SHEIKH RASHEED TERMS DELAY IN ELECTIONS ‘DEATH’ OF DEMOCRACY
One of the defining characteristics of a democracy is that it holds regular, periodic elections (Dahl 1971; Przeworski 1999). This requirement was famously enshrined into Article 21(3) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UN General Assembly 1948). It is also embedded into many conceptualizations of electoral integrity (Norris 2014). At the same time, there are occasions where a natural disaster such as an epidemic or tsunami may mean that holding an election will potentially introduce greater threats to human life and security
Former interior minister Sheikh Rasheed on Monday said that Shehbaz Sharif should make a Charter of Democracy instead of a Charter of Economy. In a series of tweets, Sheikh Rasheed challenged the political opponents and said the nation understands that the illness of Nawaz Sharif and Asif Zardari is an excuse to run away.
Whether the cowardly Nawaz Sharif returns homeland or not, or is qualified or remains disqualified, it does not matter anymore.
Table 1 therefore presents a new ideal-type typology of non-elections. The actors who cancel the election, their rationale, and timing vary in each case.
| Table 1. A Typology of Delayed Elections | |||
| Stopped by whom? | Why? | When? | |
| Cancellations | Incumbent Military | Power-grab | Pre-election |
| Crisis postponements | Incumbent Opposition | Political stalemate Constitutional crisis Violence | Pre-election |
| Transition postponements | Transitional government | Democratic reforms | Pre-election |
| Technical delay | EMB Incumbent | Technical issues Violence | Pre-election |
| Candidate death | EMB Incumbent | Equality of contestation and voter choice | Pre-election |
| Humanitarian postponement | Incumbent EMB | Emergency situation threatening life | Pre-election |
| Annulled | Judiciary Incumbent Military | Not constitutional Power-grab Not implementable | Post-election |
Although there might be humanitarian reasons for postponing an election, the prospect of not holding an election when one is scheduled is, at first glance, contrary to democratic ideals. Elections should have a level playing field for candidates. There is often some degree of structural advantages for parties and candidates, since they will enter the campaign period with a greater concentration of resources if they are backed by wealthy donors, meanwhile incumbents might have access to state resources such as editorial influence over the state media outlets (Norris and van Es 2016).
Let every powerful individual and institution understand that Elections are at the bedrock of the democratic process. They are indispensable for bringing rule by citizens as opposed to narrow political or sectional elites.
