The local government elections of 2015 in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa were a mammoth exercise. This election was much more comprehensive than the last such exercise conducted in 2005. Back then 12,818 seats were contested in 986 union councils.
This time around 41,762 seats were contested in about 4,000 wards. Likewise, the voter turnout also outstripped the tally from the 2013 General Elections. The fact that the elections were conducted is praiseworthy indeed. But all was not hunky-dory.
Election observers reported a host of mismanagement issues and irregularities throughout the polling process. According to FAFEN, about 13 percent of polling stations were not ready to commence voting from the stipulated time of 8AM. The organization cited issues such as non-availability of necessary election material (e.g. voter lists), furniture or in some cases, non-arrival of the polling staff.
Once voting got underway, many voters were daunted by the process of casting their ballots. Going through 6-7 ballot papers requiring more than 40 entries meant that each voter took a long time to get their choices noted. Waiting times were exacerbated by frequent stoppages during polling. In all, FAFEN noted over 100 stoppages in its preliminary report.
But the gravest outcome of the day was the loss of ten lives in violent clashes which, in some cases, included the use of firearms. Another 80 people were injured as a result of Election Day violence.
Peshawar and Bannu were the foci of these incidents, however most districts witnessed some form of aggressive behaviour by supporters of contestants. As many as 19 polling stations were also captured by riotous hordes; thus interfering with the voting process.
Women’s participation in the polls was reportedly higher than the 2013 General Elections. However, women voters were disenfranchised, particularly in Upper Dir, Lakki Marwat and Shangla by absence of female staff, or separate booths for women voters.
Election observers also raised concerns over the generally low level of voter awareness. Since this is the responsibility of the Election Commission of Pakistan, the onus lies on it to devise necessary framework for informing voters, especially since they are expected to handle multiple forms requiring dozens of entries.
The ECP had only about a month to prepare for the polls following the verdict of the apex court. Yet it must be understood that even with a more comfortable head start, it may not be possible to ensure better administration of polls particularly in the more populous provinces of Punjab and Sindh.
Provincial governments and the ECP should take lesson from similar exercises in other countries to make electioneering more manageable and transparent at home. General Elections in India are conducted over a month. The phased approach towards conducting polls allows that country’s relevant authorities to allocate adequate resources, serially to various states and districts.
In Pakistan, local government elections are scheduled for different months of this year for all provinces and territories. The same phased approach should be extended within the provinces as well. The shortage of law enforcement officials in comparison to population of registered voters is widely known.
Given the experience of KP, improving administrative control and providing a risk and hassle free environment for voters should be a top priority. That mandates breaking down the polling activity into manageable chunks. Otherwise, the risks of violence and interference in local government elections in Punjab and Sindh may be proportionately higher than the recently concluded exercise.
