There is no other eligibility criterion. It is also believed in Pakistan that the children of politicians should not succeed them as politicians because it is against the ideals of democracy. However, this practice is common in the West. In developed democracies, ‘political families’, such as the Rockefellers, the Kennedies and the Bushes, have played a significant part in US politics. It is also naive to think of a parliament that is packed with ‘common’ people. ‘Ordinary’ or ‘poor’ people are not found in any parliament of the world. Electoral politics is always the job of a ‘few’, not of ‘many’. The reason is simple — ordinary people have neither the money nor the time for politics.

The allegation of massive ‘rigging’ in elections is also untrue. By and large, all elections in Pakistan were fair and free, including the 1977 one. For evidence, just see the record of post-election ‘electoral complaints’ filed in the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) by the losing candidates. Take the example of the 2002 elections; the ruling coalition had formed the government by a one-vote margin only. In my opinion, the most crucial person who can ensure a free and fair election is not the chief election commissioner, the caretaker prime minister or governor, but the polling agent of the candidate. Rigging is technically not possible on election day if the polling agents are active and vigilant. Let me clear one more anomaly: practices that are considered illegal or unfair in Pakistan i.e., pre-poll rigging, such as the use of money, transfers, gerrymandering, jobs, development projects etc. are considered constitutional/legal in developed democracies. Ultimately, it is the discretion of the people to choose whom they like the most.

Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf leader Imran Khan has extra-constitutional expectations from the ECP. His demands regarding the president’s resignation and the dismissal of the ECP are unconstitutional. He basically wants the disqualification of  ‘electables’ of the two major political parties, the PPP and the PML-N. Pakistan has a history of such attempts when different regimes used various tactics to disqualify politicians, such as the Public and Representative Office Disqualification Act 1949, the Elected Bodies Disqualification Act 1959, non-partisan elections by General Ziaul Haq, the degree requirement by General (retd) Pervez Musharraf and the dual nationality requirement. This time, some forces are prepared to stretch Articles 62 and 63 of the Constitution in order to disqualify ‘electables’. These forces are confident that the courts will certainly disqualify President Asif Ali Zardari in the dual-office case on contempt charges after the dissolution of the assemblies.

In my opinion, the highest form of rigging is an attempt to keep people uneducated, ignorant and dependent. Election is a way to obtain the free opinion of the people. Freedom of the people takes many forms, including freedom of thought and of action. If voters are in chains everywhere, how will they be able to use their right to vote freely? I will give you one example. For people in a society like ours, the ‘vote’ is not more precious than ‘valuables’. When people can easily give their hard-earned income to extortionists, then giving their vote to these rascals is not a big deal either. But our focus is always on fair and free elections, not on fair and free voters/people.

Published in The Express Tribune, February 19th, 2013.

COMMENTS (14)

Noor Fatimah | 11 years ago | Reply

Very nice article Sir and as usual facts based article. The thing is this that we people don't understand that the child whose brought-up is done by the politician will obviously be more sharp in politics and his brain will work as a politician that is a separate issue that he wants to join politics or not or is he interested in working as a politician or not. But if that child's nourishment is being done by such politician who had always payed attention towards his own personal interests instead of being working for securing the national interests then the people are scared to vote for his child because they are more afraid to elect the modern rascal. Secondly, fair elections I totally agree with you that rigging can't be done on the day of elections but yes one can buy the voters before that during their election campaigns but it is not illegal. As its been done in others countries too that you have to convince the voter that your party is the best one in securing the national interest but the people should be enough qualified to think that what is best for them any short-term benefit or long-term facilities. People are innocent and they don't even bother to acquire education because they are busy in earning. We all specially youngsters need to change the way of thinking and we need to understand the real concept of democracy. As we are making our future yet so we can't work as a volunteer but the people who had made their earnings and are spending a retired life can work to solve such causes with their life experiences. I hope best for the future but we all need to improve the thoughts of the people before changing the system, its tough but not impossible.

ruby | 11 years ago | Reply

Meh!! The author rightly reduces the expectations of Pakistanis regarding democracy by pointing out problems that are recognized the world over as in today's democracies. But it is a dangerous argument. Detractors of democracy in Pakistan may as well use the same argument for military dictatorship. Because according to the article, anyway the democracy in Pakistan has no hope of offering anything substantial. So why not Musharraff or Kayani?

One point though: The author goes too far in suggesting that all the elections in Pakistan were fair and free. The stated reason is that political agents were there to ensure the fairness. This is just baloney. Most of the political agents are party fan boys in their respective areas and the post is sometimes a reward for rallying voters at booth level. The agents can be easily intimidated, influenced and many a times they are illiterate and cannot even check the rolls, although they have the advantage of knowing local faces. And rigging is not a uniform process across all stations. Where the ruling party has overwhelming power that the opposition does not bother having a polling agent, it is a field day for the rulers.

VIEW MORE COMMENTS
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ