Election as a primary democratic norm of the culturally final political setup heralds the things to be changed in line with what people suits. It provides a viable opportunity to the public to revolutionize the regime if not fulfilling their much-needed requirements. Nevertheless, it also testifies the public qualification for rightly estimating the candid and caliber of a political party to lead the system. Correspondingly, it demonstrates how the democratic norms are manifestly being observed in a country.
May 11, 2013 is circumscribed by the Election commission of Pakistan (ECP) to uphold the election fairly in pursuit of deciding the upcoming five years of the political verve of the Pakistanis, fulfilling 342 seats in national assembly including 60 seats reserved for women and 10 reserved for non-Muslims and 100 seats in senate including 17 seats reserved for women and 17 reserved for technocrats and Ulema.
Logically, the election in Pakistani political system has proven no more than a contest of financial resources among the affluent class and also a contest of opportunism. Chronologically, the direct elections were never held during 1947-1958. In Ayub era 1958-1968, the basic democratic system was firstly introduced. Yet the era entirely proved conducive for nation building and prestige mainly due to rather fair policies by the field marshal.
From 1970 up to 1980, three times the nation was given options to elect the head of governments through elections. In 1970, Awami League won 160 seats leaving behind PPP with 81 seats. Nevertheless, the democratic norms were badly neglected and caused the disintegration of Pakistan. In 1977, the PPP was far ahead with ZA Bhutto as premier and won 155 seats, defeating national Alliance with 36 seats in the uphold elections.
Under the regime, variety of mega projects specifically Pakistan steel Mill can be accredited to Bhutto, yet the saga of 1971 stigmatized him and can never be considered other than self assertive. During Zia era, only once the elections were nominally held in 1985 and M.K Junejo was granted premiership. From 1988 to 2008, the elections were being contested and the main contenders were PPP and PML.
In the election held in 1988, PPP emerged once again with 93 NA seats as a dominant political party with bounty of slogans yet how can it be accredited as patriotic and national as the high profile figures were not even allowed to enter the sensitively prohibited areas of Pakistan. In the following decades of contest between PML (N) and PPP, the influx of foreign loans was new introduction in democratic norm of Pakistani political system and the nation was indebted and even diplomatically and economically sanctioned. The adherents of PML (N) cite the accomplishment of mega projects, likely to be appreciated, however these do away with rich not with the common Pakistani.
In the following election of 2002, PML (Q) was seen as supplementary to the military regime and is blamed for brutal policies towards the different segments of the nation. The result of 2008 election evinced what is asserted. Consequently, PPP with Asif Ali Zardari as the dominant leader captured the reins of power and were succeeded first time in democratic history of Pakistan to fulfill the tenure.
What the nation experienced under this regime is needless to be introduced again. All and sundry is cognizant of the menace they suffered in the tenure. This is adequate to maintain that the elections in Pakistan from the early years of the existence remain the source of opportunism and a source of ruling the Pakistanis and amassing the riches through hook or by crook.
In the coming election May 2013, the parties that seem ardently participating include PML (N) giving their candidacy countrywide, PPP, co-chaired by Asif Ali Zardari and PTI, led by Imran khan along with the other low-worth political parties throughout the country. What happens in the wake of the elections-- will seemingly remain as the same, analysis based on the past realities? This will beget a blow to the national integrity as well as politico-economic infrastructure if the past trends of seeking self-interests are maintained.
Therefore, the elections should be free of rigging and the elected winning party should now be altruistic in order to save the nation from being declined. The care-taking setup should manage to convene the elections on fair basis and the past course of rigging should not be repeated. Under subsequent circumstances, the monitoring teams of UNO and other bodies of international influence can be invited as EU has offered to send its teams to monitor the election procedure. Jalil Abbas, The foreign Secretary positively responded, “Pakistan will welcome such a mission to monitor the process.” Similarly, the allegations by the loser parties of the rigging will not be materialized that would be promising for the national integrity specifically Pakistan passes through the internal turmoil in form of terrorism.
On the parallel hand, the public is equally assigned a task of responsibility for deciding exact candidate for the ballot. if a party whosoever gets in the national assembly with the workable members ad is preferred to form a government, the gigantic liability is put to the shoulder of the governing party’s premier. This includes (a) the restoration of peoples trust on the electoral process, (b) getting the nation out of the bloodshed and carnage, (c) provision of basic needs, (d) the cheaper fuel and power, (e) rebuilding the economic infrastructure, (f) provision of employment to the educated youths, (g) normalizing the relations with the neighbors and much more.
This is worth mentioning that making no effort to get rid of the corruption and embezzlement would weaken the state with the passage of time. Thus, to maintain the robust system and to avoid from the menace of opportunism is only guaranteed when the justice in form of fair function of state departments and fulfilling the duties in candid sense by the incumbents is observed. Otherwise, we may lean further towards decline.
Thank You For Reading