Though the parliamentary committee on electoral reforms has not finished its work, it has decided that the next election, due this year, will be based on the 2017 census, not the one held this year. The 2018 elections were held on the basis of the 2017 census only through a constitutional amendment, which allowed a one-time exemption for the census result being formally notified. The result was only notified after the government agreed to the holding of a new census, though the next was due in 2027. The main impetus behind this decision was the MQM, which is now crying foul, and demanding that the constituencies in Karachi be revised. The basis of revision cannot be the fresh census, which will be notified by the new government, following which the Election Commission of Pakistan will order fresh delimitations. The 2028 election should be held under the 2023 census, but to attempt to hold the current elections under the current delimitations will only mean a delay in the polls, because a fresh delimitation is a lengthy exercise with the governing statute containing a strict and prolonged timeline. Any such exercise would require the notification of the census, to which the MQM has already objected, perhaps because it has not yielded the results it wanted.
The committee’s recommendations are to be embodied in an amendment to the Election Laws Act, and seem focused on the 2018 election. That is perhaps as it should be, for the defects of a system are only to be observed in its operation. However, it is perhaps the identification of a defect, when the problem identified is actually a solution of a n earlier problem. The previous government;s decision to introduce electronic voting machines was not realistic for a system that could not operate a Results Transmissions System properly, and now the election laws will make returning officers responsible for ensuring alternative means of communicating the results in areas where the internet is uncertain. There are allegations that the RTS was misused by the establishment to throw the election to the PTI.
The committee, as well as the ECP, seems to be having problems with modern technology, but at the same time wish to incorporate it within the electoral process. Thls is indicated by the provision that returning officers are to be provided ‘communication devices’ (woefully outdated language for mobile phones) to allow them to transmit copies of returns. It would have been desirable had the PTI also been on board with the committee’s work, which is after all about the holding of frreee, fair and transparent elections.
