INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY, ISLAMABAD

Faculty of Basic and Applied Sciences

Department of Computer Science and Software Engineering

Pakistan Culture and Society (GC – 109)

Assignment 1

Title: A Landmark Election

Submitted by: Muhammad Daud Ali Kayani

Registration Number: 3340-FBAS/BSCS/F16 – B

Submitted to: Mr. Farrukh Nazir

Date: June 19th, 2020

Reference: THE STRUGGLE FOR PAKISTAN A MUSLIM HOMELAND AND GLOBAL POLITICS AYESHA JALAL
(The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press CAMBRIDGE MASSACHUSETTS LONDON ENGLAND 2014)

Assignment 1 / Pakistan Culture and Society / Spring 2020 1|Page

 A Landmark Election
With elections scheduled for May 11, 2013, fears of a military intervention or some improbable twist in the
political saga gave way to a growing realization of just how much Pakistan had changed. A casualty of an ill-
advised national security policy justified in the name of Islam since the early 1980s, the state had no monopoly
over the instruments of violence or ideology. Instead of the presidency or the military and its intelligence agencies
conniving to manipulate the electoral process, it was the outlawed TTP that set the tone of the campaign by
declaring democracy un-Islamic. Pamphlets articulating the Taliban viewpoint warned citizens against
participating in the elections. Dubbing the outgoing ruling alliance “secular,” the TTP selectively targeted the
PPP, the ANP, and the MQM as revenge for their support of the military operations in FATA and KPK. Though
the ANP was worst hit, the offices, rallies, and candidates of the PPP and MQM were attacked in KPK, Sindh,
and Baluchistan, resulting in over 130 deaths before polling day. By contrast, “pro-Taliban parties” like the PML-
N, Imran Khan’s PTI, the JUI-F, and the Jamaat-i-Islami, who proposed talking to the TTP, were permitted to
campaign freely in Punjab as well as the other three provinces that were awash with the blood of so-called secular
parties. Playing strictly by the rules in the most exceptional of times, the Election Commission, headed by the
revered retired octogenarian justice Fakhruddin G. Ebrahim, withdrew the security cover for ministers and high-
ranking officials of the former governments, both at the center and in the provinces. The unwillingness, if not
inability, of the caretaker governments to extend protection to PPP, ANP, and MQM candidates made for an
uneven playing field. Qamar Zaman Kaira, the former federal minister for information, complained that while
even nominal security had been withdrawn from the two former PPP prime ministers, the degree of protocol being
extended to the Sharif brothers during the campaign was putting the legitimacy of the elections into question. He
appealed to the caretaker chief minister of Punjab, Najam Sethi, to take notice of the situation as it was creating
the impression that the Sharif’s were still ruling the province. A reshuffle of senior civil servants was ordered,
but there was nothing to prevent the middle and lower ranks of the provincial administration from supporting the
PML-N. In a tense electoral atmosphere, an unexceptional statement by the caretaker federal interior minister that
Nawaz Sharif was a national leader whose security was vital for the credibility of the electoral exercise elicited
protests from other political parties and confirmed suspicions of the PML-N being the favored party. Regardless
of the systemic biases against the PPP and its allied parties, they were responsible for the anti-incumbency
groundswell building up against them. Zardari’s legendary corruption matched by the PPP’s appalling record of
governance made a huge dent in the party’s support base. Anti-PPP sentiment was strongest in Punjab, where a
massive energy crisis blamed on the federal government had badly hurt the economy. Terrorist threats to Bilawal
Zardari Bhutto, who was not eligible to seek election until he turned twenty-five, left the PPP without a face to
match the PML-N’s Nawaz Sharif and the PTI’s Imran Khan. With Zardari constitutionally debarred from playing
a role in the elections, the PPP responded to security fears by abandoning all pretense of being in the fray in
Punjab and concentrated attention on winning in Sindh. The PPP, the ANP, and MQM protested the lack of
security made available to them in the face of deadly Taliban attacks but in a clear recognition of their historical
significance for the democratic process did not boycott the elections. The oddity of only the 20 right of the political
spectrum being in a position to trawl for votes in a historic election highlighted Pakistan’s transformation from a
onetime moderate haven into a breeding ground of right-wing conservatism in tacit sympathy with proponents of
extremist ideologies. As a banned outfit waging war against the state, the TTP’s ability to influence the outcome
of an election they damned as un-Islamic by indiscriminate violence queered the pitch of the electoral campaign.
The All Pakistan Ulema Council tried countering the Taliban’s intrusion into the domain of Islamic discourse
with a fatwa endorsed by clerics from different schools of Islamic thought. They declared that elections, far from
being un-Islamic, were a religious obligation for all Muslims. This did not stop the Taliban’s murderous rampage
through Karachi and KPK, traumatizing the local populace and spreading fear and despondency across the

Reference: THE STRUGGLE FOR PAKISTAN A MUSLIM HOMELAND AND GLOBAL POLITICS AYESHA JALAL
(The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press CAMBRIDGE MASSACHUSETTS LONDON ENGLAND 2014)
2|Page
country. Analysts despaired at the prospect of a low voter turnout. Even the usual festivities associated with
elections were missing. Security concerns led the Election Commission to restrict the size of election hoardings
and banners to prevent parties from putting up larger-than-life portraits of their leaders, taking away some of the
color and spectacle typical of elections in Pakistan. With no history of the Election Commission ever enforcing
the law on electoral expenses, candidates found other ways of spending money to win votes without risking
disqualification. Despite the pain and suffering caused by the Taliban’s endless carnage, people showed no lack
of resolve in wanting to cast their votes. For all the brickbats thrown at them, often with some justification, the
media played an invigorating role in creating an election atmosphere that was conspicuously missing from the
streets and alleys of urban Pakistan as well as the rural hinterlands. Instead of an open debate among equal
contestants at the national level, only the leading candidates of parties not on the Taliban’s hit list were able to
directly engage with the electorate. A third-time contender for prime ministerial office, a wiser and more mature
Nawaz Sharif led his PML-N from the front, elating supporters with reminders of his past achievements; promises
of economic renewal by solving the energy crisis and making peace with India; and resolutions of putting an end
to American drone attacks in FATA and initiating negotiations with the Taliban. The swing in the PML-N’s favor
in Punjab was unmistakable. A faceless PPP burdened by incumbency was destined for one of its worst routs in
Pakistan’s largest province, pitting the PML-N against the PTI. Imran Khan’s star power and, to quote a veteran
journalist, “exaggerated sense of personal invincibility” had seen the PTI emerge as a potent new force on the
Pakistani political horizon. Paid advertisements calling for a “new Pakistan” and extensive media coverage of
Khan’s election rallies created momentum for the PTI in the urban areas. Some television channels showed
footage of the 1992 World Cup final won by the team captained by Imran Khan. If a partial media tipped the
scales in the PTI’s favor for avid cricket fans, other heads roiled on seeing the quintessential antipolitical hero in
the improbable role of politician. His self-righteous condemnation of political rivals and vows to end corruption
within ninety days of coming into office were easy to dismiss as electoral rhetoric. However, his emotional video
message upholding anti-Ahmadi clauses of the constitution created a stir. He denied ever soliciting the Ahmadi
vote, alarming PTI’s liberal supporters, who had mistaken the party’s modernity, if not Khan’s earlier life as a
playboy lionized in the Western media, as evidence of a “secular” ideology. Imran’s statement on the Ahmadis
seemed the more egregious in light of his invocations of Jinnah’s Pakistan. Even confirmed cynics were riled.
Imran Khan leading an anti–US drone “peace
caravan” to South Waziristan, October 7, 2012. The
White Star Photo Pvt. Ltd. Archive.
No less controversial was the cricketing legend’s take
on relations with the United States and the Taliban.
The claim that a PTI government would shoot down
American drones and open talks with the Taliban led
the more astute to wonder about Imran Khan’s sense
of geopolitical realities. Lack of precision on how to
go about addressing key problems and a catchall
slogan for a “new Pakistan” proved less than
convincing for an electorate looking for concrete
solutions to their problems. Despite his charisma, Imran Khan was unable to give the PTI the look of a party set
to make a real difference. For all the talk about the youth bulge, the party’s upper echelons consisted mainly of
the same old faces that had been tried and tested before. The message of change appealed to the urban, educated
upper and middle classes, but Pakistan’s electoral arithmetic was weighted in favor of rural constituencies where
the PTI was organizationally weak or nonexistent. The biggest stumbling block was in Punjab’s rural
Reference: THE STRUGGLE FOR PAKISTAN A MUSLIM HOMELAND AND GLOBAL POLITICS AYESHA JALAL
(The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press CAMBRIDGE MASSACHUSETTS LONDON ENGLAND 2014)
3|Page
constituencies, where the landed classes had earned windfall profits from record food crops in 2010–11 they
attributed to the PML-N government’s agricultural policies but which in fact were a result of the PPP
government’s pro-agrarian pricing policies. An economic study claimed that Punjab’s overall growth rate lagged
behind other parts of Pakistan in the four years up to 2011, leading to criticism of Shahbaz Sharif’s Lahore-centric
development priorities. But Punjab was still relatively better governed than the other provinces. Most voters in
the province were inclined to want more of the same, cutting Imran Khan’s slogan of “change” down to size.
Voting the PML-N into office at the center and the province seemed to be the most rational and effective way of
putting an end to electricity shortages, unemployment, and inflation. Unmistakable signs of a pro-PML-N wave
in Punjab did not deter Imran Khan from predicting a PTI victory. Encouraged by the addition of 36 million new
voters, he dreamt that the PTI had swept the polls and hoped that as in the past this dream would also come true.
His indefatigable romp across Pakistan created a surge that led the PTI’s most ardent supporters—educated youth
addicted to social media in the main—to presume they were winning. Imran Khan’s narrative on corruption and
reputation for integrity elicited unprecedented enthusiasm among the very rich and well-off in Lahore, Karachi,
Peshawar, Rawalpindi, and other key cities. The urban elite’s newfound interest in politics, however, was no
indicator of it being better placed to understand the complexity of the 24 25 problems bedeviling Pakistan. The
educated youth factor certainly gave the PTI’s campaign added vigor, as did throngs of fashionable women from
upmarket urban residential areas. But as many, if not more, Punjabi youth and women backed the PML-N. Three
days before polling date, Imran Khan fell headfirst to the ground fifteen feet below from a makeshift lift taking
him onto a stage to address a rally in Lahore. The cricket superstar’s unlucky fall elicited widespread concern and
sympathy. Ignoring the PTI chairman’s brash references to him at public rallies, Nawaz Sharif prayed for Khan’s
health and suspended his campaign for a day. Others less forgiving interpreted the hero’s fall in his hometown as
divine intervention to teach him some humility. The campaign ended with Nawaz Sharif addressing a massive
rally in Lahore and Imran Khan speaking through a televised videoconference link from his hospital bed. There
was relief and cautious rejoicing. The Taliban had failed to stop the elections. Pakistan’s much vaunted democratic
transition was now unstoppable. With 600,000 security personnel protecting sensitive polling stations, there was
a surprisingly high voter turnout on May 11, 2013, in defiance of Taliban death squads and their controversial
edict on Islam and democracy. Despite security fears, 55 percent of the electorate voted, compared with 44 percent
in the 2008 elections, in a strong endorsement of representative government. An early-morning attack in Karachi
killing thirteen people did not stop voters in the city from lining up for hours outside polling stations. Tightened
security arrangements in Punjab, including a welcome clampdown on the public display of weapons, resulted in
a 60 percent turnout. Voters in the Federal Capital Area topped the turnout rates with 64 percent. Sindh was not
too far behind at 54 percent. Violence stricken KPK registered a 45 percent turnout while Taliban infested FATA
with 36 percent had the lowest turnout with almost no women voting in some constituencies. In insurgency-torn
Baluchistan, a 43 percent turnout was an improvement on 31 percent in 2008. But the increase was in Pathan
dominated areas. There was virtually no voting in the Baloch constituencies, a matter of great concern since the
participation of Baloch nationalists led by Sardar Akhtar Mengal in electoral politics had raised hopes of
addressing the province’s grievances against the center. By the evening of May 11, early returns showed the PML-
N leading in more than 112 seats with about thirty each for the PPP and the PTI. The scale of the PML-N victory
belied predictions that Pakistan was headed for a hung Parliament. On the streets of Lahore, bands of youth wildly
celebrating a PTI victory a few hours earlier had been replaced by ecstatic young supporters of the PML-N
carrying banners, blaring music, and screaming “shair” (lion)—the party’s electoral symbol. There was stunned
silence at the PPP’s reverse landslide, though few outside the party circles were prepared to lament the result or
question the legitimacy of the PML-N mandate. Relief at the end of the PPP’s corrupt and nonperforming
government matched surprise at the extent of the PML-N victory. There was quiet satisfaction at the success of
the democratic process, however flawed and in need of reform it may be. Who won mattered less than the fact of
Reference: THE STRUGGLE FOR PAKISTAN A MUSLIM HOMELAND AND GLOBAL POLITICS AYESHA JALAL
(The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press CAMBRIDGE MASSACHUSETTS LONDON ENGLAND 2014)
4|Page
an ordered transition from one civilian government to another. Far from being a reductive stance toward landmark
elections, this view held by intellectuals, lawyers, and the educated elite represented a firm belief in the imperative
of the rule of law for a country that had suffered irreparable damage from repeated military interventions and
quasi-military constitutional coups in its history. An emphasis on the importance of the continuity of the political
process did not mean overlooking key issues associated with the credibility of the elections. Nawaz Sharif’s
emergence at the helm of the largest single party in the national assembly was largely anticipated. But the extent
of the victory surprised even die-hard PML-N supporters. As in the past, the PML-N won a higher percentage of
the national assembly seats (129 out of 272, or 47.4 percent) than votes (32 percent). On the eve of a famous
victory, Nawaz Sharif had given a clear message to the electorate when he said during a television interview that
a split mandate would make the next five years far worse than the previous five. Leaving other parties far behind
in a federal system, however, was not without disadvantages. The PML-N power base was in Punjab, from where
it won 120 of the province’s 148 national seats. Six seats from KPK, two from FATA, one each from Sindh and
Balochistan, and the addition of nineteen independents and forty-one reserved seats for women and minorities
gave the PML-N a simple majority with 189 seats in a national assembly that had a total strength of 342 seats.
Despite a spirited campaign, the PTI failed to prevent the PML-N’s flight to victory. While getting the second
highest vote share in the country with just under 17 percent of the popular vote, the PTI bagged twenty-eight seats
(10.2 percent) in the national assembly, making it the third largest party after the PPP, which won thirty-six seats
with around 15 percent of the vote. Province-wise the biggest upset was in KPK, where the ANP was wiped out
by the PTI. Asfandyar Wali, the ANP leader, gracefully accepted defeat but tellingly blamed the result on the
absence of a secure and even contest. “We thought CEC Fakhruddin G. Ibrahim would adjudicate the electoral
contest,” he said regretfully, but “the real referee was Hakimullah Mehsud,” the TTP leader. The PPP’s media
experts called the results “manipulated” but accepted them in the interest of democracy. Party circles had a
difficult time explaining an electoral defeat in which their supporters had not just stayed home in disgust at the
PPP government’s mismanagement but opted for either the PML-N or the PTI. PPP loyalists might try taking
comfort in the party’s ability to rise from the ashes. But the hard truth was that the left-of-center party they had
supported since 1970 had not only lost its leftist orientation and urban base but was now a “feudal” party
completely out of touch with the people. A dynastic fiefdom rather than a modern party with internal democracy,
the PPP held out no hope for political aspirants from the rising middle classes in an urbanizing country. The theme
of martyrdom for the sake of democracy still had some resonance in Pakistan. But without a clear vision of how
to improve a dismal and fast-changing present, the use of the Bhutto name to advance the interests of the Zardari
clan had few takers. The PPP was confined to its base in rural Sindh, losing its traditional stronghold in southern
Punjab—the political base of former Prime Minister Gilani— where it had failed to deliver on the promise of a
separate province, free from the dominance of Lahore. This left the PPP with just two national assembly seats
from Punjab, a dismal showing for a party that had secured over fifty seats from the province in 2008. Accusations
of rigging and related electoral malpractices had poured in from all over Pakistan on polling day. There were
reports of fraudulent stamping and defacement of votes as well as burning of ballot boxes in some constituencies.
Booth captures by MQM workers and threats to the polling staff delayed voting in some polling stations in
Karachi. But the MQM’s stranglehold over the city had visibly weakened. The media headlined protests by the
PTI’s educated upper- and middle-class supporters against the MQM’s electoral malpractices. There were similar
charges in Lahore, where the PTI alleged ballot rigging in two constituencies. One of these was Imran Khan’s
home 26 27 constituency, where he lost to the PML-N candidate. The PTI leader demanded a recount in
twentyfive constituencies. Continued street protests against ballot rigging threatened to discredit a significant step
in Pakistan’s democratic odyssey. According to a member of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan,
candidates manipulated votes with the help of the police and returning officials in one hundred polling stations.
A recount in the affected constituencies would not have made a difference to the overall result given the huge
Reference: THE STRUGGLE FOR PAKISTAN A MUSLIM HOMELAND AND GLOBAL POLITICS AYESHA JALAL
(The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press CAMBRIDGE MASSACHUSETTS LONDON ENGLAND 2014)
5|Page
margin of the PML-N victory. A sense of urgency dictated that the election controversy be set aside to let the
newly elected government get on with the business of resolving the problems of power outages and militancy to
end years of economic stagnation. Without an economic revival and better governance, the future of the
democratic process would remain uncertain. Once saner counsels prevailed, the more dubious aspects of the
election process were left in the hands of the courts and election tribunals set up by the Election Commission to
hear the complaints. But the brouhaha over rigging refused to die down. Questioning the credibility of the courts
and the Election Commission’s tribunals based on their past record, Imran Khan swore he would upon recovery
lead street protests if investigations of poll rigging lacked transparency. Elections in Pakistan have hardly ever
been free of administrative manipulation even if the “establishment” has occasionally failed to deliver the desired
results, as happened in 1970 and to a lesser extent in 2002. The idea of a free and fair election, therefore, can be
meaningfully addressed only with reference to the nature of the state and Pakistani political culture. Charges of
electoral rigging refer to irregularities in the voting process on Election Day. Systemic rigging prior to the polls,
however, has typically been the more prominent aspect of manipulated election results in Pakistan. This takes a
variety of forms, including changes in electoral laws; reshuffling the administrative bureaucracy to ensure
“positive” results; unfair use of government resources, including the media, to the advantage of the official
favorite; delimitation of constituencies to suit candidates supported by state agencies like the ISI; and, most
important, a malleable chief election commissioner. Elections are not necessarily rigged with the active support
of the chief election commissioner or the Election Commission, who for the most part are unaware of what is
happening in far-flung constituencies. The unenforceability and misuse of election laws has much to do with the
administrative bureaucracy’s entanglements with Pakistani society and politics. Far from being the representatives
of an impersonal and rule-bound state, local government officials and the police are often beholden to influential
political families who control the local patronage networks. In the absence of organized machineries, party tickets
in Pakistan are given to so-called electables, who more often than not are scions of influential political clans. In
a rapidly urbanizing setting, however, politicians belonging to the same family are no longer drawn exclusively
from the landed classes. An obvious case in point is the House of Sharifs. According to one estimate, over the
last three decades a mere 400 families have shaped policies, programs, and legislation affecting the lives of a 180
million Pakistanis. Between 1985 and 2008, two-thirds of the elected legislators and about half of the top three
contestants in the national assembly elections in Punjab belonged to established political families. Instead of being
limited to the upper echelons of political parties, “dynasticism” is deeply embedded in constituency politics. The
monetization of politics since the Zia era transformed the character of elections in Pakistan. Those with local
influence and access to state patronage and control over development 28 29 30 31 funds have the wherewithal
and clout to get themselves elected. Rigging at polling stations occurs when an established candidate’s main
support groups, who are often old hands in the art of “choreographing” elections, cast bogus votes with the
collusion of the police, the local bureaucracy, and polling staff drawn mainly from government schoolteachers
and lower judicial officials. Other extralegal methods include an excessive use of money to pressure and entice
voters; the provision of transport to voters on polling day; use of strong-arm tactics against rival candidates’
polling agents; intimidation of voters to prevent them from going to polling stations; and tampering with ballots
and getting away with fixing the result. Winning an election in Pakistan in effect means foiling attempts by rival
candidates to engineer the result. Lacking well-oiled party machineries capable of thwarting electoral fraud, only
candidates with political muscle and deep pockets can expect to carry the day. The Election Commission has a
poor record of booking candidates for any serious electoral irregularities. Since 1985 there has been a growing
trend among candidates to spend astronomical sums of money to win elections, well in excess of the legal limit.
Political parties and candidates are required under the election laws to submit their accounts for audit and also
report their election expenses. The information, if supplied, is incomplete, as neither parties nor candidates honor
the law on electoral expenditure. But no one has been charged, far less disqualified. While the institutional
Reference: THE STRUGGLE FOR PAKISTAN A MUSLIM HOMELAND AND GLOBAL POLITICS AYESHA JALAL
(The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press CAMBRIDGE MASSACHUSETTS LONDON ENGLAND 2014)
6|Page
weaknesses of the Election Commission of Pakistan have much to answer for this, political parties have also
allowed statutory provisions on election expenditure to lapse in their quest to preserve their numbers in
Parliament. Against the backdrop of a depressing electoral history, there were high expectations of a free and fair
election in 2013. Breaking the barrier seemed possible given the perceived impartiality of the Election
Commission, consisting of five retired judges, an independent-minded judiciary, a watchful media, and by and
large neutral caretaker governments. There was at least no visible involvement of the ISI and the military, nor
were there any “election cells” in the presidency as in the past. The fresh preparation of electoral rolls and the
elimination of bogus voters also lent greater credibility to the elections. However, a deeply politicized and openly
partisan police and administrative bureaucracy could still improve the chances of candidates and parties to the
detriment of opponents without coming under the scrutiny of the law. The pervasiveness of systemic bias for or
against a political party makes it impossible to blame any single individual, group, or institution for electoral
wrongdoing. Pervasive police and bureaucratic connections with candidates in local constituencies makes the
anonymity of responsibility in systemic rigging a bigger challenge for the managers of the electoral process than
bogus ballots in certain constituencies. The PTI’s insistence on electoral transparency would be more meaningful
if instead of simply ballot rigging it broadened the discourse on electoral malpractices to the larger and more
pressing question of ensuring the political neutrality of state officials responsible for conducting the elections. To
what extent were the 2013 elections free and fair? They were as free and fair as the structural and existential
realities of Pakistan permitted. The displacement of merit in recruitment, placement, and promotion has led to a
precipitous decline in service standards in the police and the civil bureaucracy. Instead of serving the state, police
and civil officials seek patrons in ruling parties or parties-in-waiting to advance their career prospects. So long as
there is an all too close interface between state officials and politicians, a completely free and fair election in
Pakistan will remain an 32 33 aspiration. Conducted under the democratically superfluous framework of caretaker
governments to accommodate fears of partisanship by an incumbent government, the 2013 elections nevertheless
are an important landmark in the realization of that elusive objective. The endorsement of democracy in the face
of Taliban terror by the largest voter turnout in four decades is perhaps the most encouraging sign of all. Equally
hopeful has been the smooth transition from one civilian government to another and the establishment of
governments at the center and the provinces without the usual political rancor. Mian Nawaz Sharif has got a solid
mandate and after fourteen years made history with an unprecedented third stint as prime minister. His task in an
unenviable one and will test the new government to the utmost as it moves on multiple fronts to pull Pakistan out
of its current morass. Only time will tell whether the geostrategic situation that surfaces after the American
endgame in Afghanistan will give Pakistan a reasonable chance to deal with the swarm of political, economic,
social, and environmental challenges that have weighed it down for so long.

Reference: THE STRUGGLE FOR PAKISTAN A MUSLIM HOMELAND AND GLOBAL POLITICS AYESHA JALAL
(The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press CAMBRIDGE MASSACHUSETTS LONDON ENGLAND 2014)
7|Page