Judiciary in elections
Contingency plan needs to be in place before appointments are finalised
And so, ladies and gentlemen, it has come to this: the involvement of judicial officers as returning officers and district returning officers in the next general polls. The Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) has proceeded to assign the roles of ROs and DROs to district, sessions, additional sessions, civil, and senior civil judges for the reason that previous officers were infamous for partial politics. When bureaucratic and government employees come under the influence of political puppeteers, this sort of intervention is a logical step. This shows how far we are from free and fair elections.
In the 2013 elections, records revealed tampering at the polls by various parties. There were also personal accounts from people who reported bullying-type behaviour by members of certain political groups. For 2018, perhaps the political bullying and coercion will be reduced. However, we must take into consideration that the National Judicial Policy Making Committee once ceased the involvement of members of the judiciary in elections due to political controversies arising. This was a very serious accusation assigned to our judiciary.
It must be ascertained that no such imbroglio ensues during this year’s elections. In this regard, it may be wise to act upon the Free and Fair Election Network’s suggestion that a range of officials should be appointed as returning officers.
No matter who is assigned this role, no strategy is foolproof unless there exists an effective disciplinary plan to take action against officers found involved in illicit activities. For the country, it would be a public relations nightmare should officials from the judiciary acting as ROs or DROs be found guilty of wrongdoing. Thus, a contingency plan needs to be in place before appointments are finalised. Punitive consequences will need to be drastic and leave a lasting impact on fellow citizens as well as other nations.
Published in The Express Tribune, April 1st, 2018.
In the 2013 elections, records revealed tampering at the polls by various parties. There were also personal accounts from people who reported bullying-type behaviour by members of certain political groups. For 2018, perhaps the political bullying and coercion will be reduced. However, we must take into consideration that the National Judicial Policy Making Committee once ceased the involvement of members of the judiciary in elections due to political controversies arising. This was a very serious accusation assigned to our judiciary.
It must be ascertained that no such imbroglio ensues during this year’s elections. In this regard, it may be wise to act upon the Free and Fair Election Network’s suggestion that a range of officials should be appointed as returning officers.
No matter who is assigned this role, no strategy is foolproof unless there exists an effective disciplinary plan to take action against officers found involved in illicit activities. For the country, it would be a public relations nightmare should officials from the judiciary acting as ROs or DROs be found guilty of wrongdoing. Thus, a contingency plan needs to be in place before appointments are finalised. Punitive consequences will need to be drastic and leave a lasting impact on fellow citizens as well as other nations.
Published in The Express Tribune, April 1st, 2018.