Why we need party-based local bodies elections
A competitive political environment at local level will eventually make the parties more responsible and responsive.
The writer is a security and political analyst and works at the Institute of Strategic Studies, Islamabad
The decision of the Lahore High Court on November 7 in favour of party-based elections in Punjab is historic and, hopefully, has settled the old controversy for all times to come. No good citizen can be or should be neutral when it comes to the fundamental questions of human rights, constitutionalism and democracy. There are great philosophies behind these ideas that have shaped the modern civilisation and continue to do so. Political parties have become an essential instrument of translating popular will into an organised knowable political mandate. Let me present three arguments, although I have many, in support of party-based elections at the local level.
Throughout history, even the most enlightened and ardent followers of democratic principles have looked at political parties with suspicion. In our case, the present political parties from left to right, and horizontally, from one region to another, lack democracy within them and have become family-run political businesses. It is a sad but indisputable fact of our political life. More on a hypothetical level, political parties everywhere polarise society. So, we cannot easily dismiss a dim view of political parties. However, in a practising democracy — constructing a republican form of government — we need the agency of political parties. An anti-party view also persisted among the founders of the American republic around 1787, when they thought of parties as promoting factions, being divisive and against the spirit of national unity and purpose. Soon, they and the rest of the world realised that parties are an indispensable tool of organising politics.
There is a contradiction in the position of the ruling elite in Pakistan about the autonomy of local governments and the role of political parties there, and their view of autonomy of provinces and the role of political parties at the provincial and national levels. Why should they reject the role of parties at the local level, if, in their judgement, they are serving well at the higher levels? A desire to control local government tiers, the base of democracy, shaped the view of the Punjab government to make the law that the Lahore High Court has rightly rejected. Frankly speaking, exceptionality of culture or social structures doesn’t win the argument, as historical evidence from other countries, developed as well as developing like ours, is against party-less local elections. Why party-based elections? Only three arguments here, the rest for another time.
First, local elections would provide a fertile ground for the political recruitment of political parties, for local representatives, particularly at the district level, through good work and reputation, and having built their party-based constituency of support, might not be ignored by the top hierarchy of the political parties. This will seriously diminish the elitist character of the political parties. We may, over time, see a reversal of the current practice of elite families nominating their own members for party tickets. The electable elite families may continue to dominate even the local councils, but the chances of party activists moving upward in the party hierarchy and leadership will be greater under party-based elections than in any other system.
Second, another related argument is that with the party flag, party workers from lower ranks may gain political influence and even challenge undemocratic elite practices at the local level. Other democracies have followed the local route of politics — with some exceptions here and there — in developing popular roots through party activists at the local levels.
Third, political parties at the local level will offer a popular and representative alternative to bureaucratic decision-making on critical issues of development, infrastructure and service delivery. Finally, a competitive political environment at the local level will eventually make the parties and party bosses more responsible and responsive.
Published in The Express Tribune, November 12th, 2013.
Throughout history, even the most enlightened and ardent followers of democratic principles have looked at political parties with suspicion. In our case, the present political parties from left to right, and horizontally, from one region to another, lack democracy within them and have become family-run political businesses. It is a sad but indisputable fact of our political life. More on a hypothetical level, political parties everywhere polarise society. So, we cannot easily dismiss a dim view of political parties. However, in a practising democracy — constructing a republican form of government — we need the agency of political parties. An anti-party view also persisted among the founders of the American republic around 1787, when they thought of parties as promoting factions, being divisive and against the spirit of national unity and purpose. Soon, they and the rest of the world realised that parties are an indispensable tool of organising politics.
There is a contradiction in the position of the ruling elite in Pakistan about the autonomy of local governments and the role of political parties there, and their view of autonomy of provinces and the role of political parties at the provincial and national levels. Why should they reject the role of parties at the local level, if, in their judgement, they are serving well at the higher levels? A desire to control local government tiers, the base of democracy, shaped the view of the Punjab government to make the law that the Lahore High Court has rightly rejected. Frankly speaking, exceptionality of culture or social structures doesn’t win the argument, as historical evidence from other countries, developed as well as developing like ours, is against party-less local elections. Why party-based elections? Only three arguments here, the rest for another time.
First, local elections would provide a fertile ground for the political recruitment of political parties, for local representatives, particularly at the district level, through good work and reputation, and having built their party-based constituency of support, might not be ignored by the top hierarchy of the political parties. This will seriously diminish the elitist character of the political parties. We may, over time, see a reversal of the current practice of elite families nominating their own members for party tickets. The electable elite families may continue to dominate even the local councils, but the chances of party activists moving upward in the party hierarchy and leadership will be greater under party-based elections than in any other system.
Second, another related argument is that with the party flag, party workers from lower ranks may gain political influence and even challenge undemocratic elite practices at the local level. Other democracies have followed the local route of politics — with some exceptions here and there — in developing popular roots through party activists at the local levels.
Third, political parties at the local level will offer a popular and representative alternative to bureaucratic decision-making on critical issues of development, infrastructure and service delivery. Finally, a competitive political environment at the local level will eventually make the parties and party bosses more responsible and responsive.
Published in The Express Tribune, November 12th, 2013.