Elections in the subcontinent: Why are we different?

The year 2024 is being dubbed as the year of elections. Never before in history have there been so many elections in so many countries with so many voters all in the same year. Elections are being held this year in 64 countries including India, Pakistan, Indonesia, the United States, the European Union and the United Kingdom. According to the weekly ‘Time’, this year 49 per cent of the world’s total population is supposed to be voting.

Elections have already been held in Pakistan and Indonesia. There has not been much controversy over the election in Indonesia. But the dramatics over the elections in this subcontinent from the very outset of this year are certainly significant. This will have reverberations in the future.

There is no end to controversy over Pakistan’s elections. There too the army and the Muslim League-PPP coalition spared no efforts in keeping the most promising party, Imran Khan’s PTI, away from the seat of power. But they did not hinder the voters from casting their votes. The voters did not disappoint the party and the PTI candidates who contested, despite not being able to use the party symbol. As a result, there was manipulation when counting the votes in order to keep PTI at bay. But the truth is gradually seeping out and agitation grows in Pakistan.

The tweaking of the vote count came to light in a rather dramatic manner. It was a candidate who was declared winner against a PTI candidate who declared that he did not win but was just shown to be the winner. This was an unprecedented stand in circumstances where most politicians are desperate for power.

The drama unfolded further when the Rawalpindi commissioner resigned and the returning officer revealed that the results had been changed. It certainly is not commonplace for civil servants to take such risks. The divisional commissioner of Rawalpindi, Liaqat Ali Chattha, expressed regret about the results of 13 seats in the Garrison City under his jurisdiction. The government accused him of trying to pull off a political stunt before his imminent retirement. It is difficult to believe that anyone would risk losing all the financial benefits he would receive after his long career in the civil service, just to create a political buzz.

There is no end to criticism concerning Pakistan. The most condemnable factor is their armed forces' domination in politics. The country lags behind us in many social and economic indicators. But the fact that not everyone has forgotten the value of upholding the sanctity of the election process is undoubtedly positive and important.

What is taking place in Pakistan now, is happening post polls. But what is happening in India, is happening a few months ahead of the national election. The Supreme Court played a major role in this regard. The Supreme Court has set a precedent in the incident of the returning officer's ballot manipulations in the mayor election of Chandigarh in Punjab. In order to ensure that the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) wins, the returning officer marred eight of the ballots and declared these null and void, thus snatching victory from the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) candidate and declaring the BJP candidate the winner. But this returning officer's manipulations were caught on video and he was not spared by the court.

Headed by the Chief Justice, the Supreme Court conducted a hearing of the AAP candidate's appeal, brought the ballot to the court and examined it themselves, carried out a recount within the court and cancelled the declared results. As the rule is for the councillors to elect the mayor, there were few ballots in number and so a recount was not much of a problem. This important step of recounting the ballots was not just to cancel the results. Rejecting BJP's demand for fresh elections, the AAP candidate who had filed the appeal, was declared winner on the basis of those votes.

As a matter had gone to court, BJP realised that their victory would not last and so they started buying off the councillors. By pulling in three AAP councillors into their camp, they wanted to ensure victory in a reelection. But the Supreme Court did not let that happen. The Chief Justice said that it was the duty of the court to ensure that the democratic process was not tarnished by the unscrupulous elements. The court said that they felt it was imperative to take such a measure in such exceptional circumstances in order to ensure the fundamental democratic mandate.

The ruling BJP in India has resorted to all sorts of coercion and harassment of the opposition leaders in various states and has been splitting up parties to consolidate their own position, making people believe that they certainly will be reelected. But in Chandigarh, the court had thwarted BJP tricks. Similarly on 15 February, the Supreme Court gave an epoch-making verdict regarding the funding of political parties. The ruling BJP stood to lose the most by this ruling. The Supreme Court cancelled the 'election bonds' issued to legally facilitate anonymous financial contributions to political parties. The court also directed the parties to reveal how much money they had received through these bonds and who had made these payments.

There were elections in Bangladesh too at the start of the year, albeit a one-sided election afflicted with a boycott. Instead of an inclusive, free, fair and democratic election, this election won the tag of a "dummy election", not so much because of the opposition, but because of the ruling party's dummy candidates. It is said that one-fifth of the new parliament members are actually dummy candidates. While the political opponents were not in the election fray, the ruling party candidates who lost in the election, themselves are crying foul, using terms such as "vote robbery", "election engineering", "night-before voting", "rigging", etc.

The Chief Election Commissioner admitted that people's faith in the elections had fallen. But that is all. It is not as if this is the first time that the people have lost their confidence in the election system. Even in the past two elections before this, people didn't get a chance to vote. But it does not seem there is a single person in our country ready to stand up and protect the credibility and sanctity of the election, which is the main basis of democracy. Our court did not set any precedence. No matter what dramatics has been seen in the elections of our subcontinent, at least the others make an effort to safeguard the sanctity of the vote. We have simply given up.

* Kamal Ahmed is a senior journalist

* This column appeared in the print and online edition of Prothom Alo and has been rewritten for the English edition by Ayesha Kabir