Voting rights for diaspora debated

Senate committee weighs postal ballot, EVMs


Our Correspondent January 02, 2025

print-news
Listen to article
ISLAMABAD:

The Senate Standing Committee on Parliamentary Affairs held a comprehensive discussion on granting overseas Pakistanis, including dual citizens, the right to vote in future elections.

The meeting was presided over by Senator Dr Mohammad Humayun Mohmand.

Highlighting the significance of extending voting rights to overseas Pakistanis, the chairman said that many countries successfully implement postal balloting and questioned why Pakistan could not adopt a similar mechanism.

A representative from the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) briefed the committee on the efforts made in the past, explaining that a third-party audit had previously advised against internet voting due to significant security concerns, including the risk of hacking.

The audit concluded that online voting was unsafe for general elections.

The chairman stressed that all Pakistanis living abroad or holding dual citizenship should have the right to vote, suggesting that postal balloting could be a viable solution for Pakistan.

While the ECP representatives acknowledged the practicality and cost-effectiveness of postal balloting, they cautioned that it could be prone to malpractice due to the lack of direct supervision.

The chairman posed the question of whether the committee would support amending the laws and the Constitution to facilitate voting systems such as postal balloting and EVMs. However, Senator Kamran Murtaza expressed reservations, arguing that such measures might not align with constitutional provisions.

Faced with limited support for constitutional and legal amendments, the chairman adjourned the meeting, stating, "If the committee members are unwilling to consider changes to enable a transparent and modern voting system, there is no point in continuing the discussion."

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