With most high-profile PTI leaders having their nomination papers rejected, a new element seems to have been introduced, and the change in the nature of pre-election rigging seems now to intrude on the bare minimum of the fairness of the voting process.
It makes a certain sense that if candidates are not there, then the party will not have a chance of victory in that particular constituency. Previously, pre-election rigging is supposed to occur in the shape of the vilification of the outgoing head of government, followed by the switching of ‘electables’ from the ousted party to the party that has been anointed.
There has been a slow process as a result of which electables have been tied to a party, and will not now ditch it. That might be why the usual transfer of loyalties which occurs at election time has not taken place. Candidates have now incorporated into their election machines the votes of their party, along with the biradari or personal support they might enjoy, and as a switch will not guarantee that the party cotes they lose will be replaced by the new party votes, they run the risk of losing.
Whatever is decided about the rejections, a new pathway has been opened for future elections. While it might seem unusual this time, all should expect it to become the new normal from next time onwards
It is true that being in the opposition means that patronage might dry up, but the sun of official favour, shown by the release of development funds, the granting of government jobs and the release of criminals, might dry up. An opposition legislator depends on potential, the possibility that in future he might be part of the government. An opposition legislator also has no chance of entering the Cabinet, which gives him a share in executive power. However, being in opposition is better than losing. Apart from the psychological advantage over the loser, there is the prospect of remaining or advancing within the party, and cementing one’s place in a future Cabinet. There is also the prospect of crossing the floor, and some legislators have gained considerably by dickering with the government, while never deserting. Having a dodgy reputation is almost the same as having one for loyalty. At least one is never taken for granted.
Another reason why PTI candidates have been decimated by rejections is much simpler than the machinations of powers that be, international conspiracies or the malignity of little green men living under the surface of the earth. It might be a matter of plain old-fashioned incompetence. The Lahore by-election in December 2021 should not be forgotten where the PTI candidate and covering candidate both got disqualified, because they both had the same proposer, whose vote turned out to be registered in another constituency. The PTI voter has no one to vote for, and the attempt to transfer the vote bank to the PPP candidate was unsuccessful.
Electioneering is a science. Being popular is one thing, contesting an election is another. There are a large number of election rules which have to be followed, and there are all sorts of technicalities surrounding actually contesting. With experience, candidates get the science down pat.
This is another reason why politics here is hereditary. Every candidate develops an electoral machine, and needs people to man it. These people develop their own expertise by virtue of repetition. Some are paid, but many are not. Parties dispose of such workers, because they are the only force that can get free workers. Also, party electoral workers can be transferred: they will work for whichever candidate the party says. These are the people who act as polling agents, or man the candidates’ camps outside the polling stations.
When a regular candidate passes away, the machine needs a new candidate. Who better than the candidate’s son/wife/son-in-law/nephew? Parties are not strong enough to impose their own choices, mainly because they do not contribute much to these machines. Indeed, the ‘electables’ are just people with electoral machines and relatively free of party influence.
The PTI did have a number of ‘electables’, but it also had a relatively high proportion of new candidates, who built their machines in 2018. Thus the electoral machines for the 2024 election were liable to slip up in a number of cases.
Again, there have been fresh delimitations, with the result that people’s votes are now in a different constituency from the previous election. That means that someone who proposed a candidate before might not be able to now. A candidate for MNA does not have to have his vote enrolled in the constituency. He only needs to be enrolled somewhere. An MPA candidate needs to be enrolled in that province. As one can change one’s place of enrolment by request, there is nothing to stop a person from contesting an MNA seat in a different province. It has never happened, but at one point, there was a proposal that Asif Zardari contest for the Punjab chief ministership. Another example of cross-province politics, is PTI KP President Ali Amin Gandapur, whose father Maj (retd) Aminullah Gandapur had been a Punjab MPA.
Proposers must be enrolled in the constituency, not a neighbouring one. However, sloppy election machines might make that mistake.
It now seems that the traditional procession to the RO’s office by the candidate was sensible. When the candidate personally was present, the question of attesting the signature did not arise. The practice of filing more than one set of nomination papers is also explained, as if just one is accepted, the others don;t matter.
However. The PTI’s candidates were in danger of arrest for the May 9 incidents, unless already arrested. Those in jail,like Imran Khan, might lack the jail superintendent’s certification. Those who have had their papers rejected will have to add to their legal burden, by appealing successively to the election tribunals, then the high courts and finally the Supreme Court. It is not only the legal burden, there is the time factor too.
The PTI has got a time constraint. It faces 368 rejections, while the PPP faces 272 and the PML(N) 124. It is not that the PTI is the only party facing rejections, but as many as 38 of its senior leaders faced rejected nominations, meaning that even if the party wins a majority anywhere, it will go into that assembly headless. Getting those rejections reversed is not purposeful if the party symbol is not allotted. That symbol is still wobbly, for the Peshawar High Court decision restoring it has been appealed by the Election Commission of Pakistan, and PTI candidates whose papers have been accepted, may still not get the party symbol.
The law should be followed. Popularity does not means the law can be ignored. It may mean that a party may win elections, and then change the law. But until it can do so, it must observe the law. However, the widespread rejection of PTI candidates’ nomination papers does mean that there has been one step further on the slippery slope.
Filing one’s nomination papers has never before been much more than a formality. The last accusation of tampering was made against Zulfikar Ali Bhutto back in 1977, of having had the Jamaat Islami’s Sindh chief Maulana Jan Muhammad Abbassi kidnapped to prevent him filing papers from Bhutto’s Larkana seat, so that Bhutto could have the satisfaction of winning unopposed from his home seat.
However, the election process has been so tainted that the other parts of the process, once subject to abuse but now assumed under control, have become doubtful. Is the campaign to be interfered with? Will the vote be free from irregularity? So far, the vote has been respected to the extent that it has still not been shown how votes are added to candidates’ totals. Electronic voting and internet voting overseas would have provided a pathway, but the method has not been identified. Various allegations have been made by losers, but no evidence has been adduced.
Whatever is decided about the rejections, a new pathway has been opened for future elections. While it might seem unusual this time, all should expect it to become the new normal from next time onwards.
