A year after the elections
Without correcting past mistakes, any election will lead to a similar crisis of credibility.
The writer is a social activist who heads the Pattan Development Organisation. The views expressed here are his own
On May 11 last year, Pakistanis exercised their ‘right’ to vote. A year after, it still remains a mystery as to who they voted for and who was declared winner. Like some previous elections, this may remain an unsolved puzzle. Yet, there is no harm in raising some pertinent questions. But let’s start by admiring the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) along with the National Database and Registration Authority (NADRA) for playing an enormous role in making elections transparent by devising ‘foolproof’ measures. But the implementers failed them systematically. This provided an opportunity to the contesting parties to agitate. The Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz was found agitating in interior Sindh but not in Punjab where it grabbed most seats; the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf in Karachi and Punjab, where it lost most seats, but not in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa where it won most. The Awami National Party and the Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam adopted the same path. The battle continues after a year.
The Free and Fair Election Network (FAFEN), the largest network of civil society organisations on election monitoring, had deployed about 40,000 observers. The network applied a very robust methodology, including parallel vote tabulation with multiple checks. Based on observations of static and mobile monitors, FAFEN issued a press release on May 11 reporting that “flagrant violations of election laws have been committed” and that there were “incidences of violence and polling irregularities from across Pakistan”.
While agitation by political parties made polling controversial, FAFEN and media reports diminished its credibility. That was last year. Since then, every attempt that intended to investigate the wrongs has been sabotaged. This created more doubts. For instance, when former NADRA chairman Tariq Malik refused to act according to the directions of the interior ministry, he had to face the music. Defiance enraged the government. He and his family members were allegedly harassed. His midnight sacking was turned down by the Islamabad High Court. This did not deter the government from harassing him further. Finally, he had to flee the country. In his recent interview to The Express Tribune, he cited the case of Hadi Bux Jatoi who cast 310 votes in Shikarpur. This can’t be an isolated act; therefore, it demands nationwide scrutiny.
FAFEN, however, continued analysing its own data and ECP statistics during the last 12 months and released a couple of volumes on the elections of 2013. It has fascinating revelations. In 35 constituencies, the margin of victory was found to be less than the rejected votes. For instance, in NA-266, the margin of victory was 5,861, while there were 25,562 rejected voters. Similarly, in NA-188, the winner got only 1,275 more votes than the runner-up, but the rejected votes were 9,392. This one is even more scandalous: in 93 constituencies, the numbers of votes stated on form XVII (constituency result form) were different from the registered votes in the final polling scheme. This potentially means tampering with the polling scheme or worse, voter disenfranchisement.
Moreover, according to some estimates, the returning and district returning officers changed about nine per cent (or 5,000) polling stations without getting prior permission from the ECP. This was also an unlawful act. It indeed had massive impact — it caused massive inconvenience to voters in finding their designated polling stations. This void might have been used to stuff ballot boxes. This tampering with the ECP polling scheme distorted the whole process enormously and caused gigantic uproar. For instance, with a change of one polling station, not only did the number of allocated voters change, but there was also a chain reaction on many neighbouring polling stations. Hence, it became impossible to do any meaningful analyses and projections. However, it provided a free hand to fraudsters.
The FAFEN observers did, however, manage to obtain around 7,250 Form XIVs on the polling day. In June, FAFEN got 30,000 certified Form XIVs. But from 114 constituencies, FAFEN observers could not get a single Form XIV. Moreover, the examination of these forms revealed intriguing trends. A significant number of presiding officers prepared these forms wrongly and I would say intentionally so. A head teacher can’t make mistakes in adding up simple figures. I handed over many forms to the ECP and revealed them to the media but no action was taken.
In my interaction with ECP officials, I found most of them upright. However, they could not hold the reins on returning officers due to structural lacuna. In April, the ECP, through a press release, had virtually surrendered. Interestingly, no one noticed this at that time. And a similar opinion is being articulated very categorically in the ECP Strategic Plan 2014-18 too, “the ECP does not have a complete control over temporary election staff. This includes DROs/ROs, Presiding Officers and other polling station staff, and security officials. It cannot take an action against them for any deliberate attempt of fraud”. This shows the ECP’s helplessness. This realisation needs to be appreciated, but it can also be construed as a confession of being witness to rigging. The ECP recognises it as one of the major strategic challenges in its plan. This is also a challenge for all of us.
I have no soft corner for Imran Khan or Tahirul Qadri but one can’t disagree with what they are demanding. The wrongs committed in the 2013 general elections must be corrected. One way forward is to examine thumb impressions of randomly selected ballot papers from all the constituencies, compare polling scheme details with the on-ground situation and recount ballot papers. Then, fix the responsibility and punish the culprits. Any new election must be conducted after wide-ranging electoral reforms. In particular, make the returning officers accountable to the ECP. Without correcting past mistakes, any election will lead to a similar crisis of credibility, having repercussion on the legitimacy of any ‘elected’ government.
Published in The Express Tribune, May 15th, 2014.
The Free and Fair Election Network (FAFEN), the largest network of civil society organisations on election monitoring, had deployed about 40,000 observers. The network applied a very robust methodology, including parallel vote tabulation with multiple checks. Based on observations of static and mobile monitors, FAFEN issued a press release on May 11 reporting that “flagrant violations of election laws have been committed” and that there were “incidences of violence and polling irregularities from across Pakistan”.
While agitation by political parties made polling controversial, FAFEN and media reports diminished its credibility. That was last year. Since then, every attempt that intended to investigate the wrongs has been sabotaged. This created more doubts. For instance, when former NADRA chairman Tariq Malik refused to act according to the directions of the interior ministry, he had to face the music. Defiance enraged the government. He and his family members were allegedly harassed. His midnight sacking was turned down by the Islamabad High Court. This did not deter the government from harassing him further. Finally, he had to flee the country. In his recent interview to The Express Tribune, he cited the case of Hadi Bux Jatoi who cast 310 votes in Shikarpur. This can’t be an isolated act; therefore, it demands nationwide scrutiny.
FAFEN, however, continued analysing its own data and ECP statistics during the last 12 months and released a couple of volumes on the elections of 2013. It has fascinating revelations. In 35 constituencies, the margin of victory was found to be less than the rejected votes. For instance, in NA-266, the margin of victory was 5,861, while there were 25,562 rejected voters. Similarly, in NA-188, the winner got only 1,275 more votes than the runner-up, but the rejected votes were 9,392. This one is even more scandalous: in 93 constituencies, the numbers of votes stated on form XVII (constituency result form) were different from the registered votes in the final polling scheme. This potentially means tampering with the polling scheme or worse, voter disenfranchisement.
Moreover, according to some estimates, the returning and district returning officers changed about nine per cent (or 5,000) polling stations without getting prior permission from the ECP. This was also an unlawful act. It indeed had massive impact — it caused massive inconvenience to voters in finding their designated polling stations. This void might have been used to stuff ballot boxes. This tampering with the ECP polling scheme distorted the whole process enormously and caused gigantic uproar. For instance, with a change of one polling station, not only did the number of allocated voters change, but there was also a chain reaction on many neighbouring polling stations. Hence, it became impossible to do any meaningful analyses and projections. However, it provided a free hand to fraudsters.
The FAFEN observers did, however, manage to obtain around 7,250 Form XIVs on the polling day. In June, FAFEN got 30,000 certified Form XIVs. But from 114 constituencies, FAFEN observers could not get a single Form XIV. Moreover, the examination of these forms revealed intriguing trends. A significant number of presiding officers prepared these forms wrongly and I would say intentionally so. A head teacher can’t make mistakes in adding up simple figures. I handed over many forms to the ECP and revealed them to the media but no action was taken.
In my interaction with ECP officials, I found most of them upright. However, they could not hold the reins on returning officers due to structural lacuna. In April, the ECP, through a press release, had virtually surrendered. Interestingly, no one noticed this at that time. And a similar opinion is being articulated very categorically in the ECP Strategic Plan 2014-18 too, “the ECP does not have a complete control over temporary election staff. This includes DROs/ROs, Presiding Officers and other polling station staff, and security officials. It cannot take an action against them for any deliberate attempt of fraud”. This shows the ECP’s helplessness. This realisation needs to be appreciated, but it can also be construed as a confession of being witness to rigging. The ECP recognises it as one of the major strategic challenges in its plan. This is also a challenge for all of us.
I have no soft corner for Imran Khan or Tahirul Qadri but one can’t disagree with what they are demanding. The wrongs committed in the 2013 general elections must be corrected. One way forward is to examine thumb impressions of randomly selected ballot papers from all the constituencies, compare polling scheme details with the on-ground situation and recount ballot papers. Then, fix the responsibility and punish the culprits. Any new election must be conducted after wide-ranging electoral reforms. In particular, make the returning officers accountable to the ECP. Without correcting past mistakes, any election will lead to a similar crisis of credibility, having repercussion on the legitimacy of any ‘elected’ government.
Published in The Express Tribune, May 15th, 2014.