ghazi52
PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2007
- Messages
- 102,847
- Reaction score
- 106
- Country
- Location
Election rigging 101: How to steal a mandate
How is the polling process exploited for personal advantage and how are voter perceptions manipulated?
Ebad Pasha
The general perception is that apart from the elections that were held in 1970 — which saw the then-East Pakistan break away from the West — none of the elections in Pakistan have really been “free” or “fair”. The Free and Fair Election Network’s (Fafen) General Secretary, Sarwar Bari, agrees.
Historically speaking, election rigging in Pakistan has occurred at multiple levels, with the connivance of state institutions, the establishment, polling officers and, of course, political parties and candidates.
The rigging process can be broadly divided into three categories: pre-poll rigging, polling day-rigging and post-poll rigging.
Here, we break down how the polling process can be exploited.
Pre-poll rigging
Manipulating the census
Yes. Manipulating the census.
The census is one of the first and most important parts of the election process, as it is what determines how many seats any particular settlement (province/district, etc) will be allocated. The number of seats given to a settlement is decided according to the population settled there, with approximately 780,000 people on average being assigned a single National Assembly seat.
So, if the population of an area is shown to be lesser or greater than it actually is, their voting power can be diluted or boosted compared to other parts of the country.
Therefore, the counting of people (and how to manipulate the result) remains at the top of the priority list of someone planning to rig the election.
Now you know why some political parties have been crying themselves hoarse since last year’s census exercise. The main players in Sindh — PPP and MQM — had demanded an audit as they claimed the population of the province as a whole, and Karachi specifically, had been shown to be less than it actually is.
Despite a government promise of an audit of 1 per cent of the census blocks, the review never happened. The census results were released as is, and Karachi may (if the parties are to be believed) be getting less seats than is its due.
"But is it really that easy to rig a census?"
Fafen's Bari says that although evidence does not exist to prove that rigging in the recent census took place, serious questions have indeed been raised because of its procedure. He says the standard post-census practice of randomly sampling 0.5pc of households to confirm findings was never done, primarily because the entire exercise happened in haste. The random sampling would have confirmed that the census results were correct unless discrepancies were found.
Gerrymandering concerns
As discussed earlier, the ECP allots a quota of seats to every district according to its population (as counted in the census).
Once the census results are in, the ECP creates constituencies following a set of rules, which (theoretically) constrain the commission into being fair when demarcating constituencies.
In theory, all NA constituencies, and those within respective provinces, have to be of the same size, with a maximum 10pc variation in their constituent population. But which areas (mohallas, galis, goths) fall into which constituency within that district is still for the commission to decide.
Therefore, if you want to rig at the constituency level, the delimitation exercise is what you need to target.
"Gerrymandering refers to drawing up constituencies in a way that one political rival is at a position of disadvantage in polls regardless of voter support"
This could mean having the areas where economically disadvantaged voters reside clubbed together into a particular constituency so that a candidate appealing to those with lower/no income has a better chance of winning it. The contra is also true.
Again, although there exists no evidence to suggest malpractice in delimitation this time around, a number of regulations have been flouted in the delimitation exercise.
“The 10pc variation rule has been broken in around 81 National Assembly constituencies and hundreds of provincial assembly constituencies,” Bari told Dawn.com, adding that he fears gerrymandering may have happened.
Gerrymandering refers to the amoral practice of drawing up constituencies in a way that one political rival is at a position of disadvantage in polls regardless of the voter support.
The practice of gerrymandering serves two basic purposes: it dilutes an opponent's voting support across many districts and also confines the voters to a single district.
Consequently, this tactic, which is essentially the most sinister form of pre-poll rigging as it happens behind closed doors, can leave a targeted political party's constituency results worse than what its actual vote bank ought to have commanded.
Get your opponent’s nomination papers rejected
This election season, the nomination papers of candidates have come under greater scrutiny as the Supreme Court itself has shown a lot interest in the matter. And, like previous elections, the nomination papers of a number of potential candidates have been rejected by returning officers (RO).
While there are legal ways of challenging the acceptance of your opponent’s nomination papers, like finding something controversial from their past or present, this alone does not guarantee that they will be disqualified.
The candidates attempt, and at times succeed, in getting the RO on their side through shady means, making the contest easier for them, the Fafen official says.
However, ousted candidates have recourse to higher courts for appeal, and it is generally difficult to sideline someone unless you hit gold digging around in their personal affairs.
Polling day-rigging
Rigging on the day of elections is perhaps the most important (and outrageous) way of turning the tide of an election, and there are multiple ways to make that happen.
Capture the polling booth
Once a candidate has done their best in pre-poll rigging, the next opportunity presents itself on polling day itself.
The best bet for the candidates is to capture polling booths in areas they exercise influence in. They do it by forcing election officials to either side with them, or keep mum about what is happening.
Fafen’s Bari says that this is the most common type of rigging, and it mostly occurs in connivance with election officers. However, it happens at perhaps 15-20pc of the polling stations.
But that, he feels, is enough to sway an election.
“You rig as much as you can hide,” he says.
Bari notes that the practice is easiest at women’s polling booths, where burqas come in handy and lists of dead people (who have not been expunged from the electoral rolls) help riggers cast extra ballots in their candidate's favour.
Manipulate the vote count
“Mir Zafarullah Khan Jamali won the [2013] election by [around] 4,000 votes. [Yet, approximately] 30,000 votes were rejected [during the vote count],” Bari recalls.
This is just an example of how even the vote counting process is not free of flaws.
A look at the NA-226 Nasirababd-cum-Jaffarabad results indeed reveals that 25,562 votes were rejected while the win margin between Jamali and Mir Saleem Ahmed Khosa was less than 6,000.
Bari says that, in all, the win margin was lower than the number of votes rejected in around 35 constituencies in 2013 elections, which means that there could have been a different winner had the rejected votes been considered valid.
How is the polling process exploited for personal advantage and how are voter perceptions manipulated?
Ebad Pasha
The general perception is that apart from the elections that were held in 1970 — which saw the then-East Pakistan break away from the West — none of the elections in Pakistan have really been “free” or “fair”. The Free and Fair Election Network’s (Fafen) General Secretary, Sarwar Bari, agrees.
Historically speaking, election rigging in Pakistan has occurred at multiple levels, with the connivance of state institutions, the establishment, polling officers and, of course, political parties and candidates.
The rigging process can be broadly divided into three categories: pre-poll rigging, polling day-rigging and post-poll rigging.
Here, we break down how the polling process can be exploited.
Pre-poll rigging
Manipulating the census
Yes. Manipulating the census.
The census is one of the first and most important parts of the election process, as it is what determines how many seats any particular settlement (province/district, etc) will be allocated. The number of seats given to a settlement is decided according to the population settled there, with approximately 780,000 people on average being assigned a single National Assembly seat.
So, if the population of an area is shown to be lesser or greater than it actually is, their voting power can be diluted or boosted compared to other parts of the country.
Therefore, the counting of people (and how to manipulate the result) remains at the top of the priority list of someone planning to rig the election.
Now you know why some political parties have been crying themselves hoarse since last year’s census exercise. The main players in Sindh — PPP and MQM — had demanded an audit as they claimed the population of the province as a whole, and Karachi specifically, had been shown to be less than it actually is.
Despite a government promise of an audit of 1 per cent of the census blocks, the review never happened. The census results were released as is, and Karachi may (if the parties are to be believed) be getting less seats than is its due.
"But is it really that easy to rig a census?"
Fafen's Bari says that although evidence does not exist to prove that rigging in the recent census took place, serious questions have indeed been raised because of its procedure. He says the standard post-census practice of randomly sampling 0.5pc of households to confirm findings was never done, primarily because the entire exercise happened in haste. The random sampling would have confirmed that the census results were correct unless discrepancies were found.
Gerrymandering concerns
As discussed earlier, the ECP allots a quota of seats to every district according to its population (as counted in the census).
Once the census results are in, the ECP creates constituencies following a set of rules, which (theoretically) constrain the commission into being fair when demarcating constituencies.
In theory, all NA constituencies, and those within respective provinces, have to be of the same size, with a maximum 10pc variation in their constituent population. But which areas (mohallas, galis, goths) fall into which constituency within that district is still for the commission to decide.
Therefore, if you want to rig at the constituency level, the delimitation exercise is what you need to target.
"Gerrymandering refers to drawing up constituencies in a way that one political rival is at a position of disadvantage in polls regardless of voter support"
This could mean having the areas where economically disadvantaged voters reside clubbed together into a particular constituency so that a candidate appealing to those with lower/no income has a better chance of winning it. The contra is also true.
Again, although there exists no evidence to suggest malpractice in delimitation this time around, a number of regulations have been flouted in the delimitation exercise.
“The 10pc variation rule has been broken in around 81 National Assembly constituencies and hundreds of provincial assembly constituencies,” Bari told Dawn.com, adding that he fears gerrymandering may have happened.
Gerrymandering refers to the amoral practice of drawing up constituencies in a way that one political rival is at a position of disadvantage in polls regardless of the voter support.
The practice of gerrymandering serves two basic purposes: it dilutes an opponent's voting support across many districts and also confines the voters to a single district.
Consequently, this tactic, which is essentially the most sinister form of pre-poll rigging as it happens behind closed doors, can leave a targeted political party's constituency results worse than what its actual vote bank ought to have commanded.
Get your opponent’s nomination papers rejected
This election season, the nomination papers of candidates have come under greater scrutiny as the Supreme Court itself has shown a lot interest in the matter. And, like previous elections, the nomination papers of a number of potential candidates have been rejected by returning officers (RO).
While there are legal ways of challenging the acceptance of your opponent’s nomination papers, like finding something controversial from their past or present, this alone does not guarantee that they will be disqualified.
The candidates attempt, and at times succeed, in getting the RO on their side through shady means, making the contest easier for them, the Fafen official says.
However, ousted candidates have recourse to higher courts for appeal, and it is generally difficult to sideline someone unless you hit gold digging around in their personal affairs.
Polling day-rigging
Rigging on the day of elections is perhaps the most important (and outrageous) way of turning the tide of an election, and there are multiple ways to make that happen.
Capture the polling booth
Once a candidate has done their best in pre-poll rigging, the next opportunity presents itself on polling day itself.
The best bet for the candidates is to capture polling booths in areas they exercise influence in. They do it by forcing election officials to either side with them, or keep mum about what is happening.
Fafen’s Bari says that this is the most common type of rigging, and it mostly occurs in connivance with election officers. However, it happens at perhaps 15-20pc of the polling stations.
But that, he feels, is enough to sway an election.
“You rig as much as you can hide,” he says.
Bari notes that the practice is easiest at women’s polling booths, where burqas come in handy and lists of dead people (who have not been expunged from the electoral rolls) help riggers cast extra ballots in their candidate's favour.
Manipulate the vote count
“Mir Zafarullah Khan Jamali won the [2013] election by [around] 4,000 votes. [Yet, approximately] 30,000 votes were rejected [during the vote count],” Bari recalls.
This is just an example of how even the vote counting process is not free of flaws.
A look at the NA-226 Nasirababd-cum-Jaffarabad results indeed reveals that 25,562 votes were rejected while the win margin between Jamali and Mir Saleem Ahmed Khosa was less than 6,000.
Bari says that, in all, the win margin was lower than the number of votes rejected in around 35 constituencies in 2013 elections, which means that there could have been a different winner had the rejected votes been considered valid.