The Good, the Bad and the Election

Published: March 10, 2013
The writer is a columnist based between Karachi 
and London. She was formerly a staff writer at the 
New Statesman

The writer is a columnist based between Karachi and London. She was formerly a staff writer at the New Statesman

This year’s impending general election has been the cause of much collective anxiety in Pakistan. If it goes ahead, it will be a significant achievement — the first time that a civilian government has lasted its full term and will transfer power to another through the ballot box. Perhaps it is the pressure of this potentially historic moment that is causing so much anxiety about the election — or perhaps, it is the weight of past example. The main worry is that the election will not happen at all, whether this is because of the increased threat of violence from extremist militants, or because of intervention from the army. There is also concern about the neutrality of the process, whether ruling parties will seek to cling onto power, and whether the election will be truly free and fair. Separating out these issues — violence, the role of the army, and public confidence — how likely is it that the elections will be undermined?

The problem at the front of most people’s minds is the threat of violence. A huge bomb attack in Karachi last week left 48 people dead and more than 200 injured, ripping off the front of two multi-storey housing blocks. These attacks, primarily targeting Shia civilians, seem to be increasing in their frequency and scale, and the trend looks set to continue as elections approach. If the intention of militant groups is to create a climate of fear, they are succeeding. At the best of times, most politicians are reluctant to take decisive action against terrorism. During election season, when they will be required to appear frequently at public rallies, their reluctance to speak out and put themselves directly — and literally — in the firing line is further reduced. These fears are not unfounded. Benazir Bhutto was assassinated during a campaign rally on December 27, 2007. During that election period, more than 100 party supporters were killed as a result of attacks on political gatherings, while more than 50 died in clashes between different activists.

A chilling effect on political campaigning is not the only impact that violence has. In certain areas of the country, those manning polling booths or going out to vote do so at considerable personal risk. Militancy in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa (K-P) or Balochistan may affect not only the ability of candidates to go out and campaign, but of local election staff working at polling stations, and of individual citizens casting their votes. Indeed, many have suggested that the law and order situation in Karachi, Balochistan, and parts of K-P will be used as an excuse to postpone the election. In 2008, there were fears that polling stations would be targeted by terrorists. While violence did not materialise on the scale that had been anticipated, by 2pm on election day, the media had already reported 35 violent incidents at polling stations, including eight bomb blasts, 12 instances of gunfire and three kidnappings. Dozens of people were injured and seven killed, and there were further reports of threatened and actual violence. The number of incidents may have been proportionally small, but the climate of fear remained. If anything, the security situation has deteriorated since then.

This week, the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) has given assurances that the army will provide security at polling stations “in Karachi, Fata, parts of Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, Balochistan and stations declared sensitive in Punjab”. This is reassuring, but underlines another persistent worry in the mind of the pubic: the role of the army. Pakistan has spent nearly half of its 64 years under military rule. One of the reasons that this parliament is so historic is that it hasn’t been deposed by the army: the exception rather than the rule. The sudden entrance into politics of cleric Tahirul Qadri late last year brought fears of an army intervention to the forefront. While his agenda focused on anti-corruption measures, Qadri’s frequent and overblown praise of the military and the judiciary, not to mention his coyness over his funding, prompted accusations that he was acting on behalf of the army and staging a coup by the back door. Whether this was true or not, the incident demonstrated that anxiety about army intervention is never far from the public consciousness. But at the present moment, the evidence suggests that there is not much appetite among the army for seizing control. Its resources are stretched, with 100,000 officers fighting insurgents on the border with Afghanistan. The military retains a huge say over foreign policy and national security, meaning that the generals at the top are enjoying power without the responsibility of running the country. There is little to indicate that this will change, but of course, nothing is certain in the world of Pakistani politics.

There have been some significant achievements in recent years. The 2008 election was hailed as a pluralistic process in which parties were free to express a broad range of views. There was greater scrutiny from the media and civil society than there has been in previous elections, and as a result, greater public confidence in the system. Yet the picture was not entirely rosy. According to the European Union’s election observation mission, there were still “serious problems with the framework and conditions in which the elections were held”. These problems included an abuse of state resources and a bias in the state media in favour of ruling parties; a lack of confidence in the ECP; and serious problems with the electoral roll which saw many duplicate entries or omissions. In the intervening five years, have these issues been addressed? One of the primary achievements of this government has been in the unglamorous arena of constitutional change. The Eighteenth and Twentieth Amendments devolved power to the provinces and took measures to guarantee more free and fair elections, including an independent election commission. Yet serious problems remain. The process of door-to-door voter verification was badly implemented and electoral rolls are still chaotic. Moves have been made towards guaranteeing independence in the electoral commission, but similar progress has not been made on transparency.

Ultimately, not all of these concerns can be addressed before this year’s general election. While there are still significant problems, it is important to recognise that progress has been made, too. With the current climate of uncertainty, it will do wonders for public confidence if the election goes ahead at all.

Published in The Express Tribune, March 11th, 2013.

Facebook Conversations

Reader Comments (8)

  • Shaami
    Mar 10, 2013 - 10:33PM

    Today i had nothing to do so i read some points of the constitution of Pakistan and was shocked to learn that Non Muslims cannot vote a Muslim in Pakistan. Non Muslims have separate electoral system and separate seats and how come we can bring equality and tolerance in Pakistan and how come the problems of our minorities will go away when Our MNAs and MPAs dont have to listen to Non Muslims to get any votes?. The whole demographics of elections could change in our country when Non Muslims will be given the right to vote as in some regions of Punjab and even in Constituency of Rana Sanaullah thousands of Non Muslims live and then these minsters will have to listen to them
    It is my request to British and American Pakistanis that do try to press Our government to bring equal rights here. In Britian and in America every citizen can vote irrespective of their religion but here first your religion is checked and then a right to vote is given to you and this Sheer Discrimination must be ended at all costs.


  • Parvez
    Mar 10, 2013 - 11:42PM

    I get the impression that you some how have not clearly written what possibly you wanted to write.
    I feel that the country is run by ‘ THE SYSTEM ‘ which has been put into place over the years by all the beneficiaries ( who include all, but the people ) the election process is just part of the system that gives the people three choices : terrible, very bad and bad……….and for appearance sake we all call it democracy.


  • MSS
    Mar 11, 2013 - 12:02AM

    Welcome to Pakistan’s twisted logic of equality, justice and freedom.


  • Arindom
    Mar 11, 2013 - 1:35AM

    why go thorugh the sham elections – where minorities are not allowed to vote freely, can vote only in their electorate, cannot aspire to be PM or president, basically lives as second class citizens.

    Save everyone the trouble, declare yourself the wahhabi republic of Al-Bakistan


  • Tinkerbell Punjjab
    Mar 11, 2013 - 5:24AM

    We are talking about Elections but before elections we need good reforms as well. All Pakistanis must be given a right to vote. As Pointed out by Shaami that a Non Muslim have no right to vote a Muslim and since a Momin must be selected for Assmeblies so essentially other than reserved seats we are closing the gates to all Non Muslims and this is a discrimination and that must be ended. Non Muslims are around 4 percent of Pakistan and we can say it is like 5-6 Million ( 50-60 Lakh) in number and in Internal Sindh in some regions Hindus are in bigger population than Muslims and similarly in Punjab almost 5 percent are Non Muslims ( Ahmedis, Chrisitans, Sikhs, Deists ) and giving them no right to vote a Muslim candidate is totally unacceptable in my view.
    If we want a progressive nation then Each and Every Pakistani counts and all Pakistanis irrespective of their religious believes must be given a right to choose candidates in next elections.


  • wonderer
    Mar 11, 2013 - 10:27AM

    Most people do not know that those belonging to Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK) have no role in these elections as they do not send their representatives to the National Parliament. This is because AJK is not legally a part of Pakistan. Even those seeking election to the provincial assembly have to pledge their allegiance to the idea of Pakistan.


  • Shaami
    Mar 11, 2013 - 5:26PM

    @wonderer Kashmir have a separate status in Pakistan unlike India where they are forced to become a part of Indian parliament and that is why Azad Kashmir have its own Supreme Court, Own Prime minister and President and that is why they cannot send their representatives to the Pakistani Parliament as Azad Kashmir is an Autonomous state. Regarding to the pledge of Allegiance they have free will actually and they have the right to pledge allegiance to India, America or any country which they want to.


  • wonderer
    Mar 11, 2013 - 6:09PM


    Thanks for being so kind as to explain, but you are not entirely correct. Kindly listen to Mr. Hamid Bashani, who is from AJK, explain the correct position through this link:

    Hamid Bashani on Kashmir Dispute


More in Opinion