What democracy means

Balloting and elections stand at the very core of any demographic system. While Pakistan has a general election scheduled for February, huge questions are already arising – as has been the case in previous polling exercises.

The level playing field demanded by most parties has quite clearly been tilted in a specific direction, in an attempt to ensure what the outcome of the people’s vote will be. People, it seems, do not matter in the success which costs taxpayers a huge amount of money and the national exchequer even more.

It would be far simpler to simply nominate candidates and put them in place rather than cook up a cauldron, which simply exposes the messy situation we are in.

The refusal to accept the papers filed by a sizable list of candidates, including those of Haqooq-e-Khalq Party (HKP) founder Ammar Ali Jan who had planned to contest a provincial assembly seat from Chungi Amar Sadhu, has added a new layer to the mayhem. There was little chance that the Khalq party would gain anything resembling an electoral victory.

Karachi-based human rights activist and lawyer Jibran Nasir has contested in at least two elections and managed to put together only about 6,000 votes in the constituencies he contested. He as someone who stands for democracy has now offered to legally represent or advise PTI candidates from his constituency in Karachi; the papers of these candidates have been mysteriously rejected.

While these matters will go to the courts, we need to understand why such an obvious facade of unfair play is being created. It seems evident that the candidate who many believe is the favoured runner for the prime ministerial position will gain a victory without too much help. Perhaps the purpose of all this mess is to ensure that his party has a simple majority and is not dependent on smaller parties to boost it up and keep it in power.

Such situations have arisen before and were superbly handled by major parties by incorporating smaller, poorly represented groups into their dialogue to have the crucial 18th Amendment in 2010. Credit of course goes to Raza Rabbani who authored this document, but the process through which it was passed – with the support from the PML-N as well as minor parties – shows how democracy should work at its best. The business is all about dialogue, discussion, discourse and reaching an agreed-upon solution to national problems.

Smaller parties that have come up recently such as the HKP and others can play a huge part in this, putting forward a different agenda and different points of view. It is important that these views be brought onto the national agenda. The victory of candidates from the HKP is unlikely despite the impressively hard work carried out in the Chungi area including providing sanitation and drinking water to the residents.

The constituency is an interesting one, with extremely poor areas surrounded by far more plush centres of living. But allowing the party a chance is crucial. We can only hope the mistakes made will be remedied though the reluctance to allow the party to put forward its grievances is somewhat alarming.

What is clear is that, as happened in 2018 and in polls before that date, we are going into an election the results of which do not seem to be in the hands of the people. This is especially true as many political experts expect turnout to be low given people’s disillusionment with larger parties even though the PTI – which faces its own electoral battle – still has strong youth support.

Low turnouts make it easier to manipulate voting, and we have seen the manner in which this happened in the past, with incidents involving the mysterious disappearance of an entire group of electoral staff for hours before turning up once again. The scenario is disturbing. The entire purpose of a democracy is to allow people to put forward their opinions. The manner in which they choose to do so is immensely important.

We should look towards India. The country’s electoral processes since the 1950s have been essentially fair, despite some controversies. The victory of the Aam Aadmi Party led by Arvind Kejriwal, which now rules Punjab, is an example of new parties coming up with an agenda aimed solely at eradicating poverty in their constituencies. It is impressive that Kejriwal’s mother made a living cleaning homes and offices. It is even more impressive that she chose to continue her work even after her son won a massive election. This is democracy as it should be. For all the flaws of the fascist Modi government, there are points of brightness in India which we should look towards.

It is clear that these flashes of light are not allowed in our country. An entirely open playing field which will allow them to flicker and perhaps burn bright is simply not available. There is obviously something very wrong here. The question is how to bring about change.

Essentially, this can happen only if larger parties, instead of smugly awaiting what they know will be theirs, lead a crusade for an inclusive election which allows everyone to take part. There also needs to be democratic change within parties. The elimination of key women candidates by the PML-N, who have played a major parliamentary role in the past, is disturbing.

For an election to have any validity, it should be not only fair but also transparent. People must be able to see exactly what is happening and how parties work. This has not been the case, and the election is essentially meaningless. The cliched pictures of people standing in queues mean very little unless all those who wish to contest are able to do so freely. It seems this is not happening, and we already have doubts about the upcoming election, provided it goes ahead at all.

The writer is a freelance columnist and former newspaper editor. She can be reached at: kamilahyat@hotmail.com