THE details have yet to be made public, but in principle the decision is the right one. After years of struggle and delay, parliament has moved a step closer to electoral reforms. Consensus at a time when the political government is under a great deal of pressure may appear as a convenient distraction, but the motivation and intention do not matter. What matters is the quality of reforms that will be evident once the bill is debated by the lower and upper houses of parliament. However, although the details must be analysed and debated, there is another problem that needs to be highlighted: the unnecessary and extended delay in arriving at some kind of agreement on reforms, even if not all parties are yet on board. Electoral reforms, of the sweeping kind that Pakistan needs, cannot be implemented easily or quickly. But more than four years have passed since the last general election, after which a commission, headed by the then chief justice of the Supreme Court, probed allegations of electoral fraud. The outcome was a report with a number of recommendations to improve the overall electoral system.

Unhappily, thus far, before this latest move, electoral reforms had been treated simply as a matter of strengthening the Election Commission of Pakistan. While constitutional amendments have been undertaken to improve the independence and autonomy of the ECP, the latter itself has time and again highlighted the problem with the scope of its powers and the administrative challenges of conducting a general election. Indeed, there is speculation that the government only expedited a consensus on electoral reforms under pressure from the ECP, which has been warning that new rules need to be established before the run-up to the election that must be held before the end of next year. Therein lies a democratic problem, ie the willingness to act only under pressure and seemingly at the last moment, rather than improving the quality of institutions and the rules that apply to them.

While the details are many, there are some core areas in which reforms can truly take the process of fair and transparent elections forward. The three phases are well known: pre-election, polling day and counting. At each point, particularly in areas where media and administrative scrutiny are inadequate, mistakes and errors are evident. That is what taints the overall electoral process and what makes it possible for losing parties to contest individual and national results. As vast consultations and debate by the electoral reforms committee have determined, reforms are mostly common sense and about strengthening the administrative apparatus at the constituency level. Some of that is relatively easy to deliver, but an overhaul is required in other areas. Whatever path is chosen, it is time for parliament to make some important decisions.

Published in Dawn, July 21st, 2017