Ahead of 10th General Election due in Pakistan in 2013, PILDAT has re-initiated its series of Election Monitors analysing key issues and developments that have the potential to impact the upcoming Election in Pakistan. The first of the series of these monitors, analysing key issues, is shared below:

1. Questions raised on the credibility of the Election Commission

The current Election Commission consisting of four (4) members each representing a province and the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) as its Chairman is the first full-time Election Commission of Pakistan whose members and the CEC are appointed through a bi-partisan process as laid down in the constitution after the 18th Constitutional Amendment.

Most of the political parties, civil society in general and the media hailed the appointment of Justice (Retd.) Fakhruddin G. Ebrahim as the CEC as he enjoyed a reputation of high integrity. No objection was raised on the credentials of the other four members as well.

Lately, however, questions have been raised by a number of political parties and leaders about the credibility of the ECP. Dr. Tahir ul Qadri, who organized a large public meeting in Lahore on December 23, 2012 and later led a �Long March� of his followers from Lahore to Islamabad demanded drastic electoral reforms including the dissolution of the present Election Commission. He raised the question of advanced age of the CEC and termed the bi-partisan appointment of other four members as a �Muk Muka� or deal between the two major parties.

A noted and senior lawyer Senator S. M. Zafar thought that the appointment of the Chief Election Commissioner and the four members has not been strictly in accordance with Article 213 (2A) of the Constitution which required that three names be forwarded to the Parliamentary Committee for each position and the Committee would then pick one name after holding hearing. The requirement of three names was met in the case of CEC as both the Leader of the House and the Leader of the Opposition forwarded three names each to the Parliamentary Committee as they could not agree on one set of three names. However, there is no record of proposing three names for each of the four members of the Election Commission. Hearing, on the other hand, was not held for any of the five positions. Senator S. M. Zafar, therefore, maintains that the requirements of the Constitution were not followed in the appointment of the CEC and the four members and the Election Commission is, therefore, not properly constituted and hence void ab-initio.

This is the position which was later adopted by Dr. Tahir ul Qadri though he seems willing to not question the appointment of the CEC. He stated the intention of approaching the superior courts to get a judicial verdict on the question. PML-Q leaders Senator Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain and Chaudhry Pervez Elahi, MNA have also raised questions on the credibility of the four members. Mr. Imran Khan, Chairman Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf has also questioned the integrity of ECP below the CEC level. Jama�at-e-Islami has also leveled serious charges against the CEC and the ECP in general after the CEC gave opinion that delimitation of constituencies in Karachi is not possible unless fresh census is held. The MQM had demanded the resignation of the ECP Secretary when he took a position that delimitation of constituencies in Karachi is possible and will be carried out even without a fresh census. All political parties in Karachi except MQM and PPP had been agitating and holding Sit-ins in front of the ECP Karachi Office because they feel that the re-verification of voters in Karachi is not being carried out independent of the influence and interference of some local groups.

This sudden outbreak of objections on the ECP is not conducive for a Free and Fair Election which is due within the next four months. Except for the objections raised on the constitutionality of the formation of the ECP, there seems to be no solid ground for questioning the credibility of the ECP.

As far as the questions about the formation of the ECP are concerned, these appear to be relating to the letter and not so much about the spirit of the Constitutional provisions.

However, now that a question has been raised and there has certainly been a lapse on the part of the Parliamentary Committee on the Appointment of the CEC and Members of the ECP, it may not be a bad idea to send a reference to the Supreme Court and seek advice on rectifying the lapse.

This lapse does indicate the serious issues of capacity in the National Assembly secretariat. Now that the Parliament and its committees are undertaking serious business of the State, the staffing policies relating to the Parliament need to be seriously reviewed and issues addressed.

2. Date of Election

The National Assembly will complete its 5-year term on March 16, 2013. The four Provincial Assemblies will complete their respective terms on different dates a few days after the National Assembly completes its term. Provincial Assembly of the Punjab will complete its 5-year term on April 9, 2013. If there is no agreement on a date when the Prime Minister and the four Chief Ministers dissolve their respective Assemblies to hold fresh election within 90 days, the Assemblies will complete their terms on such dates that it may be difficult to hold election to both National and Provincial Assemblies on the same date.

It will be an administrative nightmare to hold election on two separate dates. Indications are that all ruling political parties at the Federation and the four Provinces are in touch with each other to agree on a suitable date to dissolve the Assemblies. In the past these parties have been able to develop consensus on very difficult issues such as the 18th , 19th and 20th Constitutional Amendments, National Finance Commission Award and the appointment of the Chief Election Commissioner. Although the election time promotes more divisive politics, it should still be possible for the two main parties, the PPP and the PML-N to agree on a timetable which does not make the organization of election any more difficult than it already is.

3. ECP Ban on new jobs and re-allocation of Development Funds ahead of Election

In an unprecedented move, the ECP clamped a ban on new recruitment by the Federal and Provincial Governments and on re-allocation of development funds to certain favourite areas and constituencies through a notification on January 21, 2013.

Usually, the ECP does not take such steps until the Election is announced but there were widespread reports that both the Federal and Provincial Governments were doling out jobs to their favourites in huge numbers in order to secure their loyalties during the coming election. This recruitment was not following any rules or merit policy; it was purely based on political considerations. The ECP had received numerous complaints regarding use of government jobs and government funds for influencing the coming election. Furthermore there were reports that development funds were being re-allocated to those constituencies where the Prime Minister, some ministers or other high officials of the party were to contest election so that the voters could be impressed at the State expense.

It is a bold and befitting step by the ECP which will go a long way in establishing the credibility and writ of the ECP. Although the Governments have protested and asked the ECP to reverse its decision, the ECP hopefully stands its ground and provide a level playing field to all political players.

4. Compliance with Supreme Court Directives

The Supreme Court judgment delivered on June 8, 2012 in the Workers Party case contains a number of directions or suggestions regarding the electoral system in Pakistan. The ECP has started complying with many of these directions but some of these directions carry far-reaching ramifications and relate to basic policy and systems.

It should be for the Parliament to debate and decide whether a Proportional Representation system or a mixed system will be better than the prevailing system. It is also a policy decision and requires legislation if compulsory voting is to be introduced. It is also a policy decision whether we wish to continue with �First Past The Post System� or we wish to switch to a system which provides for run-off election for the top two contenders if none could secure more than 50 % votes in the first round.

All these systems are in practice in various established democracies and there is no conclusive evidence that one system is better than the other. Each country has adopted systems and policies keeping its peculiar conditions in mind and these have evolved over a period of time.

It will not be appropriate to introduce systemic changes just on the direction of the court.

Honourable courts may decide to desist from issuing such policy directions. They, of course, can draw the attention of the Government and the Parliament towards a particular electoral issue and the Parliament may debate and decide on the possible way outs.

In case the Supreme Court insists that its directions be complied with before the next election, the ECP should approach the Court and argue against this. If required, the ECP should hire an able lawyer to present their case.

5. Verification of Voters in Karach

The persistent flaws in the Electoral Rolls remains the single most important concern in the context of prospects of free and fair election.

The Election Commission failed to gauge the gravity of situation and order remedial measures when many political parties and citizens complained of massive flaws in the electoral rolls in Karachi. One common complaint was that a large number of voters were not contacted during the first exercise of door-to-door verification. Their preferred place of voting was changed without consulting them and in some cases addresses were assigned to voters which they had never visited and never requested.

Apparently, some foul play was at work and the precarious law and order situation made it extremely difficult for the ECP enumerators to do their work without coercion and interference.

Despite repeated complaints, protest processions and sit-ins, the ECP refused to address the grievances. Finally some political parties took the matter to Supreme Court which ordered fresh exercise of door-to-door verification of voters under the protection of Army and Frontier Corpse (FC) or Rangers. This verification process is underway but the same political parties are protesting that the verification exercise is being carried out without the protection of the Armed Forces which has again rendered the enumerators vulnerable to armed gangs. It is only a few days back that the CEC has asked the military to provide more manpower so that each team is accompanied by the armed forces personnel.

It is extremely important that the Electoral Rolls in Karachi are set right after this elaborate exercise. The ECP should take all possible measures to ensure that the exercise is carried out without intervention of any party. The ECP has no margin of error now. Even the current exercise is scheduled to conclude by March 2013. Any major flaw in the re-verification process can set the whole election cycle back.

The ECP should also worry at this stage about the extra measures it needs to put in place in Karachi to ensure not only free, fair but also peaceful election in Karachi and of course elsewhere such as Balochistan.