Barrister Salman Makhdum

The elections in February 2024 are critical for Pakistan because they will determine the future direction of the country in terms of its governance, development, and relations with other nations. The elections are also expected to be highly competitive and contentious, as the three major parties – Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), Pakistan Muslim League (N) (PML-N), and Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) – have different visions and agendas for the country.

The PTI, led by new chairman Barrister Gohar Khan, is seeking to regain power after being ousted by a no-confidence motion in August 2023. The PTI claims to represent the aspirations of the youth, the middle class, and the marginalized sections of society. The PTI promises to fight corruption, reform the institutions, and deliver social justice and welfare. The PTI also advocates for a peaceful and cooperative foreign policy, especially with neighboring countries like India and Afghanistan.

The PML-N, led by former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, is hoping to return to power. The PML-N claims to represent the interests of the business community, the urban elite, and the religious conservatives. The PML-N promises to revive the economy, restore the rule of law, and strengthen the national security and sovereignty. The PML-N also favors a pragmatic and balanced foreign policy, with an emphasis on maintaining good relations with the United States and China.

The PPP, led by former Foreign Minister Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, is aiming to expand its influence beyond its stronghold of Sindh province. The PPP claims to represent the legacy of the Bhutto family, which has a history of championing democracy, human rights, and federalism. The PPP promises to protect the rights of the provinces, the minorities, and the women. The PPP also supports a progressive and inclusive foreign policy with a focus on promoting regional integration and cooperation.

The outcome of the elections will have significant implications for the political, economic, and cultural stability of Pakistan, as the country faces multiple challenges and opportunities.

Please, subscribe to the monthly magazines of republicpolicy.com

Whispers of potential election delay hang heavy in the air of Pakistan, casting a shadow of uncertainty on the country’s political landscape. The Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) may have vehemently denied these rumors, declaring them “completely baseless and misleading,” but public doubts linger.

Fueling the Flames of Speculation:

Several factors have fanned the flames of speculation:

• Political Accusations: Fingers are pointed, with parties accusing each other of seeking a delay for their own ends. One party, even bizarrely, cited the winter weather as a reason to postpone, conveniently forgetting past elections held in February.
• Financial Concerns: Reports about the ECP’s lack of allocated funds and their subsequent summoning of the finance secretary only added fuel to the fire. While the funds were ultimately released, the incident sowed seeds of doubt.
• Security Concerns: Governor Ghulam Ali’s public pronouncements about the volatile security situation in parts of KP and Balochistan further fueled anxieties. While the surge in terrorist attacks is undeniable, is it enough to justify an election delay?

Lessons from History:

History offers a stark counterpoint to these concerns. In 2008 and 2013, Pakistan faced even more dire security situations, with the spillover from the Afghan war casting a long shadow. Yet, elections went ahead, albeit with minor adjustments. Even the tragic assassination of Benazir Bhutto in 2007 couldn’t derail the democratic process.

The People’s Voice:

The Pakistani people yearn for an elected government, one capable of tackling the country’s myriad challenges, particularly the ailing economy. They are not swayed by the specter of winter weather or isolated security concerns. They want their voices heard, their votes counted, and their future shaped by their own democratic choices.

The Fallacy of Security as Justification:

Invoking security concerns to justify a nationwide delay, particularly when only a handful of constituencies face genuine risks, is a dangerous and disingenuous tactic. It reeks of political maneuvering rather than genuine concern for public safety.

The Cost of Delay:

Postponing elections would have far-reaching consequences, not just for democracy, but for the entire nation:

• Constitutional Crisis: It would be a blatant violation of the constitution, plunging Pakistan into a potentially chaotic legal and political quagmire.
• Political Instability: Such a move would deepen polarization and fuel unrest, threatening the country’s fragile political stability.
• Economic Turmoil: Uncertainty is the enemy of economic progress. Delaying elections would only worsen Pakistan’s already precarious economic situation, potentially leading to another default.

The ECP must stand firm in its commitment to holding elections on February 8th. It must move swiftly to issue the election schedule and ensure a free and fair process. Pakistan needs a legitimate government, chosen by its people, to navigate the challenges ahead. Delaying elections is not just a political blunder; it’s a betrayal of the people’s trust and a gamble with the nation’s future.

The Pakistani people have spoken. They want their elections. They want their democracy. Can their leaders rise to the occasion and deliver? Only time will tell.

Please, subscribe to the YouTube channel of republicpolicy.com