Issue of delimitation of constituencies

Dr. Tahseen Mahmood Aslam describes the rationale behind the electoral requirement

The national elections are apparently around the corner but they may face the contentious issue of consensual agreement on delimitation of constituencies. The problem is actually deeper as the results of census exercise carried out a few years before are not accepted nationally. Every electoral process requires a clear earmarking of the boundaries of districts from where voters exercise the right to vote, and for this reason accurate and acceptable census figures form the fundamental requirement of an electoral exercise. This process requires continuous monitoring as physical and demographic changes invariably alter the characteristics of a boundary district necessitating its periodic review. Even the recently carried out digital census did not allay the misgivings and objections of contending political groupings.

The Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) has expressed its inability to re-draw the electoral constituencies across the country in a way that puts more emphasis on respecting administrative borders than on an equal vote for each citizen. The regulations governing the principles of change are not very precise and it appears that more discretion has been awarded to ECP to prioritise certain criteria. The underlying assumption of bringing change in constituency parameters is undoubtedly ensuring equality of vote and ECP has tried to comply with this spirit as much as possible. Keeping in view the difficulties associated with the census it was recently decided to retain the electoral constituencies as they were in the last general elections in 2018 though there are many objections to this decision.

Pakistan has been subjected to arbitrary fixation of constituency boundaries and their lopsided dimensions. The result of substantial variation in voting constituencies distorts the equality of vote and implies that a voter in a particular area has more power than a voter in some other place. Subsequent judicial reviews of the process resulted in the declaration that the delimitation of electoral constituencies was unconstitutional, citing the large variations in the sizes of constituencies, among other reasons. To address the dichotomy in electoral districts the Parliament passed Election Act 2017 that limited variation in constituency sizes to a maximum of 10%, in line with international practices. The Act however made census data as the basis for determining the extent of changes and as the approved census data was unavailable therefore an amendment was carried out in the Act enabling the ECP to use provisional census data. Accordingly, the ECP has tried to regulate the conduct of delimitation and produced preliminary results.

The national elections are apparently around the corner but they may face the contentious issue of consensual agreement on delimitation of constituencies. The problem is actually deeper as the results of census exercise carried out a few years before are not accepted nationally. Every electoral process requires a clear earmarking of the boundaries of districts from where voters exercise the right to vote, and for this reason accurate and acceptable census figures form the fundamental requirement of an electoral exercise. This process requires continuous monitoring as physical and demographic changes invariably alter the characteristics of a boundary district necessitating its periodic review. Even the recently carried out digital census did not allay the misgivings and objections of contending political groupings.
The Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) has expressed its inability to re-draw the electoral constituencies across the country in a way that puts more emphasis on respecting administrative borders than on an equal vote for each citizen. The regulations governing the principles of change are not very precise and it appears that more discretion has been awarded to ECP to prioritise certain criteria. The underlying assumption of bringing change in constituency parameters is undoubtedly ensuring equality of vote and ECP has tried to comply with this spirit as much as possible. Keeping in view the difficulties associated with the census it was recently decided to retain the electoral constituencies as they were in the last general elections in 2018 though there are many objections to this decision.
Pakistan has been subjected to arbitrary fixation of constituency boundaries and their lopsided dimensions. The result of substantial variation in voting constituencies distorts the equality of vote and implies that a voter in a particular area has more power than a voter in some other place. Subsequent judicial reviews of the process resulted in the declaration that the delimitation of electoral constituencies was unconstitutional, citing the large variations in the sizes of constituencies, among other reasons. To address the dichotomy in electoral districts the Parliament passed Election Act 2017 that limited variation in constituency sizes to a maximum of 10%, in line with international practices. The Act however made census data as the basis for determining the extent of changes and as the approved census data was unavailable therefore an amendment was carried out in the Act enabling the ECP to use provisional census data. Accordingly, the ECP has tried to regulate the conduct of delimitation and produced preliminary results.
The Act specifically ascertains the size of constituencies and declares that the variation in the population of electoral constituencies should “not ordinarily exceed ten per cent.” The Act however stays silent on the method to address an excess in the threshold so mandated. Nevertheless, the ECP calculated a population quota per seat based on the number of seats allocated to each province. The current position reveals that 94 constituencies, or 34%, have population sizes that are larger or smaller than the 10% threshold set in the Election Act. Sindh and Punjab have the highest number of constituencies and the size of their constituencies mainly vary between populations of 700-800,000 people. This problem is confronted by every electoral exercise and due to balancing strategies are devised to satisfy the political participants.
In re-fixing constituencies ECP has ventured to explain the reasons responsible for variations by mentioning geographic preferences and provincial and district seat quotas. Though the Election Act stipulated broader criteria and principles for delimitation, requiring attention to geographical continuity, communication infrastructure and homogeneity of the population but the implementation of these criterias was left to the ECP to be decided with due discretion allowed to it. The fixation of constituencies carried out by ECP depicts its standpoint reflecting that electoral constituency boundaries ought not to cross the administrative boundaries of districts. Following the adherence to such preference, in Balochistan, many districts are combined together to form a constituency owing to the thinly spread population.
It is to be emphasised here that the preference of ECP is generally in line with the general perception of political parties and citizens who attach decisive value to administrative boundaries. The main reason for this preference is that all basic services such as health, education, police and judiciary operate through administrative boundaries. It may however be conceded that such preference compromises the electoral equality and portrays a distorted picture of electoral representation.
While considering this matter it must be borne in mind that the electoral process in Pakistan is gradually evolving and is now addressing the basic issues concerned with adult franchise. In a country that lacks in adequate infrastructure and social networking it is difficult to swiftly alter the basics governing earmarking constituencies but it appears progressively clear that political and electoral stakeholders are aware of the shortcomings and are trying to rectify them whereas it should also be accepted that it will take time. TW

The Act specifically ascertains the size of constituencies and declares that the variation in the population of electoral constituencies should “not ordinarily exceed ten per cent.” The Act however stays silent on the method to address an excess in the threshold so mandated. Nevertheless, the ECP calculated a population quota per seat based on the number of seats allocated to each province. The current position reveals that 94 constituencies, or 34%, have population sizes that are larger or smaller than the 10% threshold set in the Election Act. Sindh and Punjab have the highest number of constituencies and the size of their constituencies mainly vary between populations of 700-800,000 people. This problem is confronted by every electoral exercise and due to balancing strategies are devised to satisfy the political participants.

In re-fixing constituencies ECP has ventured to explain the reasons responsible for variations by mentioning geographic preferences and provincial and district seat quotas. Though the Election Act stipulated broader criteria and principles for delimitation, requiring attention to geographical continuity, communication infrastructure and homogeneity of the population but the implementation of these criterias was left to the ECP to be decided with due discretion allowed to it. The fixation of constituencies carried out by ECP depicts its standpoint reflecting that electoral constituency boundaries ought not to cross the administrative boundaries of districts. Following the adherence to such preference, in Balochistan, many districts are combined together to form a constituency owing to the thinly spread population.

It is to be emphasised here that the preference of ECP is generally in line with the general perception of political parties and citizens who attach decisive value to administrative boundaries. The main reason for this preference is that all basic services such as health, education, police and judiciary operate through administrative boundaries. It may however be conceded that such preference compromises the electoral equality and portrays a distorted picture of electoral representation.

While considering this matter it must be borne in mind that the electoral process in Pakistan is gradually evolving and is now addressing the basic issues concerned with adult franchise. In a country that lacks in adequate infrastructure and social networking it is difficult to swiftly alter the basics governing earmarking constituencies but it appears progressively clear that political and electoral stakeholders are aware of the shortcomings and are trying to rectify them whereas it should also be accepted that it will take time. The Weekender