The Ejection Commission of Pakistan

The democratic government that followed Zia should have revoked Articles 62 and 63 earlier. Because the military dictators need no tests and this pre-election ablution was solely for politicians. They should have foreseen that this clause will catch up with them

What is a Pakistani election without some drama? We love the comedy, the absurdity and the timing. We assume that anyone seeking a political office in Pakistan must be either an imbecile or a bastard. And then we throw him/her at the mercy of the lions.

The latest “lions” are the Registration Officers, popularly known as ROs, without whose approvals nomination papers go nowhere.

The RO must determine how staunch a Muslim the candidate is and his ultimate whips are Articles 62 and 63 that require a politician to be “sagacious” and “ameen”. The candidate must also not be against the “ideology of Pakistan” and should not have committed “major sins”.

Now let us have a look at some of the nuanced and erudite questions the ROs came up with, and the recommended answers:

If you were dying of thirst in a desert, will you embrace death or alcohol?
I will embrace death before alcohol, your honor.

Do you eat with your left hand?
No, your honor. That hand is only used in the toilet.

And, do you believe in a honeymoon?
Only a political one, your honor- the one we experience in the first few months of our military government.

Should Pakistan be a democracy?
Yes. But the politicians should don the role of a Khalifa, just like in Saudi Arabia, your honor. And they should embody Muslim standards of morality.

That’s it! Your nomination papers are approved.

There are 126 District Returning Officers, 425 Returning Officers and 709 Assistant Returning Officers, according to the Election Commission website.

The good news is that these God-fearing and devout ROs didn’t fall from the sky. These are all judges in the local courts and include the additional, session and civil judges. Their assistants include tehsildars, District officers, Assistant Commissioners etc.

These are the people we deal with everyday in small cities at the local level. We need them for our applications, documents, signatures, stamps, appointments and approvals. After witnessing the performance of our ROs, it is not surprising that Pakistan’s sectarian and terrorist outfits almost never land in jail. Imagine being a rape victim or a runaway bride seeking protection from her family- how will these stalwarts of tradition perceive such victims of the system? Not very favorably one presumes.

When it comes to religion, the level of understanding these ROs have is quite dismal. Islam isn’t about reciting a Quranic verse or staying clear of alcohol alone. Defining the “Islamic injunctions”, “non-profligate” and even the “Ideology of Pakistan” is tricky and a rather never ending endeavor in exegesis.

Apparently transparency is not what the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) is seeking but rather the mug slinging itself. What if the RO was bribed to clear a candidate or reject someone’s opponent? What if he informed people to revise their third Qalima and Dua Qanoot beforehand? What if someone from the establishment gave the RO instructions?
The ROs raised doubts about the religious integrity of Ayaz Amir but later retracted. Similarly, former PM Pervez Ashraf, Hina Rabbani Khar, Chaudry Nisar and Pervez Musharraf’s papers were rejected. The party leader who paid the maintenance of his love child isn’t removed under 62/63 either.

Musharraf’s papers were later accepted in another constituency. The RO in Chitral admitted that he was under pressure to accept Musharraf’s nomination. Unfortunately, Khar was removed for shaking hands with men whereas those famous for wining and dining are cleared. What about all the male Pakistani politicians shaking hands with the various first ladies, women ambassadors, Hillary Clinton, Madeline Albright and Condoleezza Rice?

Everyone rejoiced when Musarat Shaheen was able to recite her Quranic verses. But why? We don’t have the right to declare someone a bad Muslim and neither is it our business to determine if someone is good one. Not only is it impossible to determine how truthful and honest someone is, it is also exceedingly foolish to see people in black and white terms.

The Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP hasn’t taken the kind of control a country with a history of military intervention and growing religious extremism requires. Next time, we hope that the ECP has the courage to bring onto themselves what they brought on others. And hopefully the ROs will be more trained, professional and clear-headed five years from now.

The democratic government that followed Zia should have revoked Articles 62 and 63 earlier. Because the military dictators need no tests and this pre-election ablution was solely for politicians. They should have foreseen that this clause will catch up with them. Above all, 62/63 flushed out the chance of any non-Muslim contesting an election in Pakistan. This is not democratic because 4% of our population in non-Muslim. Hopefully the other 96% will realize that it is impossible for them to prove themselves Muslim either. But this unfortunate election drama has once again revealed that Pakistan has not yet become a civilized and mature democracy.

Ammara Ahmad is one of the editors of Viewpoint, she tweets at @AmmaraTiger