Democracy builds up from the grass roots at the local level through local institutions, where citizens experience governance more intimately and participate in many ways to address their problems, raise their voices and become involved in local politics. Pakistani democracy, or whatever passes for it, is top-down and is dominated by the elite, who have the tendency to retain as much power and resources as they can for as long as is possible for them to stay at the top. ‘Democracy’ is therefore limited to the small clique around dynastic leaders.
One of the uglier aspects of a civilian democracy is that the party bosses have refused to share power vertically with the lower tiers of the government. For the first time, we saw them agreeing to transfer power to the provinces through the 18th Amendment, when there was no single party dominating politics at the top. It was in their self-interest to move greater power to the provinces. In the post-Musharraf era, both the major parties — the PPP and the PML-N — refused to hold local government elections. They had to now in 2015 because of the intervention of the Supreme Court.
This background is necessary to understand the dynamics of the first phase of local government elections in Punjab and Sindh, as the other two provinces have already completed this exercise. One more thing that we must bear in mind is that the PML-N drafted the law to have local elections on a non-party basis couple of years ago, as it was not sure if it could win — and losing elections to the then rising PTI would have been a political disaster.
The outcome of the elections has apparently gone in favour of the PPP in interior Sindh and the PML-N in Punjab. There is a reason for this and it is not that the parties have done a great job in governing their respective provinces; the reason for their successes is the lure and lustre of patronage politics. The present and previous patterns of local governments have tended to show alignments with the provincial party or the government in power. Staying in the opposition means denial of everything, including resources, power and influence over the district government departments, with only very little of these allowed to flow downwards.
A large number of independent candidates, second in numbers to the PML-N, explains the undercurrents of interest-driven politics, which is based neither on ideology nor on the standing of any party. These candidates would be open to bargaining to join the ruling parties or supporting their candidates for the position of nazim at the district level in exchange of favours. The alliances and coalitions for local government elections always cut across party lines. It is as much a play of local power struggles, as it is of pragmatism. There is nothing wrong with this. All politics, at every level, from voting to contesting and forming a government, is determined by a rational choice of interest.
The good part of the local elections is that they have been conducted on a party basis that would allow parties, over time, to develop strong identities and voting constituencies at the grassroots level. Adequate resources, powers and autonomy to function will make this foundational tier grow even stronger.
Published in The Express Tribune, November 4th, 2015.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
COMMENTS (2)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ