The tribesmen think that holding elections in Pakistan is not a solution to the problem confronted by the country. The main problem of Pakistan is terrorism. Its elimination is a must before the introduction of democracy can be initiated.
The masses must be liberated from the clutches of terrorists. Presently my own hometown Bajaur Agency, tribal area is under control of terrorists. The terrorists have been moving freely in the society terrorising the people. Through terror, the terrorists could win an election and can become rulers of this country.
US President George W. Bush should tell his close friend in Pakistan General Pervez Musharraf to fulfill his duty or leave the corridor of power.
According to a prominent political writer Rasul Bakhsh Rais, in democracies, elections are the most powerful tool for confirming the legitimacy of a ruling party or leader, or dislodging a government that has lost the trust and support of the people. In a more substantive way, elections are the only modern means of organising political power in a society, establishing a popular base and obtaining a mandate from the masses for the policies that a party or leader would like to pursue while in power.
The electoral process is also the best way to sink the root of democracy in societies that have experienced nothing but political oppression and tyranny. Even in procedural democracies, elections serve a great purpose in recognising the principle of popular sovereignty. It is a simple but revolutionary belief that citizens of a society have the power to make and change governments through elected representatives.
Having argued that elections are the only recognisable mode of transferring power in a peaceful manner from one political group to another, one important point needs to be clarified: democracies are not the only form of government that can hold elections.
All authoritarian and totalitarian regimes during the past century and in our time and in our country have held elections. This should not be surprising because elections provide the moral, political and legal bases for acquiring and exercising power.
Therefore, in order to be democratic in character or with the aim of institutionalising democracy in any society, elections must satisfy at least two basic criteria.
First, elections must be competitive not in the procedural but in the substantive sense. They must be open to all political factions, groups and parties without discrimination or favour. Elections would not be considered substantively competitive if they don’t provide enough social and political space for non-elite classes to enter the contest and be able to win. In other words, if the electoral processes are used to authenticate power of the traditional ruling classes and groups, they become merely symbolic with the capture and domination of political space by the powerful economic and social classes.
Second, elections, in order to be a credible and sincere exercise, have to be free and fair. They have to be conducted by a neutral body that all participants can trust; and the institutions that interpret and enforce rules relating to elections have to be autonomous of the executive that may have a political interest in the outcome of the elections.
Unfortunately, never have our rulers fulfilled any of the two conditions outlined above in order for any election to have social and political significance. No elections, with the marginal exception of 1970, have been free, fair, open or uncontroversial. Consequently, people in Pakistan have lost faith in one of the most fundamental democratic institutions because of the way it has been repeatedly manipulated to bring into power groups and individuals who would align with dictators. This loss of faith is evident in the declining voter turnout in successive elections during the past two decades.
The elections scheduled for next month are being conducted in the familiar Pakistani mode but in a very different national atmosphere where doubts are being raised about credibility and fairness. What will be the political worth of elections under a ruler who has bent every respected political norm, disfigured the Constitution and disbanded the superior judiciary?
The motive of General (retd) Pervez Musharraf is glaringly clear: stay in power at any cost, not to promote democracy or even respect for a Constitution that he has suspended and amended against the will of the nation.
Elections are a part of such political manipulation, and are arguably the most powerful device available to Musharraf for validating his acts on and after November 3. Elections are, to reassert again, a valid process to form governments. But how can one ignore the flipside of this process in light of the Pakistani experience and in view of the institutional setting that Musharraf has created to extract an outcome of his liking?
Participation in the elections by any party or group is an equally powerful signal of accepting the legitimacy and authenticity of the process. This is one of the rare occasions in Pakistan’s political history that democratic political forces can deny Musharraf what he desperately needs to earn respect and popular acceptance. It is sad that some mainstream political parties enthusiastically want to be part of this doubtful process. This will only boost the credibility of the process.