Elite’s fear of elections
Iqbal Jafar

The political history of Pakistan is but an unending story of intrigues, conspiracies, coups and manipulations by the elite to prevent, tamper with, delay, abort, or nullify elections and even constitutions that provided for a popular mandate to rule the country. This is evident from the fact that from 1951 till today Pakistan has, for all practical purposes, been ruled by unelected or indirectly elected presidents (governor general till 1956) except for a period of four years from 1973 to 1977.
In the early years of independence, the elite followed a simple ploy to avoid elections: delay the framing of the constitution. Hence, all attempts at framing a constitution were thwarted for as long as 12 years after independence. Ultimately, after much bargaining and public pressure, a constitution was adopted by the Constituent Assembly. It even received the assent of the governor general and was promulgated in March 1956. One of the reasons, or probably the main reason, why it sailed through all the opposing currents was that the constitution of 1956 had no provision for the holding of the first general elections!
It was only by a non-binding administrative order that the first general elections were scheduled to be held later in February 1959, that is, three years after the promulgation of the constitution. The people waited for the appointed day with increasing excitement as the day of elections drew nearer, but all hopes were dashed five months before the appointed day when, in October 1958, martial law was imposed and the constitution abrogated. The chief martial law administrator promised to restore democracy but of ‘a type that people can understand and work.’
The promised was fulfilled in March 1962 when a new constitution was unveiled. The new constitution solved the problem of elections, – the main problem that bothers the elite – by doing away with the very idea of general elections! It provided, instead, for ‘controlled democracy’ through an electoral college of 80,000 members to elect the president and the legislature.
The Constitution of 1962 was abrogated by the second martial law in March 1969, and the generals were forced to think of holding elections, especially because East Pakistan was already at the brink of revolt due to strong feelings of alienation generated and also because of the fact that the eastern wing of the country had only an insignificant representation among the elite.
The general elections were finally held, 23 years after the creation of Pakistan, in March 1970. Those elections were free and fair not because of the good intentions of the ruling cabal, but because of the failure of the intelligence agencies to predict the outcome of the elections correctly. To their surprise two populist parties, one in the east and the other in the west, emerged as winners, instead of five or six that could be manipulated. Even worse, the Awami League emerged as the majority party in the House.
That being contrary to the expectations of the civil-military elite, the first meeting of the newly elected National Assembly was postponed. That led to much bloodshed, national humiliation, and the eventual creation of Bangladesh. We, thus, paid a very heavy price for defying a popular electoral verdict. The powers that be seem to have learnt a lesson from that monumental blunder: manipulate the elections so that you don’t have to court disaster by defying a popular verdict. Consequently, no general elections held after 1970 have been free or fair. All of them were managed and rigged to obtain, in the immortal words of General Ziaul Haq, “musbat nataij” (positive results).
Now, after 42 years, we are close to another free and fair election. An independent and fearless judiciary, recent constitutional amendments, and the appointment of an independent and powerful election commission, have made it as certain as is humanly possible that the next elections would, indeed, be free and fair. This should have been a cause for national celebration but, instead, the air is suddenly thick with forebodings, rumours and doubts about when, how, and if at all, elections could or should be held.
All sorts of problems, pre-conditions, and fears have come to occupy our political discourse, such as: elections cannot be held due to widespread lawlessness; elections cannot and should not be held without certain electoral reforms and corrections in the electoral process; elections would worsen ethnic and regional conflicts; elections should be delayed to launch a clean-up operation; polling on the election day will provide easy targets for the terrorists. If all this fails to shake the resolve to hold elections, then, there is the last desperate formulation: what would the people gain by these elections?
These spurious considerations can be summarily dismissed. Iran held two general elections during an eight-year long full-fledged war with Iraq. Sri Lanka held all the elections that were due during its 30-year long civil war. Afghanistan, our immediate neighbour, held its first general elections while the authority of the government in Kabul was being defied by powerful elements throughout the country. The less-intense challenges that we face today cannot, therefore, be used as an excuse for delaying the elections.
This brings us to the question whether there is any reason to expect a change for the better, or any change at all, due to elections. This question deserves to be considered in earnest as it is on the mind of everyone, regardless of party preferences. We can begin to answer by comparing the elections of 2013 with those of 1970 that also happen to be the first and, so far, the last free and fair elections we had in the country.
In 1970, most of the political parties in West Pakistan, except the newly formed PPP, could be described as dormant. This is evident from the fact that, as against 81 seats won by the PPP, no other party could win more than nine seats. Independent candidates (16) won almost as many seats as all the three factions of the Muslim League combined. Next, the print media was hardly free and the electronic media was a state monopoly and that too with limited reach. Even so the elections of 1970 were a lively event, and brought massive change. The PPP itself, which could not contest a larger number of seats due to lack of candidates, was surprised at the defeat of many assured ‘electables.’
In 2013, the political landscape will be quite different. There are at least half a dozen big parties that have credible organisation, motivated workers, and substantial support even if confined to a particular region. Except for the PML-Q, which may evaporate even before the run-up to the elections, the major old players – seasoned by nine previous elections – are PPP, PML-N, MQM, ANP, JUI, and JI. They are sure to make the electoral contest more intense than ever before. The new major factor, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), may not yet be the biggest political force but it already is the biggest catalyst for change. It has also infused new energy in the political process, shaking even some older parties out of their contented indolence.
For these reasons the elections of 2013 will be a great watershed in our political history. Through this experience the political parties should be able to finally come of age, and the electorate grow more confident and less cynical. Also, by holding truly free and fair elections, even in less-than-ideal conditions, we would have achieved what other nations have achieved at a much greater cost. This, surely, is a cause for celebration.
The writer is a former civil servant.
Email: iqjafar@gmail.com