The Election Commission of Pakistan’s (ECP’s) press release issued last month that close to 37 million voters on the electoral lists are bogus has stunned observers, leading some to argue that it has rendered 45 percent seats of the national and provincial assemblies dubious. While it speaks volumes about the weak performance of the ECP prior to the 2008 general elections, the argument on legitimacy of parliament does not hold water. The National Database and Registration Authority (NADRA) was created in 2000 and delegated the task to register the citizens of Pakistan on a computerised system and issue them Computerised National Identity Cards (CNICs). At the time of the 2002 general elections, old electoral rolls were used and voters were allowed to present both old ID cards and CNICs as identification documents. During the six years from 2002 to 2008, the ECP had to update the electoral lists according to the latest data available. One would think that in the presence of NADRA, which has the most reliable documented record of the eligible voters, the ECP’s task had become easy. However, it seems the ECP did its own parallel documentation and did not reconcile the data collected by its staff with that of NADRA, leading to such blatant discrepancies. This is not the first instance of the ECP’s poor performance but this time it has severely marred the credibility of the current dispensation. Earlier, the issue of fake degrees had assumed epic proportions when a number of legislators were disqualified, while others resigned for fear of disqualification. The ECP failed to get the degrees presented by the contesting candidates verified from their respective universities. Hence the Supreme Court’s ire against the ECP for not doing its constitutional duty is perfectly justified. If the very basis of democracy, the electoral process, is called into question, then the whole edifice created from that exercise becomes dubious. That is why some news reports have gone so far as to declare 45 percent seats of the national and provincial legislatures dubious. However, before making sweeping statements, things must be analysed rationally. The 37 million fake voters are spread over many constituencies throughout Pakistan and it has not been investigated whether all these fake votes present on the lists were actually cast. Moreover, they were the result of the failure of the ECP to complete the task of updating the electoral rolls in time and not intended to be used as ‘fake’ votes. The one party that could be blamed for using fake votes in its favour was the outgoing PML-Q. However, PML-Q suffered a humiliating defeat in the 2008 elections and even its central leaders, including Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain, lost their respective seats. Therefore, without verifying how many fake votes were cast, one cannot question the legitimacy of the current parliament. If the number of fake votes cast in each constituency was marginal, then the results are reasonably acceptable. This issue speaks volumes about the need to make the ECP autonomous and competent. Pakistan returned to democracy after great struggle and can ill afford this blunder resulting from the poor performance of a state institution. Without an independent, impartial and competent election commission, the legitimacy of democratically elected governments will always be questionable and democracy will not flourish. It can be argued that this is part of the process of maturity of institutions. It is hoped that the ECP will assert its autonomy and refuse to be influenced by vested interests. Whoever is responsible for this debacle, including the chief election commissioner, should be taken to task and removal of these flaws in the electoral lists ensured before the next general elections. *