Pakistan’s upcoming general election is unlike any in the recent past. With just days to go the outcome is still hard to call.

A number of unknowns make the polls more unpredictable than previous ones. The year 2013 is unlikely to mirror 2008 for several reasons. The most obvious is the absence of a single overwhelming factor that, for example, gave the PPP an edge in the 2008 polls: the sympathy vote generated by Benazir Bhutto’s tragic assassination. The PPP is now burdened by incumbency and by a dismal record in power.

The PPP today is leaderless and has failed to even mount a nation-wide campaign. Its public messaging is muddled and directionless. Its TV commercials are about the past not the future. Its political strategy has seen a retreat to its traditional stronghold in rural Sindh. This has unwittingly signaled that the party has all but given up in much of Punjab: the make-or-break province.

All of this has strengthened the public perception that the PPP is trailing well behind its longtime rival — the Pakistan Muslim League led by former prime minister Nawaz Sharif — and is under pressure from the new challenger, Imran Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI).

Apart from these changing dynamics it is unclear how several other factors could weigh in on the election. There are, at least, five unknowns. The first is the triangular nature of contests and unpredictability about how the PTI factor will shape the outcome in three-way races. New voters are a second unknown factor. First-time voters are disproportionately young. An estimated 31 per cent of the electorate is between 18 and 29 years. More young people are now registered voters.

Opinion surveys show many also intend to vote. A British Council poll released last month found 62 per cent of the under 30s said they were likely to vote. If this happens will it upset traditional calculations?

The third unknown is voter turnout. If turnout rises from the modest 44 per cent in 2008 this could change the game in several ways. It would disproportionately benefit urban-based parties; tip the balance on several marginal seats and perhaps even undercut the political weight of traditional allegiances.

Higher turnout especially by young voters could intensify the ‘swing’ factor in the election. A substantial part of the electorate — over a fifth — is ‘undecided’ or uncommitted. This ‘floating vote’ can be decisive especially on the sizeable number of marginal seats.

The fifth unknown is how a more informed electorate will weigh various factors to decide whom to vote for. Voters now have more knowledge about candidates, campaigns and issues, thanks to the broadcast media’s greater reach. This is not Pakistan’s first ‘television election’. But over a decade of public exposure to independent television networks may have begun to loosen traditional loyalties and make voters more open to consider different options.
There are, of course, well-established facts about the country’s electoral politics. The most obvious are deep-rooted voter alignments that have long advantaged the two main parties. The phenomenon of ‘all politics is local’ works to the advantage of parties that have traditionally dominated Pakistan’s constituency-based politics. Not to be underestimated is the reality that much of electoral politics still pivots around traditional allegiances with long standing vote banks kicking in on polling day to determine the outcome.
The two major parties rely on networks of rural and urban influentials or ‘electables’, who use their local power or clan and kinship connections to rally support and win seats.

The hold of traditional politics on the election process has been reinforced by the recent failure of the Election Commission’s candidate scrutiny process. In the absence of clearly articulated rules many members of the rural and urban elite were able to escape the process, which if it had been properly spelt out and rigorously implemented would have barred them from the election. Not only were serial loan defaulters allowed to participate, but the Free and Fair Elections Network (FAFEN) also found that over 40 per cent of candidates did not have national tax numbers, making them non-taxpayers. If the scrutiny procedure held any promise of aligning the election process to the rule of law, high court tribunals thwarted this.

Between the various knowns and plethora of unknowns it is difficult to predict what the election outcome would look like. If there is any certainty it is that whoever wins the election is unlikely to secure an overall majority and will have to cobble a coalition to govern the country.

(Dr Maleeha Lodhi served as Pakistan’s ambassador to the US and United Kingdom)


http://www.thefrontierpost.com/category/40/