Daily Times

Tasting the sweet success is no ordinary feat in our beloved land. Especially when the political odds seem perpetually stacked against one’s cause. Despite being hailed as the backbone of the Pakistani economy in every state banter, it took nearly two decades for overseas Pakistanis to get their much-deserved right to vote. From Farooq Leghari in 1994 to Justice Saqib Nisar in 2018, no one batted an eyelid before jumping on board but words can just go so far. It is for this purpose that over nine million expatriates are singing songs of praise for the ruling PTI, which has finally delivered on its promise. Credit should be given where due and Islamabad has, indeed, passed historic legislation by empowering those whose remittances are the biggest source of our foreign earnings. The heated debate making rounds on social media, however, might give a whiff of Pakistan being the only country to have trodden this path. But, this could not be more removed from reality as the global village had long come to terms with its history of migration (that had started from the lush wetlands of Africa). Over 130 countries have, in one way or another, made arrangements for their non-resident citizens to vote in homeland elections. American 2020 polls saw an overwhelming number of Americans living abroad request ballots in their home states.

There can be no qualms about the close ties emigrants enjoy with their communities back home as well as their desire to procure representativeness in the legislative process. Now, the chunkier part of the puzzle refers to the modes de operadi of the overseas enfranchisement. The ECP was long equipped by Elections Act 2017 to “ascertain the technical efficacy, secrecy, security and financial feasibility of (expat) voting.” But its pilot studies have yet to put out the final word. Whether overseas Pakistanis would be requested to vote in the missions nearby, or send in postal votes (like the US): there are many options. The hottest item on the agenda, e-Voting, has stirred the angriest debate given the cyber-risks involved. The uproar over alleged foreign interference in the 2016 American race is hard to look past. The fact that our major institutions, such as the FBR, have yet to fool-proof their websites against hackers is the proverbial cherry on top.

As the voting conundrum has been dealt with, the upcoming days might see the government deal with the question of the reserved seats. Job well done on the voting bill, but who would they vote for? It should be clarified how (and whether) this new electorate would vote for contestants in their home districts. Clearly, the cabinet would not have gone to all this trouble for gestures only. If such a long-drawn-out dilemma has been resolved, due diligence should now be given to dotting all the i’s and crossing all the t’s. *