The worst offenders of dynastic politics are the biggest champions of democracy.  The list is long. Obviously the PML (all factions), the PPP (al factions) and the ANP (all factions) are all run by generations heirs. Even smaller parties like the ANP pass the mantle to their first born.

Amazingly Pervez Musharraf is the only politician in Pakistan and possibly in the history of Pakistan whose progeny is not the heir apparent. Obviously this is not so in most of the political parties.The Jamat e islami and the MQM are notable exceptions to the rule which may surprise may people.

Sarwar Bari’s list is disgusting and asks more questions than it answers.

Ending the monopoly of dynasties Tuesday, July 22, 2008 Sarwar BariElectoral rigging and the manipulation of the election process by political dynasties was the hallmark of the recent by-elections. There is plenty of evidence that the prime minister, the foreign minister and the PML-N leadership used official resources and privileges in the election campaign in favour of their family members. This includees the “development” and “relief” packages for people in by-elections constituencies, which was in violation of the Election Commission’s code of conduct, as well as victories of VVIPs without contest.

The candidates in question include Shahbaz Sharif who won from two constituencies), his son Hamza Shahbaz, Asif Zardari’s sister Faryal Talpur and Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani’s son Ghulam Qadir Gilani. How did they achieve these victories? In NA 207 constituency in Old Larkana, some candidates were forced to withdraw from the contest. Those who refused were disqualified on technical grounds. One candidate who insisted on contesting was kidnapped for three days, during whichh time the Election Commission declared Ms Talpur the winner. Mr Brohi, the candidate, filed a petition with the Commision and held a press conference in Islamabad to protest his manipulated defeat. His case has also been reported by the Free and Fair Election Network- the largest and the most credible domestic coalition of 40 NGOs, which observed the by-elections.

The victory of Shahbaz Sharif from PP-10 is equally dubious, with his rival Shahid Orakzaidisqualified on technical grounds. Shahabz Sharif had already won from PP- 48 without a contest.

Meanwhile, non-locals have started contesting from the SaraikiBelt in greater numbers. Since 1988, politicians of central Punjab are increasingly contesting elections from the Seraiki areas, mostly Rahim Yar Khan, Bahawalnagar, Bhakkar and Bahawalpur districts. In the 2002 election, Chaudhary Shujaat Hussain, Pervaiz Elahi, Ejazul Haq, Aitzaz Ahsanand some other leaders of central Punjab contested election from the Saraiki Belt. What attracts them? First, the presence of a powerful group of Punjabi settlers in the Seraiki areas, who are more cohesive socially and politically. They are helped by the collaborative role of a section of subservient Saraiki jagirdarswho have strong control over the rural poor. The Saraikidistricts have some distinctive features, which can be easily manipulated. These districts are poor, ruraland remote, and a thin media presence. It therefore becomes easy for the administration to ensure victory for candidates from central Punjab, who may otherwise lose from Lahore, Rawalpindi, Faisalabad and Gujrat, where election contests are intense due to the presence of a relatively more organised middle and working classes in these areas.

Then, there is the stranglehold of the political dynasties. A comparative analysis of various elections and legislative bodies since the 1988 election shows that concentration of political power among a few families has increased radically. The political dynasties captured most of the increased number of seats as well as reserved seats for women since 2002. When they did not have enough family members to contest all the seats in their area of influence, they contested on more than one seat. Election Commission records show that in 2008 election 310 individuals were candidates in 684 constituencies. Of these, 255 simultaneously contested from two seats each and 55 from three or more seat. As many as 181 candidates simultaneously contested national and provincial seats. These candidates all belonged to leading political dynasties.

However, the electorates showed wisdom and defeated most of these candidates. Out of 310 candidates only 22 could win more than one seat. This caused by-elections in 28 constituencies.

Pre-election rigging discouraged voters from going to the polling stations on June 26, as they knew the results in advance. As a result, voters’ turnout in most constituencies was less than 30 percent. In some constituencies it was as low as 12 percent. The winners may not even have the blessing of even 5 percent of the constituents.

This situation raises serious questions. Are those who represent the public not accountable to anybody?

Such flawed electoral exercise has serious bearing on the structures of governance as well as on economic resources. Firstly, the political interference in electoral administration corrupts the administration, the judiciary and the police. Second, it allows criminal elements to infiltrate and influence the political parties. As a result, it further damages the confidence of the public in the political process, which prevents capable and honest people from joining the political parties. As far as the cost on by-election is concerned, it must be in the range of tens of millions.

The outcome of the general election and the by-election is furthering the stranglehold and monopoly of few political dynasties in our legislative assemblies. The same families control lands, businesses, industry and commerce in the districts. There is no way that we will ever achieve good governance in Pakistan as long as the monopoly of these dynasties continues. Can a liberal democracy flourish where social, political and economic monopolies are so entrenched? So what is to be done to enhance the social basis of democracy?

As the Election Commission has formed a committee to reform the electoral laws, I would like to recommend the following:

First, a ban on candidates contesting from more than one seat. If this is not possible then charge all the cost of the by-election from the winner who had vacated the seat.

Second, introduce agrarian reforms in order to liberate peasants and the other rural poor from the stranglehold of jagirdars so that they could vote without fear of vengeance or victimisation. Land reforms will clearly benefit the economy of the country. Professor Amartya Sen argues that there is an inverse relationship between farm size and farm productivity. Therefore, in order to increase food productivity and feed the nation we must divide large farms into smaller ones and give them to landless peasants.

Third, initiate public debate on how to end monopolisation of legislative bodies by political families in order to diversify social basis of the legislative structure. Anti-monopoly and anti-cartel laws, which deal with bad behaviour of business houses do exist in Pakistan as they do in most other countries, including the old democracies. These could be extended to the agrarian and political arenas as well.

Fourth, put a ban persons from other constituencies contesting an election. A candidate must be registered as a voter where he/she is contesting the election.

Fifth, in order to enhance legitimacy and accountabilities of legislative bodies, at least 50 percent of the vote must be secured by the winner.

Sixth, indirect election (quota seats for women, minorities and specialist seats) must be replaced with direct election, as this will enhance public scrutiny and accountability.

Seventh, voters should be given the right through the ballot paper to reject all candidates should they feel none is worth of their vote. In case a majority of voters reject all the candidates then disqualify all of them and hold a fresh election in such constituencies.

Finally, investigate how some candidates won the June 8 by-elections without a contest.

But will the political dynasties allow the passage of legislation that goes against their respective interests? The answer is obviously no. So the only way to push these reforms is through public debate and pressure. This is the only peaceful way forward towards deepening the democracy and to eliminate autocracy and militancy in the country. If our politicians wish to enjoy public respect and credibility, they must show their electorate some minimum standards of good behavior, so people could see that they are different from the military dictators. In a situation where politicians are fast losing public support, the only way to arrest this trend is to introduce electoral reforms on an urgent basis, otherwise people will start using violent means to get rid of the corrupt ruling elites. If not today, tomorrow certainly belongs to the people.

The writer is national coordinator of the Pattan Development Organisation. Email: bari@pattan.org