Back to electoral mode

  By Imtiaz Alam

Thanks to a lack of popular support to boycotting elections, the components of All Parties Democratic Movement (APDM), who were inclined to conditionally reject the electoral process, are now considering to participate under the pressure of their own candidates who are keen to contest the next polls. In the presence of major electoral parties, such as the PPP, the PML-Q, the JUI, the MQM and the ANP, in the contest, the PML-N could not afford to give a walkover to its adversaries. After taking a tougher line, Mian Nawaz Sharif is inclined to take the right course of participating in the elections as other major parties have shown their determination to not to let pro-Musharraf parties have a walkover. How will not repeating the blunder of boycotting elections, as in 1985, affect the prospects of struggle for the restoration of democracy and the new civilian set-up?

Against the backdrop of heat and anguish generated by the November 3 declaration of emergency, suspension of the constitution and subjugation of judiciary under the Provisional Constitutional Order (PCO), the opposition was under greater pressure to demand the reversal of all steps taken by the second martial law. By making the restoration of pre-PCO-II judiciary its major demand, the parties of APDM unwillingly took an irreconcilable position. But they intelligently kept a window open by making it conditional upon the boycott by the PPP and the JUI who were unlikely to follow suit. Mixing up the reinstatement of the judges with the tactic of boycotting elections was a mistake. By taking the course of boycott and compelling others to do the same, they were not only going to take an isolationist course, but would have also let the pro-Musharraf political forces capture the next parliament.

The tactic of boycott is a most aggressive popular political act that presupposes a mass upsurge or insurrection through which the people either take over the state or forcibly disrupt the whole electoral process. In a situation where the masses have not been mobilized (or could not be mobilized) for a general strike or other sustainable mass protests, adopting such a tactic would have been tantamount to taking a self-suicidal course. In 1985, it was General Ziaul Haq who prompted some sections of MRD to boycott the elections to further isolate the opposition. The opposition’s boycott proved ineffective and served the very purpose of the then dictator. After the division among the opposition parties over boycott, the boycotters not only got isolated but also not prepared to take the people at large away from the electoral process.

This was nothing but an infantile disorder of those who stood no chance of winning the elections. If Qazi Hussain Ahmed had no possibility of overtaking even Maulana Fazalur Rehman, Imran Khan had little chance of winning his lone seat from Mianwali that he had won last time with the blessing of Musharraf. The real loser on the boycott track would have been Mian Nawaz Sharif and his PML-N while the ANP had already decided to contest the elections anticipating a lack of consensus on the issue. The boycotters were in fact carried away by the sentiments expressed by the bars and civil society activists who have a legitimate stand but no mass following to pursue their goals. They also forgot that after the judgments by the PCO-judiciary in defence of the two proclamations issued by the former COAS, the only forum left for the restoration of pre-PCO-II judiciary was the next parliament from which they were opting out. By abandoning the huge opportunity of mobilizing the masses during the election campaign, they were leaving the field open to pro-PCO elements to get elected and indemnify the extra-constitutional measures of November 3.

After the separation of two offices or doffing of uniform and announcement to lift emergency and withdraw PCO by 16 December, the opposition is left with two demands of restoration of judiciary and holding of fair elections. The pre-PCO-II judiciary can now only be restored by the next parliament by not indemnifying the oath under PCO-II, whereas elections can only become freer by building public pressure and mobilizing the electorate. By boycotting elections, the opposition cannot achieve its goals.

One must appreciate a pro-active and realistic decision taken by Ms Benazir Bhutto and Maulana Fazalur Rehman to participate in the elections and mobilize the people from their respective platforms. Ms Bhutto decided to participate in elections under protest while keeping her option to boycott the elections open, if they are rigged, to a later stage. If Ms Bhutto provided the liberal-democratic secular alternative, Fazalur Rehman offered the religious-right’s constitutionalist alternative, leaving no major ideological space out. This should have forced not only Nawaz Sharif to not let PML-Q and PPP expand its space in the Punjab at its expense, but also Qazi Hussian Ahmed to not let Fazalur Rehman takeover all of MMA’s constituencies in NWFP. Faced with the prospects of losing much ground and increasing isolation from the international community, Mr Sharif is beginning to show the flexibility and will probably agree to play the ball according to the ground situation by taking refuge behind Bhutto’s reluctance in not boycotting the polls at this stage.

Ms Bhutto, however, both gains and loses in the Punjab with the participation of Mr Sharif. She could lose some seats in the urban areas of the Punjab to Mr Sharif and win more seats in the rural areas where both Leagues could divide anti-Bhutto votes. However, with Mr Sharif’s participation, anti-Musharraf front in the next parliament would be strengthened. It would also be good for the next parliament’s legitimacy and for the assertion of its sovereignty that all parties participated in the elections. Much will, however, depend on how effective campaign the opposition will run and how little they may spoil each other’s votes in favour of the allies of the President. It is most likely that the opposition parties would dominate the next elections. A lot depends on how far the two moderate leaders from the ideological divide, Ms Bhutto and Mr Sharif, will be able to bridge their differences and succeed in reactivating the Charter of Democracy they had earlier signed.

No doubt, President Musharraf has lost too much ground after November 3. Most vocal sections of civil society are on the streets against his self-perpetuation. An anti-Musharraf environment is being created before the election campaign starts. A new COAS has taken the charge and the enlightened self-interest of the army warrants that it keeps away from the baggage of last eight-year’s military rule. Most worrying aspect of the current situation is that all opposition parties are expressing serious reservations about the impartiality of the coming elections. After doffing uniform, President Muhsarraf is fighting his last desperate round by manipulating the next elections. The whole game is now focused on the outcome of next elections and the opposition must win this round. And if the opposition does win this round, it can cleanup the whole constitution of all autocratic deviations and decide the fate of, at least, two PCOs issued by Musharraf. The time is to go to the people, mobilize them and get rid of last vestiges of authoritarianism.

The writer is editor current affairs, The News, and editor South Asian Journal. Email: imtiazalampak@yahoo.com