Let us get one thing out of the way first, just because he is from a minority group and has presented a proposal, it does not mean anything he says is reasonable nor does it mean there is an inherent logic in his demands, they have to make sense and they have to pass the test of reasonableness.
He is equal to any other citizen, therefore extra value cannot be placed on his judgement unless it makes sense.
There were ten reserved seats for non-Muslims when the number of general seats were 207. When general seats were increased to 272 in 2002, the number of seats for non-Muslims remained the same i.e 10. Minority community strongly feel that minority's representation in National and Provincial Assemblies may be increased according to the proportion to the population of non-Muslims.
When the seats were 207, the percentage of minorities was 3.5% they should have been allocated 7 seats so they were given 3 seats more than their share of the population. Now after the increase, the seats as per population share should be 9.5 seats out of 272. They had 3 extra seats under the old system, and proper share under the new system. What is there to cry about???
They were not allowed to stand for elections under the old system, but they can under the new system for the last 20 years, plus women are allowed to be appointed under quota reserved for women. How is having extra rights wrong????
Just stating numbers makes no sense, they have to mean something. According to his numbers they had it good under the old system, with 3 extra seats, and they have it extremely good under the new system. Due to guarranteed representation as per population share, plus freedom to participate in general political life. How is that wrong??????????????
By choosing from parties list the minorities have no say in who occupies the 10 reserved seats in the National Assembly, instead these seats become a tool for victorious parties to pick their favorites. Moreover there is a fragile relation between those selected on reserved seats and those who are active members of the community.
Sensing the sentiments of the minority community in Pakistan it is time to end the party list system. Changing the election procedure of reserved seats of Non-Muslims is not a new phenomenon. In 1985 separate electorates were introduced for non-Muslims five elections were held which were totally abolished by 2002. On top of that in the Global community religious and ethnic minorities are represented the parliament through direct elections. Taking examples of Jordan, Lebanon, India, New Zealand, Fiji, Croatia, Iran, and Belgium, where religious and ethnic minorities are elected through direct electorate.
There are so many contradictions in this proposal, it is stupid. The quota system works by having a party list, it is not unfair, women seats are elected in the same manner. All countries that practice proportional representation in elections, such a Germany have the same system, you cannot keep crying foul for sake of attention, sometimes enough is enough. The existing system gives extra rights, I wish we had that in Britain.
Plus, non-muslims are free to stand in open seats, so where are the restrictions???? there are none, so no need to cry foul.
If you take the example of india, it has around
27 Muslim members in the lower house, if it practiced the Pakistani system the Indian parliament would have
82 Muslim members, plus they would be free to stand in open elections and will likely have few more. They would have around
3 times more seats in parliament if India followed the Pakistani system for minorities.
How is that a bad thing, he should be teaching India to follow Pakistan, not demanding regressive steps. After the change, he will be demanding we don't have enough representation because of this and that. People will be crying foul every day on PDF. A proposal means nothing if it does not make sense, and he should be ashamed of himself for not having thought clearly about his proposals because they will reduce the rights of the minorities.
There are ways to improve further still, and I do have proposals, but that's for another day.
Besides changing the election criteria of reserve seats for non-Muslims it is also proposed that to give the right to non-Muslims to cast double vote. This means dual franchise, and enables non-Muslims to cast one vote to a general seat candidate and the second to a member of their own community. This way they would remain integrated with the main stream politics, and true representatives of their communities would surface. The representatives would be answerable to the community and taking interest in the welfare of development of their communities. the argument of double votes cites the example of the residents of Azad Jammu and Kashmir, who cast votes both in their AJ K hometown constituencies and in the Pakistani constituencies where they reside.
If this isn't shameful, I don't know what is, does anyone really think asking for two votes makes sense. The minorities already have theoretical two votes, one direct and one indirect, and people have accepted it because no one complains. But to give two votes in a naked fashion, in the manner he has demanded, even I would complain and cry foul, he is taking arrogant selfishness to the extreme. Pakistan was not created to pamper to his fantasies, fairness means fairness for all, not double triple legal rights for some.
He should be ashamed for having put forward such a proposal.
For election on reserve seats for non-Muslims, the de-limitation of Constituencies may be made on divisional basis by the Election Commission of Pakistan. The number of divisions included in each contingency shall be on the basis of the non-Muslims population so as to make a total of 15 constituencies for the National Assemblies.
Using the same mechanism 4 constituencies shall be formed in Baluchistan, 4 in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 10 in Punjab and 14 in Sindh, for Provincial Assemblies. Since 2002, the electoral role in general election do not identify voter by their religions. In this this regard NADRA is the only source to track down non-Muslims population in all divisions of Pakistan, because NADRA has documented religion of every citizen who applies for NADRA CNIC
When you keep demanding, demanding, and demanding, you become known as bridezilla, a drama queen.
When you already have more than your share, to continue to ask for more is insane, and I am shocked at you for having to put forward his proposals part of your arguments, in which country would these be acceptable. Name me another country that has given as many electoral rights to minorities as Pakistan.
I would love to know.
Unless there are fundamental violations of the UN Charter of Human Rights (
Link ) every member country of the United Nations is responsible for the welfare and protection of its own minorities without external interference. Comparisons with other countries are odious. There is a tendency amongst some of us to make comparisons within the region ( with other South Asian nations) , where the record of minority oppression is extreme.
Of course I agree our lawmakers represent all religions and all their constituents. Our electoral system so far as minority representation is concerned is the best in the world.
What we should move to is an environment where a lawmaker can only be elected based on the electorate perception that their interests are best represented through this particular lawmaker, not on account of religious status or racial origin.
Maybe I am being hyper-secular and idealistic because I am looking at an ideal world where separate electorates, vote weightage or seat reservations are not needed.
Example: The US now has the largest number of lawmakers of South Asian origin ever in its history ( including the Vice-President ), and these lawmakers got elected on the votes of a diverse population, not on reserved seats or weightage of votes. The US Congress also has the largest number of female lawmakers of different racial denominations ever.
I know this was not always the case in the USA. African American and Native American population was not even allowed to vote until 1870, and the voting rights were not defined until 1963-1964 .
Women couldn't vote until 1920. The timeline is interesting (
Link ).
It is a population mindset that is important where religion or color does not matter. We should transform to set and enhance our own standards; not by comparisons with a neighboring state descending into fascism or our former eastern constituent territory with its treatment of religious and linguistic minorities. .
Before we stray too far from the topic it is more than just electoral representation that counts into minority integration. We can adhere to all the laws we have in practice and yet be completely insular to minorities.
Example : Would like to see a vibrant minority news anchor on one of our TV channels like Ali Velshi. A minority news anchor seen by millions is a powerful and secular projection of minority identity to the majority.
We can argue these are optics but optics do count in the world today.
I think you are having two different arguments in your head because your facts do not match your arguments. You are raising points that have no bearing on the discussion on hand. There has to be a reasonable connection.
If you believe the electoral system for minorities is wrong, please spell it out clearly, why do you think that is the case, a clear explanation. highlighting what is wrong and why. Thank you.
Please read his question to me.
