Findings of Voters' List, Delimitation Process and Polling Scheme
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ADVOCACY FOR ELECTORAL REFORMS FINDINGS OF VOTERS’ LIST, DELIMITATION PROCESS AND POLLING SCHEME ASSESSMENTS OF DISTRICTS CHITRAL, LOWER DIR, UPPER DIR, SHANGLA AND SWAT DISCLAIMER While significant effort has been made to avoid any factual error, omission or commission is accepted and will be duly acknowledged with gratitutde. Please feel free to contact at [email protected] Contents Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 4 Scope and Methodology of Assessment Studies .................................................................................... 5 A. Household Survey .......................................................................................................................... 5 B. Stakeholder Interviews .................................................................................................................. 6 1. Interviews of DECs ................................................................................................................... 6 2. Interviews of DDOs .................................................................................................................. 7 3. Interviews of District Level Leaders of Political Parties ...................................................... 7 Key Findings ................................................................................................................................................ 9 A. Voters’ List Assessment .............................................................................................................. 10 1. Household Registration and Preferred Address Consent Status ...................................... 10 2. Non-Registered Eligible-Age Members of households ...................................................... 13 3. Additional Registration Needs for 2018 General Elections............................................... 15 B. Delimitation Process: Awareness, Transparency and Grievance Redress ........................... 20 1. Citizens’ knowledge of Delimitation Process....................................................................... 20 2. Citizens’ Input in Delimitation Process ................................................................................ 25 3. Political Parties’ Input in Delimitation Process ................................................................... 32 4. Delimitation: Dispute Settlement Mechanism ..................................................................... 38 C. Polling Scheme: Awareness, Transparency and Grievance Redress ..................................... 47 1. Citizens’ knowledge of Polling Scheme ................................................................................ 47 2. Political Parties’ Input in Polling Scheme Formulation ...................................................... 52 3. Citizen’s Input in Polling Staff Appointment ...................................................................... 58 4. Polling Stations’ Establishment on Election-day ................................................................. 63 Findings of Voters’ List, Delimitation Process and Polling Scheme Assessments of Districts Chitral, Lower Dir, Upper Dir, Shangla and Swat Executive Summary This report is based on a survey of 96 households in District Chitral, 256 in District Lower Dir, 160 in District Shangla, 528 in District Swat and 192 in Upper Dir; and interviews with the District Election Commissioners (DECs), District Delimitation Officers (DDOs) and local leadership of the five leading political parties (as per the results of the 2013 General Elections) in these districts. The summary of key findings related to the existing status of voters’ registration and future electoral needs and the participation of citizens and political parties in, and their contribution to, the processes of constituency delimitation and polling scheme formulation is as follows: Voters’ Registration: Existing Status and Future Needs Only 8% (8 out of 96) households surveyed in Chitral, 8% (20 out of 256) respondents of the household survey in Lower Dir, 14% (22 out of 160) in Shangla, 15% (80 out of 528) in Swat and 6% (12 out of 192) in Upper Dir reported that no one in their household was consulted about their preferred address for registration on the voters’ list. As many as 50% (48 out of 96) households surveyed in Chitral, 68% (175 out of 256) in Lower Dir,, 37% (59 out of 160) in Shangla, 53% (281 out of 528) in Swat and 60% (116 out of 192) in Upper Dir had at least one eligible-age member who is currently not registered on the voters’ list. For the General Election 2018, the voter effort will also contend with registration household members who are currently not eligible to be on the voters’ list but will be before the announcement of election schedule. As many 55% (53 out of 96) households surveyed in Chitral, 69% (176 out of 256) in Lower Dir, 39% (63 out of 160) in Shangla, 52% (276 out of 528) in Swat and 53% (101 out of 192) in Upper Dir have at least one 15-17 year old member who will be eligible for registration on the voters’ list before the 2018 General Elections. Constituency Delimitation: Citizens’ Knowledge and Input As many as 33% (32 out of 96) households surveyed in Chitral, 97% (249 out of 256) in Lower Dir, 31% (49 out of 160) in Shangla, 90% (475 out of 528) in Swat and 92% (188 out of 192) survey in Upper Dir reported that they did not know about the last constituency delimitation in their district. Of the small number of respondents who knew about the last delimitation in their district, only 1 in Chitral, 1 in Shangla and 1 in Swat claimed that they had shared their recommendations/objections with the delimitation authority. In comparison, all the district-level leaders of the five leading political parties were more engaged in the delimitation process. Page 1 of 76 Findings of Voters’ List, Delimitation Process and Polling Scheme Assessments of Districts Chitral, Lower Dir, Upper Dir, Shangla and Swat o Leader of 1 of the 5 Political parties interviewed in Swat, 3 of the 5 in Upper Dir and Lower Dir claimed to have raised objections on the appointment of certain delimitation officers at the time of last delimitation in their district. o Leaders of 4 of the 5 political parties interviewed in Swat, 2 of the 5 in Shangla and Chitral, 3 of the 5 in Upper Dir and Lower Dir claimed to have submitted their recommendations/objections to the delimitation authority at the time of the initial delimitation listing. o Leaders of 3 of the 5 political parties interviewed in Swat and Upper Dir, 2 of the 5 in Shangla and Chitral and 1 of the 5 in Lower Dir who had submitted their recommendations/objections to the delimitation authority reported that they were dissatisfied with the mechanism adopted for addressing their objections. o Leaders of 2 of the 5 political parties interviewed in Swat, 1 of the 5 in Shangla and Lower Dir and 3 of the 5 in Upper Dir did not consider the proceedings of the delimitation authority impartial. Polling Scheme Formulation: Citizens’ Knowledge and Input Of the under-study districts, only the DECs of Swat, Chitral, Lower Dir, Upper Dir reported that the initial polling scheme had been publicized in their districts for citizens’ input. In line with this, leaders of 1 of the 5 political parties interviewed in Shangla and 2 of the 5 in Lower Dir, reported that the initial polling scheme had been publicized in their district for citizens’ input. Only 3% (3 out of 96) respondents of the household survey in Chitral, 1 out of 256 in Lower Dir, 4% (21 out of 528) in Swat and 1 out of 192 in Upper Dir reported that the voters in their area had been consulted before assigning of polling stations. The DECs of the under-study districts claimed that input had been sought from political parties and candidates before the draft polling scheme. o Among the political parties, leader of only 1 out of 5 political parties’ interviewed in Swat, 2 of the 5 in Shangla, 1 of the 5 in Upper Dir and 1 of the 5 in Lower Dir reported that their input had been sought before the draft polling scheme. o Leaders of 3 of the 5 political parties interviewed in Swat and Shangla, 2 of the 5 in Chitral, 4 of the 5 in Upper Dir and Lower Dir claimed to have registered their objections to the draft polling scheme. o Leaders of only 3 of the 5 political parties’ interviewed in Shangla, 2 of the 5 in Chitral and Lower Dir and 1 in Upper Dir reported that their parties’ objections on the polling scheme had been heard by concerned officials. o Leaders of Only 2 of the 5 political parties interviewed in Shangla and Chitral reported that they were satisfied with the remedial measures adopted by the ECP to address their parties’ objections on the draft polling scheme. Page 2 of 76 Findings of Voters’ List, Delimitation Process and Polling Scheme Assessments of Districts Chitral, Lower Dir, Upper Dir, Shangla and Swat The DECs of all the under-study districts stated that polling stations had been established as per the final polling scheme in the most recent elections. o In line with this, leaders of all the 5 political parties interviewed in Swat, Shangla and Chitral and 4 of the 5 in Upper Dir and Lower Dir stated that polling stations had been established as per the final polling scheme in the most