Case of the open-and-shut election

General Pervez Musharraf wants international observers monitoring the October 10 parliamentary elections to avoid making comments about the ...

General Pervez Musharraf wants international observers monitoring the October 10 parliamentary elections to avoid making comments about the political environment in Pakistan. His remarks, and those of his henchmen, are aimed at intimidating the election observers. General Musharraf learnt a lesson about election irregularities during last April’s farcical presidential referendum. Then, the stuffing of ballot boxes in full view of foreign journalists exposed the regime’s contempt for democracy. For parliamentary elections, the government’s strategy has been to rig the political environment and avoid, to the best extent possible, blatant irregularities on polling day.

Ironically, criticism of the election observers comes from the same regime that has never denied the ‘‘right’’ of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank officials to comment extensively on all aspects of Pakistani life. Since Pakistan’s first military regime took over in 1958, the military establishment has looked upon engagement with the international community only as a means of securing money. IMF and World Bank conditions are not frowned upon because they are linked to the flow of hard cash. But when someone points out the deficiencies in the Pakistani establishment’s desire to control the political system, they are told (in General Musharraf’s words) that they ‘‘see Pakistani political culture from the eyes of the British system’’.

The truth is, there is something wrong with the argument that US dollars and British-made weapons suit Pakistan but western democratic principles do not. Democracy is no longer just a western ideal. It has taken root all over the world. And while democracy has several forms one thing is certain. It can be many things but not military rule by other means. Political systems evolve through consistent adherence to constitutional principles, not from the General Headquarters.

Story continues below this ad

When Pakistan’s first general election was held in 1970, more than 63 % of registered voters exercised their franchise because they expected to change their lives by electing their future rulers. Even in the flawed election of 1977, voter turnout stood at 55 %. But the controversy over that election, and the subsequent military takeover, has caused the public to lose faith in the electoral process. During the 1997 election only 35 % of registered voters exercised their franchise. It’s estimated that at least 6 million of eligible voters were not registered.

The October 10 election is also expected to suffer from a low voter turnout. Low turnout reflects a feeling on the part of the electorate that its vote simply does not matter. In 1970, General Yahya refused to transfer power to the elected representatives and he may not have handed over to Zulfikar Ali Bhutto even a year later had it not been for the humiliating military defeat in 1971. The only definite outcome of the 1977 election was 11 years of dictatorship under General Zia. Between 1988 and 1999, governments were dismissed with alarming regularity. Once this partially manipulated political process had been completely discredited, Musharraf assumed power directly on behalf of the military. When since 1958, one may ask, has the political process been allowed to take its own course?

Pakistan’s military brass sees itself as the country’s redeemer and whoever commands the military is presented as the nation’s saviour. Since Ayub’s days, Pakistanis are taught a distorted version of history that glosses over the manipulations of the establishment. Even these days, reading the government’s version of events would make one think that Pakistan’s political history began only with the 1988 election and the ensuing political musical chairs between Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif. But Pakistan’s political problems started much earlier. General Musharraf’s apologists may not want to face it but the fact remains that Pakistan is the only major country in South Asia where power has never been transferred as a result of democratic elections.

The October 10 election will not change anything unless the international community rejects this manipulated process of politics and Pakistanis themselves persuade their military to accept the reality of politics. The European Union and Commonwealth election observers should point out that Musharraf’s regime draws its legitimacy from a Supreme Court ruling that was obtained only after the court was reconstituted and potential dissenting judges removed from the bench. They should acknowledge that the referendum was an absolute farce.

Story continues below this ad

They should also note that the government has propped up a King’s party and created undue difficulties for the country’s major political parties ahead of parliamentary elections. And they should not hesitate to point out that General Musharraf’s definition of democracy is not democracy, as the rest of the world knows it.

Musharraf says Pakistan is a difficult country to govern. He should be told that this is because it is run by the law of rulers, instead of under the rule of law.

(Husain Haqqani is a Visiting Scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington. He served as adviser to Nawaz Sharif and Benazir Bhutto and as Pakistan’s Ambassador to Sri Lanka)