he question of parity in the representation of provinces was raised soon after the creation of Pakistan because particular asymmetries were part of the structure in terms of historical evolution of the provinces and their placement in the scheme of the Raj. Ideally, the provinces should have represented their demographic strength after independence, but this was not acceptable to the self-proclaimed custodians of the idea of Pakistan. Some of them had left their constituencies behind in India. Moreover, the non-representative institutions of the state, with moorings of the colonial ethos, were not ready to accept the demographic majority of the East Bengal which had a more politically conscious citizenry and middle class progressive orientation of leadership.

To provide a degree of parity of representation to the provinces in the 1973 constitution, the institution of Senate was conceived. It was created nearly a year after the National Assembly had adopted the constitution. In this sense, the first Senate was an offspring of the National Assembly. The constitution laid out a mechanism of indirect elections for the Senate. Members of the Provincial Assemblies in each province were to elect ten members. Members of the National Assembly were to elect members to represent the Federally Administered Tribal Areas and the federal capital.

The purpose of indirect elections to the Senate was to reflect the strength of political parties in provincial legislatures in this house and to present and safeguard the interests of the provinces. Hence, the provisions for the Senate elections were enacted under the Senate Election Order (PO No 9 and 12, 1973). The first elections to the senate were held in the Punjab, Sindh Balochistan, the FATA, and the NWFP (now Khyber Pakhtunkhwa) on July 4, 6, 8, 9 and 10, respectively. The party position in the forty-five member Senate was: Pakistan Peoples Party 29, National Awami Party 8, independents 3, Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam 2, United Democratic Front 2, and Pakistan Muslim League 1. The term of the first group that consisted of five members from each province, two members from the FATA and one from the capital was two years; the term for the remaining members was four years.

The first meeting of the first elected Senate was held on August 6, 1973, in the National Assembly Hall. The same session elected the first Senate chairman and deputy chairman. However, the first regular session for the conduct of routine business was held from September 4 to 15, 1973. The constitution provided the Rules of Business and Procedure until new rules were framed and notified by the president. For this, a special committee was formed on December 13, 1974.

Mahboob Hussain argues in his book, The Parliament of Pakistan (2019), that “the role of the Senate as a federal institution under the 1973 constitution was important. In the matter of legislation, the participation of both houses of the parliament was essential, but in some respects, the National Assembly enjoyed a distinctly superior position.” The Senate provides equal representation to all the federating units in the parliament, which provides equitable representation and confidence to the smaller provinces and the federal capital. Nonetheless, some of the representatives from smaller provinces have always been unhappy with the way the Senate operates because of the system of indirect elections under Proportional Representation-Single Transferable Vote.

In his book Electoral Reforms in Pakistan, Mohammad Waseem opines that two provisions: one, constitutional, and the other, electoral, counter the effect of over-representation of smaller provinces in the Senate. The former was introduced through asymmetric policy scope of the two houses whereby money bills could only be introduced in the National Assembly. The latter distinction is that, as opposed to the National Assembly, the Senate is elected on the basis of proportional representation, restricted franchise and indirect elections. He argues that “indirect elections are by their very nature less representative than direct elections.”

The problem with the current framework of Senate elections is that the initiative for electing the Senate is exercised not by the electorate but by political parties which are represented in provincial assemblies. The key to making it more representative lies with direct elections as is the case in the United States, where citizens directly elect their Senators. It has been argued that this will be very difficult to implement in Pakistan because the size of the constituencies will be too large to be manageable. Since the voting system involves secret ballot, party affiliation does not matter and it may be difficult for parties to ensure that their members vote along party lines. Therefore, parties prepare groups/ blocks to get their maximum share of candidates elected.

In the Senate elections, there is more room for manipulation of the system. Candidates can virtually purchase votes across the party spectrum. For instance, if somebody manages to enlist support of three legislators from the former FATA region, he could be elected a senator. During 2002-2005, the Muttahida Majlis-i-Amal was accused of offering its Senate seats to wealthy people. Several ‘investors’ were thus elected to the House. Similarly, candidates favoured by the establishment are often elected by getting support across party lines.

Sometimes ruling parties extend their support to certain candidates because they have to be included in the cabinet. For example, the PML-N is poised this time around to elect Muhammad Aurangzeb and Ahad Cheema. Both have already been given ministerial portfolios without being members of the parliament.

Some members get elected to the Senate from places where they are not domiciled. This negates the principle of provincial representation. For instance, Aimal Wali Khan, the central leader of the Awami National Party, is a joint candidate of the ANP and the PPP for a general seat from Balochistan. Some of the candidates against seats reserved for technocrats and women also have dubious credentials.

This prestigious parliamentary institution needs reforms, continuity and evolution to overcome the loopholes and its weaknesses.

The writer heads the History Department at University of Sargodha. He has worked as a research fellow at Royal Holloway College, University of London. He can be reached at abrar.zahoor@hotmail.com His X handle: @AbrarZahoor1