The Punjab Assembly passed, last week, the Local Government (Amendment) Bill, 2010, making some 21 amendments in the Punjab Local Government Ordinance, 2001, and authorising, among other things, the government to replace the existing Nazims with administrators. As promised, the PML-N-led government allowed the Opposition ample opportunity to debate the bill and propose recommendations.
Yet, none of its 22 recommendations found their way into the new law. The Opposition members staged a walkout from the assembly, complaining that the government could not accept, even the "most logical" amendments to the bill, and that it wanted to bulldoze everything on the basis of its numerical strength.
Notably, the PPP, a ruling alliance partner in the province, supported the bill - although talking later to the media Senior Minister Raja Riaz expressed some displeasure - apparently because the party did not want to annoy the PML-N at a time it is embattled on different other fronts.
The 'most logical' amendments included the recommendation that the present Nazims be allowed to remain in office, as is the practice in other elected offices, till the new elections. The Opposition is not to blame if it apprehends that the government-appointed administrators will create conditions for the elections that are favourable to the ruling party's candidates. Even more important is its concern about the provision in the new law that envisages the creation of an Election Authority, to conduct and notify the elections. It will be headed by a person who has been a judge of a high court or qualifies to be appointed as one.
It can also be a person, says the amended law, who has, or is, serving the government in Grade-20 or above. In other words, the elections would be held under the auspices of the government, rather than an independent provincial election commission. Since the Election Authority chief is to be appointed by the provincial chief executive, he/she will be dependent on the latter's goodwill to stay in office.
Hence, the basic conditions of a free and fair election that demand impartiality and transparency have been compromised. These issues are likely to raise all manner of questions about the election results, however fair they might be. A controversial election body is not going to serve the government well. Besides, electoral rules and regulations do not hold a one-time utility.
The next time the local government elections are held, the present political parties might find themselves on different sides of the power equation. Then the PML-N would regret having handed the executive complete control over the election process. For now, thwarting of the Opposition attempts to have the provincial election commission preside over local government elections has caused a dent in the party's claims of respect for democratic principles.