The More Things Change...

In its sixty years of existence, Pakistan, envisioned by its founder as a constitutional republic, has had six periods of martial law, the last between 3rd November and 15th December of last year. On the eve of the general elections on 18th February, as one juxtaposes the past with the present, one gets the inevitable feeling of what the French refer to as "plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose"; the more
things change, the more they stay the same.

While circumstances and people over the years have changed, certain election trends have remained remarkably consistent. Almost every election ever held in the country has been replete with allegations of fraud and duplicity. The charges include, voter and candidate harassment, irregularities in the delimitation of constituencies, the fudging of voter lists, the misuse of state apparatus to assist state-favoured candidates, the active involvement of murky
intelligence agencies, ballot stuffing and biased appointments and conduct of election commissioners and election staff. A rejection of poll results by unsuccessful parties on the above pretexts has been a feature of almost all elections held so far.

In the 1965 presidential elections held under the Constitution of 1962, Fatima Jinnah, Ayub Khan's main rival and the chosen candidate of the Combined Opposition Parties (COP) complained bitterly about how state functionaries were actively impeding her campaign. She publicly stated that "so many obstructions have been placed that my faith in the whole process has been shaken."

COP's demands for judicial inquiries into election complaints, stricter voter identity checks at polling stations and for judicial officers (rather than executive officers) to serve as returning officers were rejected by the government and the Election Commission. Miss Jinnah's demand that polls be held under an impartial, caretaker
government was similarly brushed aside.

State-run radio, Radio Pakistan served as a propaganda mouthpiece for Ayub who had publicly revealed his strongly held belief that democracy was not to the "genius of the Pakistani people", An indication of the Government's complicity in fixing Ayub's election comes from the fact
that Khan A. Sabur, the serving Central Communications Minister, announced the date of the election to the press even before the official announcement by the Election Commission.

In the elections of March 1977 the Pakistan National Alliance (PNA) attributed the PPP's win of almost four-fifths of the available National Assembly seats to mass scale rigging, coercion, fraud and the use of government jeeps and buses in electioneering. According to the Zia regime's exhaustive though self-serving 'White Paper' on the
elections, Bhutto had used government funds and intelligence and law enforcement officials to ensure a PPP victory. Even in Bhutto's "safe seat" of Larkana, his opponent, Jan Mohammad Abbasi was arrested and kept at an undisclosed location till after the last date for filing of nomination papers had passed. So lacking in credibility was this
election, that even its Chief Election Commissioner, Justice Sajjad Ahmad Jan termed the process a hoax saying that "the failure of the electoral process was, by and large, due to the candidates of the ruling party who exploited their position and succeeded in hoaxing the officials in charge of the elections, thus destroying the sanctity of the ballot box."

The Movement for the Restoration of Democracy (MRD), many of whose leaders were in prison at the time, boycotted the February 1985 elections held by Zia. Officially, these were party-less polls, though state patronage was decidedly provided to the Jamaat-e-Islami. The voters responded by handing a resounding defeat to Zia and his allies. All but one of his Federal Ministers lost in their constituencies and the Jamaat's showing was dismal at best.

In the October 1990 elections, the Pakistan Democratic Alliance (PDA) which included the PPP, alleged that massive rigging had taken place to install an Islami Jamhoori Ittehad (IJI) government. President Ghulam Ishaq Khan, who had dismissed the previous PPP government made no secret of his preferred party. On the eve of the election he made a
televised speech asking the people to vote against the PDA destroying every semblance of the neutrality and impartiality of the office of the President. The PDA's White Paper on the elections alleged that Ishaq Khan had set up an election cell at the Aiwan-e-Sadar to closely monitor and manage the election for it to yield his desired result.

The 1997 general elections which resulted in a two-thirds majority for the PML (N) were dismissed by Benazir Bhutho as being "engineered". Qazi Hussain Ahmed also rubbished the elections and said that the Jamaat would not recognize the government that would emerge.

The 2002 general elections were no exception to the trend and were termed by national and international organizations, including Human Rights Watch, as being "deeply flawed".

The irony of Pakistan's electoral history is that arguably the freest, fairest and most transparent elections ever held were those under the stewardship of the dissolute General Yahya Khan in 1970.

Referendums have also been mis-used by Generals to validate or prolong their illegal tenures.

Pursuant to Ayub's Presidential Order, on the 14th of February 1960, Basic Democrats were required to answer the penetrating question: "Have you confidence in President Field Marshal Muhammad Ayub Khan, Hilal-i-Jurat?" The rules of this farce, set by the regime, stipulated that if a majority of the "votes" answered yes then Ayub would be
deemed to have been elected the President of Pakistan, given the sole authority to produce a new constitution and also to serve as the first term as President under it. The regime was proud to announce that 95.6% of the votes had gone in Ayub's favour.

Zia was also proud to announce that 97.7% of the people had voted for him in his 1984 referendum while Musharraf was equally pleased with his slighter higher showing of 98% approval.

As we move towards the elections on 18th February 2008, it may be safe to say that things have changed. For example, never before has seventy percent of Pakistan's judiciary been deposed and incarcerated illegally.

Other things, however, remain consistent with the past. We have a "president" who has addressed political rallies favouring one particular party. Resources of the state have been used to assist this party. Violence and bloodshed has visited us. District judges have been frantically transferred. The issue of millions of missing voters
remains unresolved as do issues of delimitation.

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose!