5
THE ECP last week released its draft code of conduct for the 2018 elections, which is now under deliberation by political parties. The code seeks to check the scale of political campaigns; banning rallies, billboards, pamphleteering and the airing of political advertisements on privately owned media outlets. Corner meetings, door-to-door canvassing and the use of megaphones would be permitted.
The ECP’s draft code reeks of good intentions, but is ultimately misguided. It seems the commission wants to limit excessive expenditure (and the likely misappropriation of public funds or corruption required for such spending), maintain public order, and avoid negative campaigning. Its guidelines also envision a devolved campaign style, promoting connections between local party representatives and their constituencies rather than a media circus around party leaders. So far, so good.
But vociferous campaigning must be permitted as part of the democratic process, especially in Pakistan. This is a difficult claim to make in the shadow of the US presidential elections, where political campaigning has amounted to little more than nasty mudslinging. Interestingly, academic research in the US has shown that campaigns have only minimal impact on the outcome of elections, which are largely determined by other factors: the state of the economy, party organisation and public perceptions regarding the country’s trajectory. The influence of campaigns is also limited by the fact that, come election time, there are not many undecided voters left to persuade.
The ECP must focus on strengthening the democratic culture.
The argument that campaigns are a waste can be made more strongly in a country where patronage politics still rules. Few people in Pakistan make individual choices about which parties and platforms to support, and instead vote on the basis of ethnicity or for local strongmen who seem best positioned to extract resources from the state. This is true — but times are changing.
Political campaigns that have the widest reach possible are important in a premature democracy such as ours. The public is still learning why we go through the electoral exercise, and campaigns can be educative, by their very nature, highlighting that candidates are chosen representatives meant to execute the will of the people.
Political campaigns can also foster a culture of accountability in a country where institutions are too weak to otherwise promote it. When on the campaign trail, politicians make promises that they can be held to during their tenure — the more widely publicised the promises, the more binding they become. In 2013, Nawaz Sharif arguably won the election because he promised to cut load-shedding; his fate in 2018 will be determined by the extent the PML-N delivers on this count. Why else the focus on CPEC and other power projects?
Vibrant political campaigns can also help Pakistan evolve beyond patronage politics towards an issue-based politics. If forced to articulate policies on the campaign trail, our politicians will have to spare a thought for the needs of their constituencies (and that, lest we forget, is the point of elections).
As the fastest urbanising country in South Asia, with increasingly young, mobile, media-savvy and informed voters, Pakistan is on the cusp of a shift to issue-based politics. Changing political structures, particularly in cities — take, for example, the power vacuum in Karachi following the systemic weakening of the MQM — means that seats are genuinely up for grabs, and those candidates able to make the most convincing arguments to serve the people will be the power brokers of tomorrow.
Rather than issue blanket bans on traditional campaign materials, the ECP should consider ways in which to turn the shouting match of current politics into a genuine debate. For example, it could require printed material to contain clauses from the party’s manifesto rather than photographs of party scions, or work with commercial media outlets to organise inclusive debates (imagine what would ensue if Sharif and Imran Khan had to interact with each other). The ECP’s recommendation that criticism of opponents be limited to their policies and track record is a good step in this regard.
The commission should also play a larger role in regulating and monitoring campaign financing. Ultimately, the ECP should focus on practices that strengthen Pakistan’s democratic culture. For that reason, the first clause from the draft code that must be cut is the one recommending the disqualification of candidates who challenge the ideology and sovereignty of Pakistan or ridicule its security establishment and judiciary. Thoughtfully criticising and questioning a system is distinct from ridicule or outright rejection, and the first step towards changing it — which is exactly what we elect representatives to do.
As the ECP and political parties haggle over the specifics of billboards and airtime, they should remain committed to preserving space for open debate and dialogue, which is the very essence of democracy.
The writer is a freelance journalist.
Published in Dawn, October 24th, 2016
