The National Assembly, defying all its doubters, just completed its five-year term last month. Notwithstanding the turbulence that frequently jolted the political process, the system has survived. Transition from one elected government to another now appears not as a farfetched thought, but a reality even though there are still a few hurdles that need to be crossed. This surely is a high point in our checkered democratic history and needs to be lauded, despite all its short comings. These five years, just like the preceding ones witnessed the ousting of yet another elected Prime Minister. These disentitlements of arguably the country’s most powerful elected figure, continue to cast shadows over our fragile democratic process. The coming elections would definitely lead to a changing of guard but the important question to ask is if it would bring any qualitative transformation in the system. Another question that remains to be asked is whether the much-touted transition brings change and tranquility in existing power dynamics coupled with political stability, or would the country witness further weakening of the elected bodies, with non-elected institutions filling the void?

Furthermore, the apprehensions that are circulating regarding installation of a hybrid political system with the military and judiciary becoming an informal part of the power troika has solid reasoning. In reality, our nation at present is viewing a prototype of this phenomenon. However, the imbalance of power between state institutions has led to confrontation and caused havoc; the political leadership too, is as responsible as other institutions of our country. The political leadership has deliberately derailed the political process where the parliament has been reduced to nothing more than a chaotic debate club as the leadership fails to show any vision for our future.

Transitional democracies, like Pakistan, face many challenges and have to fight their way out of their plight and anguish. But where we differ from rest of the transitional democracies is the fact that our elites across institutions have consistently failed to agree on a set of norms under which they operate. One can conclude that they suffer from collective amnesia that renders them immune to the lessons from history, and that leave us suffering, from one crisis to another. What is worse is that the layman does not really know the political scenario at hand all that well and neither does he have a reliable source for accessing it.

The political leadership has deliberately derailed the political process where the parliament has been reduced to nothing more than a chaotic debate club as the leadership fails to show any vision for our future.

Pakistan is not only in dire need of cogitable polls that can result in political stability but also a political regime that has an intelligible mandate. But if the past is an example, political mandates are often arrogated through numerous rigging tools. Although these tools have become less overt over the years given the awareness among the public and global pressures, they still remain capable to create hurdles in the election polls.

Since 1947, the most widely employed rigging tool is ‘vote delay,’ with a considerable interference from the establishment and expedition by certain crafty politicians. The first polls that were credible took place in 1970 but unfortunately, they did not result in political stability since the establishment did not transfer power to the winner. Next came the 1977 polls which were held by politicians and were overtly rigged via miscounting, suppression and extortion. Other years that saw vote rigging were 1985, 1990, 1993, 1997 and 2002 as they were outlined by the mighty establishment.

Later, the nation saw comparatively credible elections in the years 1970, 1988, 2008 and 2013. The first three were held under the establishment’s control only because the never ending rule of the military had destroyed the country and there was major internal and external pressure to do so. Even then, the credibility of the elections was not owed to the institutional strength of the electoral process but because the dictators wanted to pull at the reins of certain elements. In the years when the elections were rigged, the manipulators were at the peak of their powers and there was no pressure, internal or external, to hold credible polls.

The PPP’s collusion with the establishment against the Awami League in 1971 and the aid provided by PML-N to the Awami League against PPP in the 1980s is now similar to PTI’s situation with PML-N.

Due to voluntary institutional measures taken by the politicians, i.e. the introduction of the clause for inclusion of a neutral interim government, the elections held in 2013 were somewhat credible. Analyzing the polling patterns, one would realise that it is the military instead of the politicians who are majorly responsible for controlling the polling reins. The most irresistible rigging tools in the hands of politicians is vote-buying at constituency level. In such cases, the voter has a choice to either accept the bribe or vote within the privacy of the vote booth.

Politicians also side with the powers that are on the same page in their quest to expropriate other politicians. The PPP’s collusion with the establishment against the Awami League in 1971 and the aid provided by PML-N to the Awami League against PPP in the 1980s is now similar to PTI’s situation with PML-N.

The subtlety of vote rigging is a direct consequence of changing times. The internal and external pressures have grown. Hence, techniques like vote stuffing, miscounting and prolonged vote delays have become less common. Even in the 1990s, rigging skills of vote extortion, suppression and buying were used, and the focus was never on physically decapitating the process but on games like discouragement or by giving an impromptu verdict on election results. After being absent from the electoral scene of 2008 and 2013, there is an alarming probability that some elements could be gearing up to play an active role in the upcoming elections. Although hard evidence is still absent, the astonishing ousting of the Prime Minister, changing loyalties and selective accountability processes are some overt signs. This may result in either a handicapped parliament which albeit suits the targets of some quarters of the political scene, or it may point out the inability of the government to handle national problems effectively.