The unexpected announcement by the Election Commission of Pakistan to postpone the upcoming elections in Punjab until October 8 has unsurprisingly prompted condemnation from the PTI, with Imran Khan claiming that the PTI dissolved two provincial assemblies “with [the] expectation that elections would be held in 90 days” and not “to allow a bunch of fascists to impose a reign of dread. Not just the PTI has criticised the ECP’s decision.
Most legal analysts, on both sides of the political spectrum, have categorically condemned the ECP’s reasoning as weak and a clear violation of the Constitution. While the PTI and legal and political observers are justified in their harsh criticism of this decision, another viewpoint contends that the ECP may simply be constrained by factors beyond its control. According to this line of thought, the onus is on the government, and the ECP has no choice but to postpone elections if the government does not provide financial assistance and election security.
Naturally, if the finance, interior, and defence ministries all refuse to assist the ECP, how can the commission proceed with the elections? The focus should then shift away from the ECP and towards the government, which has chosen to disregard the constitution in favour of petty political gains. Some legal professionals have provided a feeble defence, asserting that the Supreme Court’s order concerning these elections stated that the ECP can extend the period of time if there are any difficulties beyond 90 days by the “bare minimum,” and that this can be subjectively interpreted to mean even April 30 is beyond 90 days. This, however, has to be the last straw in a situation in which the government appears to be avoiding performing a constitutional duty.
The government claims it cannot be held hostage by one man’s whims. Marriyum Aurangzeb, the information minister, has justified the ECP’s decision by claiming that polls in two provinces would have been contentious while the country is conducting a population census. However, the government conveniently forgot something: the Pakistani constitution does not prohibit holding separate elections, so when the government says it will not hold elections—and let’s not get confused about why and how the ECP came to this decision—there is little room for legal nuances.
Elections in Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa are definitely not something the coalition administration wants to happen before the national vote in October. Given the chaos of the last week or so, one would think that the government could have at least attempted some rapprochement with the PTI rather than refusing ECP assistance and setting a dangerous precedent. The government may have won this round, but in the long run, Pakistan and its democratic system have been ruthlessly mangled in recent years, with not holding elections within the time frame stipulated being the most recent attack. More uncertainty looms ahead as the PTI prepares to go to court, hoping to conduct a lawyers’ movement-like effort. This could end badly for either side.
