Learn more

composite
37
37

Pakistan

In law
50
In practice
28

In Pakistan, there is no direct or indirect public funding for parties or candidates. Non-financial state resources featured in the 2013 campaign, despite a law banning their use. Contributions to parties are somewhat restricted, but the law ignores candidates in this regard. The reverse holds for campaign expenditures. Candidates are required, in law, to spend less than a specified amount, but party spending is unregulated. The evidence suggests that, though the legal framework is not particularly extensive, even the restrictions on contribution and expenditure were likely violated in the run-up to the 2013 elections. During campaign periods, candidates are required to file financial reports, while parties must submit reports on an annual basis. In practice, not all candidates submit the required reports, and most data is incomplete, without a full list of identifying details for contributors. Political finance information is not available online, though it can be obtained in hard copy at photocopying cost, or in pdf. Third party actors are not subject to reporting requirements, though unions and some religious groups do appear to exercise some influence in campaigns. Enforcement in Pakistan is less than robust. The leaders of the Electoral Commission are not appointed in public, completely merit-based processes, and their independence is not guaranteed. The Commission's budget and staff are not sufficient for comprehensive oversight. It performed no audits or investigations after the 2013 elections, and many of its administrative sanctions were ignored by violators.

  • expand button!

    Direct and Indirect Public Funding

    More about category
    composite
    37
    • expand button!
      Direct Public Funding
      More about category
      • expand button!
        1
        Score
        NO
        In law, there is direct public funding for electoral campaigns.More about indicator

        No such law exists.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where there is direct public funding for both political parties and individual candidates to campaign. A 100 also applies where only one of the two actors can be elected and, therefore, only one is entitled to direct public funding.

        A MODERATE score is earned where per law only one of the two actors (either political parties or individual candidates) is allocated direct public funding to campaign, even though both can be elected.

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources

        No such law exists.

      • expand button!
        2
        Score
        NO
        In law, there is a transparent and equitable mechanism to determine direct public funding for electoral campaigns.More about indicator

        No such law exists.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where: 1) direct public funding for political parties and individual candidates' electoral campaigns is allocated through a clearly defined calculation mechanism that is transparent and equitable, and 2) there are clearly defined eligibility criteria.

        A MODERATE score is earned where direct public funding for political party and individual candidates' electoral campaigns is allocated through a clearly defined calculation mechanism that is transparent and equitable, but eligibility criteria are not clearly defined.

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources

        No such law exists.

      • expand button!
        3
        Score
        50
        In practice, to what extent is the mechanism to determine direct public funding for electoral campaigns transparent, equitable and consistently applied?More about indicator

        Not applicable. After thorough review of the election laws and an interview with voter education officer Mr. Khurram Badar, it is clear that no law in Pakistan provides for and regulates public funding.

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where: 1) electoral campaigns allocations are always defined through a clearly defined transparent and equitable calculation mechanism, and 2) the defined eligibility criteria are applied consistently.

        A 50 score is earned where: 1) electoral campaign allocations are usually defined through a clearly defined transparent and equitable calculation mechanism but exceptions exist, or 2) the eligibility criteria are usually applied but exceptions exist.

        A 0 score is earned where: 1) political campaign allocations are rarely or never defined through a clearly defined transparent and equitable calculation mechanism, or 2) the defined eligibility criteria are rarely applied.

        Sources

        Legal Framework, Election Commission of Pakistan. See all relevant laws at: http://ecp.gov.pk/ElectionLaws/Volume-I.pd

        Interview with Khurram Badar Alam, Voter Education Officer, IFES-Pakistan, August 21, 2014, via telephone.

      • expand button!
        4
        Score
        50
        In practice, to what extent does the entity in charge of public funding make disbursement information publicly available?More about indicator

        Not applicable. After thorough review of the election laws and interview with voter education officer Mr. Khurram Badar, it is clear that no law in Pakistan provides for and regulates public funding.

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where: 1) complete information on the disbursements is published less than a month after disbursement, and 2) the information is available on the Internet for free or in hard copy at photocopying cost.

        A 50 score is earned where: 1) the information published is incomplete or published more than two months after disbursement, or 2) obtaining the information costs more than photocopying.

        A 0 score is earned where: 1) disbursement information is published more than four months after disbursement, or 2) no disbursement information is published or released upon request.

        Sources

        Legal Framework, Election Commission of Pakistan. See all relevant laws at: http://ecp.gov.pk/ElectionLaws/Volume-I.pd

        Interview with Khurram Badar Alam, Voter Education Officer, IFES-Pakistan, August 21, 2014, via telephone.

    • expand button!
      Indirect Public Funding
      More about category
      • expand button!
        5
        Score
        YES
        In law, use of state resources in favor of or against political parties and individual candidates is prohibited.More about indicator

        Section 10 of the General Elections Code of Conduct (2013) and section 83A of ROPA 1976 state: "No person or political party or a contesting candidate and their supporters shall hoist or fix party flags on any public property or at any public place, except with the permission in writing from local government or authorities and on payment of such fee or charges as may be chargeable."

        Article 25 of the Code of Conduct further states: "Issuing of advertisements at the cost of public exchequer in the newspapers and other media and misuse of official mass media during the election period for partisan coverage of political news and publicity by the Federal, Provincial and Local governments shall be prohibited."

        Sections i and ii of the By-elections Code of Conduct state: i). "The executive authority of federation and provinces shall not use State Resources in those constituencies where elections/by elections are being held for unfair advantage for particular candidate and political party nor exercise undue influence affecting the interest of candidate or party for participating in elections/by election held hereinafter"

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where there is an explicit ban on the use of state resources in favor of or against political parties and individual candidates. A YES is also earned where there are clearly defined exceptions, which are accessible to all actors equally.

        A MODERATE score is earned where an explicit ban exists but it only applies to one of the two actors, even though both can be elected. A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        A NO score is also earned where the law exists, but allows discretionary exceptions.

        Sources

        Pakistan Representation of People Act, 1976, (amended 2013), Article 83 www.ecp.gov.pk/ElectionLaws/Volume-I.pdf

        Code of Conduct (General Elections 2013), January 28th 2013, Articles 10 & 25 http://ecp.gov.pk/ViewPressReleaseNotificDetail.aspx?ID=1841&TypeID=1

        Code of Conduct (By Elections 2013), section i & ii http://ecp.gov.pk/CodeofContductByeElections28082013.pdf

      • expand button!
        6
        Score
        50
        In practice, to what extent are no state resources used in favor of or against political parties and individual candidates' electoral campaigns?More about indicator

        in Pakistan, the law clearly prohibits the use of state resources during political campaigns. However, the political parties, especially the ruling political parties, exercise strong influence during political campaigns and misuse state resources. For example, despite the fact that there is a provision in the Constitution mandating that an interim government ( caretaker) be appointed during elections, the set up of the interim goverment is in large part influenced by whichever party was hitherto the ruling party.

        In the first instance, Free & Fair Election Network (FAFEN) observed, the ruling political party PPP in February 2013, two months before general elections was using public buildings to display its campaign material. The campaign materials included party banners, wall chalking, posters and stickers pasted on the premises of public offices. In addition, seven other parties - Pakistan Peoples Party (Shaheed Bhutto), Pakistan Muslim League-Functional, Jamaat-e-Islami, Pakistan Awami Tehreek, Muttahida Qaumi Movement, Sindh Taraqqi Pasand Party and Pakistan Peoples Party Parliamentarians (Patriots)- also had their campaign material at public places.

        Across 14 districts, FAFEN observers found party stickers pasted at 13 offices and posters up at nine. They saw wall chalking at eight offices and banners of political parties at four. The reporting districts included Karachi East, Karachi West, Jamshoro, Sukkur, Larkana, Matiari, Thatta, Badin, Ghotki, Shaheed Benazirabad, Malir and Hyderabad in Sindh, and Narowal and Sialkot in Punjab.

        Such reports of the misuse of state resources also come during by-elections when the party in power uses state resources for the benefit of particular candidate (mostly ruling party ticket holder).

        There are often reported several cases of violations of code of conduct by election candidates but the reporting in newspapers and media are often vague and half baked. These are based on accusations and counter accusations by competing candidates. Neverthless, such violations were reported in the media during very recent by-elections, including the use of a helicopter for distributing pamphlets for government backed candidate in NA-149 in October.


        Peer reviewer comment: Disagree - suggests a 0 score. A source at the National Accountability Bureau states that the use of state resources in election campaigns is quite common. Frequent violations include the following: 1. Police officials are used to intimidate the voters and supporters of other group 2. Official vehicles of police department and education department are usually used 3. Teachers who are appointed returning officers at times help some parties

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where there is no evidence of authorities using state resources in favor of or against political parties and individual candidates. A 100 is also earned where there are clearly defined exceptions and are equally accessible to all actors.

        A 50 score is earned where: 1) documented evidence indicates occasional use of state resources in favor of or against political parties and individual candidates, or 2) clearly defined exceptions are not equally accessible to all actors.

        A 0 score is earned where documented evidence indicates regular use of state resources in favor of or against certain political parties and individual candidates.

        Sources

        Interview with Khurram Badar Alam, Voter Education Officer, IFES-Pakistan, August 21, 2014, via telephone.

        FAFEN, Use of State resources for Political Campaigns, 2013. http://fafen.org/?s=use+of+state+resources

        The News Tribe, "Pakistan Election 2014: 70 Govt Officials Campaign for Candidates in 25 Constituencies", May 6, 2013, http://www.thenewstribe.com/2013/05/06/pakistan-election-2013-70-govt-officials-campaign-for-candidates-in-25-constituencies/

        Dawn news “Acting CEC, Punjab accused of influencing NAT-151 poll”, Dawn, July 19, 2012. http://www.dawn.com/news/735507/acting-cec-punjab-accused-of-influencing-na-151-poll

        Pakistan World News. "Multan by-Election", October 15, 2014. http://pakistan.worldnewsviews.com/2014/10/15/multan-by-election-javed-hashmis-unique-campaign/

        Reviewer's sources: Interview of an Investigation Officer, National Accountability Bureau (NAB), Islamabad. Date: 11 December 2014

        The names of anonymous sources are known to Global Integrity and Global Integrity has agreed not to disclose them.

      • expand button!
        7
        Score
        NO
        In law, political parties and individual candidates have free or subsidized access to equitable air time for electoral campaigns?More about indicator

        No such law exists.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where: 1) free or subsidized access to air time for electoral campaigns is granted in a transparent, equitable way, and 2) there are clearly defined eligibility criteria.

        A MODERATE score is earned where free or subsidized access to air time for electoral campaigns is granted in a transparent, equitable way, but eligibility criteria are not clearly defined.

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources

        No such law exists.

      • expand button!
        8
        Score
        50
        In practice, to what extent is free or subsidized access to air time provided in a transparent, equitable way to political parties and individual candidates for electoral campaigns?More about indicator

        Not applicable. No mechanism for free or subsidized access to air time exists.


        Peer reviewer comment: Agree - Though there is no legal mechanism to distribute advertising slots equitably, it's important to note that the state media is completely biased in favor of the ruling party (PML-N). This is not unusual in Pakistan because the jobs of everyone in state media agencies are depended on the mercy of the leadership that regulates media through the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA).

        Through PEMRA, the government has been effectively controlling all TV and radio channels. For example, a renowned channel, Geo TV, faced a suspension of 15 days and a heavy fine for speaking against the country’s intelligence chief. Since then, this private TV channel has become like a state owned channel. Right now, when the protests of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf are over 100 days old, many TV channels hesitate to show continued live coverage of Imran Khan’s protests. This is because the government continues to block any such channel, for example ARY TV.

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where: 1) free or subsidized access to media advertising is always provided in a transparent and equitable way, and 2) the defined eligibility criteria are applied consistently.

        A 50 score is earned where: 1) free or subsidized access to media advertising is usually provided in a transparent and equitable way, but exceptions exist, or 2) the eligibility criteria are not always applied.

        A 0 score is earned where: 1) there's rarely free or subsidized access to air time for political campaign, and 2) access exists but is not provided in a transparent, equitable way.

        Sources

        No such law exists.

        Reviewer's sources: ‘PEMRA suspends Geo TV’s licence for 15 days, imposes Rs10 million fine’, Express Tribune, 6 June 2014. http://tribune.com.pk/story/718288/pemra-suspends-geo-tvs-licence-for-15-days-imposes-rs10-million-fine/

  • expand button!

    Contribution and Expenditure Restrictions

    More about category
    composite
    51
    • expand button!
      General Rules on Electoral Campaign Contributions
      More about category
      • expand button!
        9
        Score
        NO
        In law, cash contributions are banned.More about indicator

        Cash contributions are allowed, subject to the requirements on all contributions noted below.

        THE POLITICAL PARTIES ORDER, 2002 (CHIEF EXECUTIVE’S ORDER NO. 18 OF 2002): 6 (2) The contribution made by members or supporters of any party shall be duly recorded by the political parties.

        6(3) Any contribution made, directly or indirectly, by any foreign government, multi-national or domestically incorporated public or private company, firm, trade or professional association shall be prohibited and the parties may accept contributions and donations only from individuals.

        6(4) Any contribution or donation which is prohibited under this Order shall be confiscated in favor of the State in the manner as may be prescribed.

        For the purpose of this section, a “contribution or donation” includes a contribution or donation made in cash, kind, stocks, hospitality, accommodation, transport, fuel and provision of other such facilities.

        1. Financial transactions within a party.— All financial transactions within a party shall be entered in the statement of accounts submitted under rule 4.

        Code of conduct general elections 2013, January 28, 2013

        (21) No transaction towards the election expenses shall be made through an account other than the account opened for the purpose. (22) All transactions relating to the election expenses shall be entered into with GST registered firms / persons, wherever it is possible.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where cash contributions are banned and all financial contributions must be made via the banking system.

        A MODERATE score is earned where cash contributions are allowed up to a maximum limit, regardless of the limit.

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources

        THE POLITICAL PARTIES ORDER, 2002 (CHIEF EXECUTIVE’S ORDER NO. 18 OF 2002), Article 5, and 6 (2). http://ecp.gov.pk/ElectionLaws/Volume-I.pdf

        Code of conduct general elections 2013, January 28, 2013. http://ecp.gov.pk/ViewPressReleaseNotificDetail.aspx?ID=1841&TypeID=1

      • expand button!
        10
        Score
        MODERATE
        In law, there is a ban on anonymous contributions.More about indicator

        There are requirements stipulating the disclosure of all 'sources of funds'.

        Article 4 of the THE POLITICAL PARTIES RULES, 2002 states that: "Submission of statement of accounts.— Every political party shall maintain its accounts in the manner set-out in Form-I indicating its income and expenditure, sources of funds, assets and liabilities and shall, within sixty days from the close of each financial year (July—June), submit to the Election Commission a consolidated statement of accounts of the party audited by a Chartered Accountant, accompanied by a certificate, duly signed by the Party Leader to the effect that no funds from any source prohibited under the Order were received by the party and that the statement contains an accurate financial position of the party."

        Article 50 (2) of the Representation of the People Act states: The return of election expenses of the returned candidate referred to in sub-section (3A) of section 42 and of every contesting candidate referred to in sub-section (1) shall be submitted to the Returning Officer in the prescribed form containing—

        (d) a statement of all moneys, securities or equivalent of money received from, or spent, by any person for the benefit of the candidate, specifying the name of every such person.

        Article 48 of the same act defines an election expense as "any expenditure incurred before, during, and after an election or payment made...in connection with...the election of a candidate." This includes payments made to candidates for electoral activities.

        Article 49(3) goes on to stipulate that "a candidate shall, through bills, receipts, and other documents, vouch for every payment made in respect of election expenses, except where the amount is less than five hundred rupees."

        So while parties must disclose all sources of donations, candidates are legally obliged to disclose only donations in excess of 500 rupees.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where the law stipulates that anonymous contributions are banned.

        A MODERATE score is earned where the ban exists, but it applies only to one actor (whether political parties or individual candidates). A MODERATE score is also earned where small anonymous donations are allowed up to a maximum threshold equal to or less than the equivalent to US$300.

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources

        THE POLITICAL PARTIES RULES, 2002, Article 4. http://ecp.gov.pk/ElectionLaws/Volume-I.pdf

        THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE ACT, 1976 (ACT No. LXXXV OF 1976), Article 48, 49, & 50. http://ecp.gov.pk/ElectionLaws/Volume-I.pdf

      • expand button!
        11
        Score
        YES
        In law, in-kind donations to political parties and individual candidates must be reported.More about indicator

        In-kind donations to both parties and candidates must be reported.

        The Representation of the People Act, 1976 states: 49. Restriction on election expenses.—(1) No person other than the candidate shall incur any election expenses of such candidate: Provided that where any person incurs any election expenses on behalf of such candidate, whether for stationery, postage, telegrams, advertisement, transport or for any other item whatsoever, such expenses shall be deemed to be the election expenses incurred by the candidate himself.

        The Political Parties Order 2002, Article 6 states: (2)The contribution made by members or supporters of any party shall be duly recorded by the political parties. (3) Any contribution made, directly or indirectly, by any foreign government, multi-national or domestically incorporated public or private company, firm, trade or professional association shall be prohibited and the parties may accept contributions and donations only from individuals. (4) Any contribution or donation which is prohibited under this Order shall be confiscated in favour of the State in the manner as may be prescribed. Explanation.—For the purpose of this section, a “contribution or donation” includes a contribution or donation made in cash, kind, stocks, hospitality, accommodation, transport, fuel and provision of other such facilities.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where all in-kind donations must be reported to the oversight authority.

        A MODERATE score is also earned if the requirement to report such information exists, but applies only to one actor (whether political parties or individual candidates).

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources

        THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE ACT, 1976 (ACT No. LXXXV OF 1976), Article 49. http://ecp.gov.pk/ElectionLaws/Volume-I.pdf

        The Political Parties Order 2002, Article 6(2). http://ecp.gov.pk/ElectionLaws/Volume-I.pdf

      • expand button!
        12
        Score
        YES
        In law, loans to political parties and individual candidates must be reported.More about indicator

        Candidates and parties are legally required to report all types and amount of loans.

        Article 63 of the 1973 Constitution states the disqualifications for membership of Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) on the grounds: (n) he has obtained a loan for an amount of two million rupees or more, from any bank, financial institution, cooperative society or cooperative body in his own name or in the name of his spouse or any of his dependents, which remains unpaid for more than one year from the due date, or has got such loan written off; or (o) he or his spouse or any of his dependents has defaulted in payment of government dues and utility expenses, including telephone, electricity, gas and water charges in excess of ten thousand rupees, for over six months, at the time of filing his nomination papers; or

        The Nomination paper provision (STATEMENT OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES), requires candidates to declare that they've not defaulted on any loan worth more than 2 million rupees. All loans must be reported on the Nomination Form among the liabilites.

        Article 4 of the THE POLITICAL PARTIES RULES, 2002 states that: "Submission of statement of accounts.— Every political party shall maintain its accounts in the manner set-out in Form-I indicating its income and expenditure, sources of funds, assets and liabilities and shall, within sixty days from the close of each financial year (July—June), submit to the Election Commission a consolidated statement of accounts of the party audited by a Chartered Accountant, accompanied by a certificate, duly signed by the Party Leader to the effect that no funds from any source prohibited under the Order were received by the party and that the statement contains an accurate financial position of the party."

        Artcile 13 of the Political Parties Order, 2002, states that: 'Every political party to submit to Election Commission a consolidated statement of its accounts containing annual income and expenditure, sources of its funds and details of assets and liabilities. Statements to be audited by a Chartered Accountant and to be filed within 60 days from the close of each financial year."

        The disclosure of 'sources of funds', duly checked by audit report, carries provision regarding the reporting of loans of political party.


        Peer reviewer comment: Agree. In addition, details of loans taken by any candidate are provided to the Election Commission of Pakistan by the State Bank and the National Accountability Bureau.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where all loans must be reported to the oversight authority.

        A MODERATE score is earned where loans must be reported, but the requirement applies only to one actor (whether political parties or individual candidates).

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources

        The Constitution of Pakistan, 1973, Article 63. www.na.gov.pk/publications/Constitution.pdf

        Nomination paper provision (STATEMENT OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES), no date. http://www.ecp.gov.pk/Misc/NominationForms/NominationForm1.pdf

        The Political Parties Order 2002, Article 4, 13. http://ecp.gov.pk/ElectionLaws/Volume-I.pdf

    • expand button!
      Limits on Contributions and Expenditures during Electoral Campaign Periods
      More about category
      • expand button!
        13
        Score
        NO
        In law, contributions from individuals are limited to a maximum amount.More about indicator

        No such law exists.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where: 1) individuals may not contribute more than a maximum amount established by the law.

        A MODERATE score is earned where a maximum amount exists, but it applies only to contributions for one actor (whether political parties or individual candidates). A MODERATE score is also earned where individuals are forbidden from making any contribution.

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources

        No such law exists.

      • expand button!
        14
        Score
        MODERATE
        In law, contributions from corporations are limited to a maximum amount.More about indicator

        Parties may not receive donations from corporations.

        THE POLITICAL PARTIES ORDER, 2002 (CHIEF EXECUTIVE’S ORDER NO. 18 OF 2002)

        6 (3) Any contribution made, directly or indirectly, by any foreign government, multi-national or domestically incorporated public or private company, firm, trade or professional association shall be prohibited and the parties may accept contributions and donations only from individuals.

        Article 6 of the political parties, rules 2002, states: 6. Confiscation of prohibited funds.— Where the Election Commission decides that the contributions or donations, as the case may be, accepted by the political parties are prohibited under clause (3) of Article 6, it shall, subject to notice to the political party concerned and after giving an opportunity of being heard, direct the same to be confiscated in favour of the State to be deposited in Government Treasury or sub-Treasury in the following head of the account:— “3000000-Deposits and Reserves-B-Not Bearing interest- 3500000-Departmental and Judicial Deposits-3501000-Civil Deposits-3501010-Deposits in connection with Elections”.

        There is no provision regarding the prohibition of funding from corporations to individual candidate.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where: 1) corporations may not contribute more than a maximum amount established by the law.

        A MODERATE score is earned where a maximum amount or ban exists, but it applies only to contributions for one actor (whether political parties or individual candidates). A MODERATE score is also earned where corporations are forbidden from making any contribution.

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources

        THE POLITICAL PARTIES ORDER, 2002 (CHIEF EXECUTIVE’S ORDER NO. 18 OF 2002), Article 6(3). http://ecp.gov.pk/ElectionLaws/Volume-I.pdf

        The Political Parties Rules 2002, Article 6. http://ecp.gov.pk/ElectionLaws/Volume-I.pdf

      • expand button!
        15
        Score
        MODERATE
        In law, contributions from foreign sources are banned.More about indicator

        Donations from foreign sources to parties are banned.

        Article 6 (3) of the Political Parties Order 2002 states: Any contribution made, directly or indirectly, by any foreign government, multi-national or domestically incorporated public or private company, firm, trade or professional association shall be prohibited and the parties may accept contributions and donations only from individuals.

        Article 6 of the Political Parties Rules, 2002 stipulates: Confiscation of prohibited funds.— Where the Election Commission decides that the contributions or donations, as the case may be, accepted by the political parties are prohibited under clause (3) of Article 6, it shall, subject to notice to the political party concerned and after giving an opportunity of being heard, direct the same to be confiscated in favour of the State to be deposited in Government Treasury or sub-Treasury in the following head of the account:— “3000000-Deposits and Reserves-B-Not Bearing interest- 3500000-Departmental and Judicial Deposits-3501000-Civil Deposits-3501010-Deposits in connection with Elections”.

        There are no provisions in law prohibiting candidates receiving funds from foreign sources.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where it is forbidden for political parties and individual candidates to receive contributions (financial or in-kind) from foreign sources.

        A MODERATE score is earned where: 1) the ban exists but it applies only to one actor (whether political parties or individual candidates), or 2) contributions from foreign sources are allowed to a maximum amount.

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources

        THE POLITICAL PARTIES ORDER, 2002 (CHIEF EXECUTIVE’S ORDER NO. 18 OF 2002), Article 6(3). http://ecp.gov.pk/ElectionLaws/Volume-I.pdf

        The Political Parties Rules, 2002. Article 6. http://ecp.gov.pk/ElectionLaws/Volume-I.pdf

      • expand button!
        16
        Score
        MODERATE
        In law, contributions from third-party actors (unions, foundations, think tanks, political action committees, etc.) are limited to a maximum amount or banned.More about indicator

        Article 6 (3) of the 'THE POLITICAL PARTIES ORDER, 2002 (CHIEF EXECUTIVE’S ORDER NO. 18 OF 2002), states: "Any contribution made, directly or indirectly, by any foreign government, multi-national or domestically incorporated public or private company, firm, trade or professional association shall be prohibited and the parties may accept contributions and donations only from individuals."

        Article 6 of the The Political Parties Rules, 2002, stipulates: "Confiscation of prohibited funds.— Where the Election Commission decides that the contributions or donations, as the case may be, accepted by the political parties are prohibited under clause (3) of Article 6, it shall, subject to notice to the political party concerned and after giving an opportunity of being heard, direct the same to be confiscated in favour of the State to be deposited in Government Treasury or sub-Treasury in the following head of the account:—“3000000-Deposits and Reserves-B-Not Bearing interest- 3500000-Departmental and Judicial Deposits-3501000-Civil Deposits-3501010-Deposits in connection with Elections”.

        There are no clear provisions prohibiting contributions from third party actors to candidates.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where: 1) third-party actors may not contribute more than a maximum amount established by the law, or 2) are forbidden from making any contribution.

        A MODERATE score is earned where: 1) the maximum amount or ban exists only for the majority of third-party actors, but not all, or 2) the maximum amount or ban exists, but applies only to contributions for either political parties or individual candidates.

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources

        THE POLITICAL PARTIES ORDER, 2002 (CHIEF EXECUTIVE’S ORDER NO. 18 OF 2002), Article 6 (3). http://ecp.gov.pk/ElectionLaws/Volume-I.pdf

        The Political Parties Rules, 2002. Article 6. http://ecp.gov.pk/ElectionLaws/Volume-I.pdf

      • expand button!
        17
        Score
        MODERATE
        In law, election campaign spending by political parties and individual candidates is limited to a maximum amount.More about indicator

        Article 49 of ROPA 1976 states: Restriction on election expenses.—(1) No person other than the candidate shall incur any election expenses of such candidate: Provided that where any person incurs any election expenses on behalf of such candidate, whether for stationery, postage, telegrams, advertisement, transport or for any other item whatsoever, such expenses shall be deemed to be the election expenses incurred by the candidate himself. (2) The election expenses of a contesting candidate shall not exceed, in the case of an election to a seat in the National Assembly, one million and five hundred thousand rupees (USD 14,598) and, in the case of an election to a seat in a Provincial Assembly, one million rupees (USD 9,732). (3) A candidate shall, through bills, receipts and other documents, vouch for every payment made in respect of election expenses, except where the amount is less than five hundred rupees (USD 487).

        Article 50 of ROPA 1976 requires . Return of election expenses.—(1) Every contesting candidate, other than the returned candidate, shall submit the return of his election expenses within thirty days of the publication of the name of the returned candidate. (2) The return of election expenses of the returned candidate referred to in sub-section (3A) of section 42 and of every contesting candidate referred to in sub-section (1) shall be submitted to the Returning Officer in the prescribed form containing— (a) a statement of all payments made by him together with all bills and receipts; (b) a statement of all disputed claims; (c) a statement of all unpaid claims, if any; and (d) a statement of all moneys, securities or equivalent of money received from, or spent, by any person for the benefit of the candidate, specifying the name of every such person. (3) The returns submitted under sub-section (2) shall be accompanied by an affidavit of the candidate in the prescribed form.

        There is no specific legal provision for specific permission of expenses to political parties, and there are also no any prohibitions on political parties for election expenses.

        No law regulates the political finances of presidential elections. The presidential elections are held indirectly (see Electoral System Summary) and normally the political parties incur expenditures because often most presidential candidates are from political parties. The candidates don’t incur expenditures by themselves. Unlike the presidential elections in US, the presidential elections are not a big event. Everybody knows, the party having majority in national assembly, senate and provincial assemblies can easily elect their candidate as president.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where it is forbidden for political parties and individual candidates to spend more than a certain amount in a political campaign.

        A MODERATE score is earned where the maximum amount exists, but it applies only to one actor (whether political parties or individual candidates).

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources

        THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE ACT, 1976 (ACT No. LXXXV OF 1976), Article 49 & 50. http://ecp.gov.pk/ElectionLaws/Volume-I.pdf

      • expand button!
        18
        Score
        --
        Open Question: Do the national laws regulating political finance also apply to sub-national units? If not, to what extent do sub-national units have laws regulating political finance?More about indicator

        In Pakistan, there are three tiers of government: federal, provincial, and local, each of which is elected directly or indirectly through the independent election management body called the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP). Along with general elections held for the national legislative assembly, provincial assemblies, and local councils, the Election Commission also has the responsibility to organize indirect elections for president and senate.

        The electoral laws, especially “The Political Parties Order 2002”, “The Representation of Peoples Act 1976”, the Codes of Conduct for General Elections 2002, 2008, and 2013, and some Constitutional provisions regulate political finances at federal & provincial tier. The Senate elections are held under “The Senate (Election) Act, 1975 (No. LI of 1975)”, therefore, there are provisions in this act related with political finance regulation. The presidential election is regulated through “the presidential election rules, 1988”, that contains no specific provision regarding political finance regulation during presidential elections.

        However, elections to the local bodies have been held hitherto predominantly on non-party basis, therefore political finance regulations in “Political Parties Order, 2002” is not applicable on local bodies. The Representation of Peoples Act 1976 does not contain any specific provision regarding political finance regulation related with local government elections. There is gap of legal provisions related with political finance regulation at third tier.


        Peer reviewer comment: Agree - Election Commission of Pakistan implements its regulations at the national level and there have been no reports of problems at sub-national levels in Pakistan.

        Scoring Criteria

        Please describe the applicability of national political finance regulations at the sub-national level, being sure to answer: 1) whether national laws are applicable to sub-national campaigns; 2) if not, to what extent do sub-national units have similar laws regulating political finance; and 3) whether there are any reports of problems arising from gaps in this framework.

        Sources

        The Representation of Peoples Act, 1976. http://ecp.gov.pk/ElectionLaws/Volume-I.pdf

        The Political Parties Order, 2002. http://ecp.gov.pk/ElectionLaws/Volume-I.pdf

        The Senate (Election) Act, 1975. www.ecp.gov.pk/ElectionLaws/volume2.pdf

        Electoral Commission of Pakistan: ‘The code of conduct for local Government Elections’, 2013. At http://ecp.gov.pk/lg/lg2013/Zabta-e-Ikhlaq%20LGE.pdf

        The Express Tribune, "Balochistan local bodies: Poll commissioner issues code, schedule", Nov 2, 2013. http://tribune.com.pk/story/626039/balochistan-local-bodies-poll-commissioner-issues-code-schedule/.

        Interview with Khalid Wahid, Electoral Dispute Resolution & Political Finance Officer, IFES, September 17, 2014, in person.

      • expand button!
        19
        Score
        --
        Open Question: What are the predominant sources of funding for electoral campaigns?More about indicator

        As a matter of practice, political parties and individual candidates spend funds on electoral campaign that they have generated from various sources. According to law, as stipulated in The Political Parties Order 2002, and The Representation of Peoples Act 1976, the individual candidates have to maintain bank accounts for election campaign and political parties have to maintain accounts for party funds and expenditures annually.

        The political parties and individual candidates receive funds from different sources. Political parties receive funds from party members, supporters, ticket holders, any individual not prohibited by law. As Article 6 (3), of the Political Parties Order 2002, prohibits political parties from receiving funds directly or indirectly, by any foreign government, multi-national or domestically incorporated public or private company, firm, trade or professional association, however, it is alleged that political parties receive funds from business class directly or indirectly as anonymous expenses incurred during elections campaign.

        Similarly, Article 49 and 50 of The Representation of Peoples Act 1976, make individual candidates report funds received and expenses incurred during election campaigns within an upper limit. Candidates normally receive funds from family, relatives, friends, supports, and their political party (if they have one). As there is no strict mechanism to monitor the funds generation and expenditures, and laws regulating finances are not strictly adhered to, therefore the political parties and individual candidates receiving funds from prohibited sources cannot be clearly visible.

        Normally, wealthy candidates not only spend their expenses by themselves but also provide money to political parties that spend it in election campaign generally or also provide party funds to candidates having relatively humble economic background.

        Parties do not own or run businesses as a way of generating income, but some political parties run trusts for public services, such as Mutahida Qaumi Movement (khidmat Khalq Foundation), Jamat-e Islami (Al-khidmat Foundation), and Pakistan tehreek-e Insaf (Imran Khan Foundation), however, these trusts act independently of party funds, though one can say, they use such funds indirectly for campaign when they spend it on poor.


        Peer reviewer comment: Agree - According to a politician, and a 2006 report by Zafarullah Khan, the major parties receive their donations from party members, some of whom are very rich businessmen or landlords. There are a variety of funding sources for Pakistani political parties: 1. Jamaat-e-Islami. Contribuitons from members and supporters 2. Jamiat-e-Ulama-e-Islam (F). donations, General Council Meetings and sales of copies of the Constitution 3. Muttahida Quami Movement. Donations from the Party. 4. Pakistan Peoples Party Parliamentarian. Fundraising on regular basis 5. Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz). Subscription/donations from party workers/parliamentarians. 6. Pakistan Muslim League. Membership fee/donations from members of Parliament and Assemblies, party fund/bank profit. 7. Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf. Membership fee, fundraising by Pakistani Diaspora in different countries, for example the USA.

        Scoring Criteria

        Please describe the important sources of funding for electoral campaigns, being sure to answer: 1) where does the preponderance of funding come from - public, individual, corporate, or other; 2) to what extent do individual candidates self-finance; and 3) do political parties have other methods of generating campaign funds, such as owning their own businesses or trusts.

        Sources

        Interview with Khurram Badar Alam, Voter Education Officer, IFES-Pakistan, August 21, 2014, via telephone.

        Interview with Sahibzada Saud, Director Election Oversight, Research, & Reforms, FAFEN (Free & Fair Election Network), September 18, 2014, in person.

        Interview with Shahid Jatoi, Voter & Civic Education Officer, CPDI (Centre for Peace & Development Initiatives), September 15-17, 2014, in person.

        Reviewer's sources: 1. Interview with Mian Hafizullah, a politician from Toba Tek Singh, Mian Hafizullah, on 17 December 2014. 2. Zafarullah Khan (2006). Pakistan: Country Report based on Research and Dialogue with Political Parties. International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, Stockholm;

      • expand button!
        20
        Score
        --
        Open Question: Have there been documented instances of violations of contribution or expenditure limits or any of the laws mentioned above (Section 2)?More about indicator

        According to political finance specialists, in Pakistan there is already weak legal framework regarding political finance regulation, however due to non-availability of enforcement mechanism there are observed numerous violations of several laws pertaining to money regulation in elections. As, there is no mechanism to monitor these regulations, accordingly it is also difficult to prove such violations.

        There are no specific proven case reporting of political parties accepting illegal finances. With little solid information, there is accusations and counter accusations by parties and sometimes by media persons in talk shows and debates. Further, there are no audit mechanism to verify the statement of accounts of political parties, though ECP has the right to direct Auditor General of Pakistan to audit the statement of accounts of political parties submitted. This is not usually practiced. Even in 2014, Only 26 of the 282 registered political parties submitted details of their accounts and assets for the last financial year to the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP).

        FAFEN reported that while observing 267 out of 272 General seats ( 5 constituencies of district Muzaffar Garh were not covered) in May 2013 elections, their observers noted 1550 cases of voter inducement where candidates made offers of direct benefits to voters or announced/inaugurated development schemes to solicit voters ( pg 61). Such violations pertains to the Representation of Peoples Act 1976, and General Code of Conduct Elections 2013.

        FAFEN also reported 5,528 instances of misuse of state resources/authority across 267 constituencies. These violations included campaign material on state buildings, postings/transfers, and the involvement of government officials in political campaign, use of government vehicles during political canvassing campaign and misuse of income support program (pg 97).


        Peer reviewer comment: Agree - Though he was unable to offer specific examples, an anonymous official at the National Accountability Board with expertise in these issues confirms that violations such as those described by the researcher are regular occurences. An experienced party worker is of the same belief.

        Scoring Criteria

        Please list and describe all documented instances of: 1) violation of contribution limits, 2) violation of expenditure limits, and 3) financial contributions that circumvent the regulatory framework. The objective of this question is to learn more about the local context, so please explain the cases in as much detail as relevant.

        Sources

        Interview with Khalid Wahid, Electoral Dispute Resolution & Political Finance Officer, IFES, September 17, 2014, in person.

        Interview with Sahibzada Saud, Director Election Oversight, Research, & Reforms, FAFEN (Free & Fair Election Network), September 18, 2014, in person.

        FAFEN. 2013 General Elections: Observation and Analysis of Pre-Election Processes, June 2014. http://www.fafen.org/site/v6/publications

        The Express Tribune, "Only 26 of 282 registered political parties submit asset details to ECP", August 30, 2014. http://tribune.com.pk/story/755732/only-25-of-282-registered-political-parties-submit-asset-details-to-ecp/

        Reviewer's sources: Interview of an Investigation Officer, National Accountability Bureau (NAB), Islamabad. Date: 11 December 2014

        Interview with Ziaud Din Hassan, Member of Pakistan Tehrik Insaf, and formerly a member of the Pakistan Muslim League, and an experienced party worker, December 1, 2014, over telephone.

        The names of anonymous sources are known to Global Integrity and Global Integrity has agreed not to disclose them.

  • expand button!

    Reporting and Public Disclosure

    More about category
    composite
    36
    • expand button!
      Reporting Requirements to the Oversight Entity
      More about category
      • expand button!
        21
        Score
        MODERATE
        In law, political parties and individual candidates report itemized contributions and expenditures both during and outside electoral campaign periods.More about indicator

        Parties must submit annual consolidated financial reports. Individual candidates report only after the conclusion of elections.

        Article 4 of the Political Party rules stipulates: "Every political party shall maintain its accounts in the manner set-out in Form-I indicating its income and expenditure, sources of funds, assets and liabilities and shall, within sixty days from the close of each financial year (July—June), submit to the Election Commission a consolidated statement of accounts of the party audited by a Chartered Accountant, accompanied by a certificate, duly signed by the Party Leader to the effect that no funds from any source prohibited under the Order were received by the party and that the statement contains an accurate financial position of the party."

        Article 50 of ROPA 1976 states: Return of election expenses.—(1) Every contesting candidate, other than the returned candidate, shall submit the return of his election expenses within thirty days of the publication of the name of the returned candidate. (2) The return of election expenses of the returned candidate referred to in sub-section (3A) of section 42 and of every contesting candidate referred to in sub-section (1) shall be submitted to the Returning Officer in the prescribed form containing— (a) a statement of all payments made by him together with all bills and receipts; (b) a statement of all disputed claims; (c) a statement of all unpaid claims, if any; and (d) a statement of all moneys, securities or equivalent of money received from, or spent, by any person for the benefit of the candidate, specifying the name of every such person. (3) The returns submitted under sub-section (2) shall be accompanied by an affidavit of the candidate in the prescribed form.

        Article 51 of ROPA 1976 states: "Inspection of returns, etc.(1) The returns and documents submitted under section 50 shall be kept by the Returning Officer in his office or at such other convenient place as he may think fit and shall, during one year from the date of their receipt by him, be open to inspection by any person on payment of the prescribed fee. (2) The Returning Officer shall, on an application made in this behalf and payment of the prescribed fee, give any person copies of any return or document kept under sub-section (1)]."

        Article 30 of the THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE (CONDUCT OF ELECTION) RULES, 1977 states: Account of election expenses. —(1) A contesting candidate shall maintain or cause to be maintained a register of receipts and expenditure in Form XVIII. (2) The contesting candidate shall, after the publication under section 20 or section 42 of the name of the returned candidate, submit to the Returning Officer an account of election expenses as required by section 50 in Form XVIII. (3) All vouchers shall accompany the account of election expenses duly arranged according to the date of payment and serially numbered and such serial number shall be entered in the appropriate column of the relevant account. (4) It shall not be necessary, while rendering account to the Returning Officer to give particulars of the payees in regard to the items of expenditure for which receipts are not required to be obtained under sub-section (5) of section 49.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where political parties and individual candidates are required to report itemized contributions and expenditures to the oversight authority, both during and outside electoral campaign periods.

        A MODERATE score is earned where: 1) the requirement applies for itemized contributions, but not for itemized expenditures, or 2) it applies only during the electoral campaign but not outside it. A MODERATE score is also earned where the requirement exists, but it only applies to one actor (whether political parties and individual candidates).

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources

        The Political Parties Rules, 2002, Article 4. http://ecp.gov.pk/ElectionLaws/Volume-I.pdf

        THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE ACT, 1976 (ACT No. LXXXV OF 1976), Article 50 & 51. http://ecp.gov.pk/ElectionLaws/Volume-I.pdf

        THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE (CONDUCT OF ELECTION) RULES, 1977, Article 30. http://ecp.gov.pk/ElectionLaws/Volume-I.pdf

      • expand button!
        22
        Score
        MODERATE
        In law, political parties and individual candidates are required to report their financial information on a monthly basis during the electoral campaign.More about indicator

        Only individual candidates are required to submit their financial information during campaign periods. No such requirement is defined for parties.

        Article 50 of the ROPA 1976 states: (1) Every contesting candidate, other than the returned candidate, shall submit the return of his election expenses within thirty days of the publication of the name of the returned candidate. (2) The return of election expenses of the returned candidate referred to in sub-section (3A) of section 42 and of every contesting candidate referred to in sub-section (1) shall be submitted to the Returning Officer in the prescribed form containing— (a) a statement of all payments made by him together with all bills and receipts; (b) a statement of all disputed claims; (c) a statement of all unpaid claims, if any; and (d) a statement of all moneys, securities or equivalent of money received from, or spent, by any person for the benefit of the candidate, specifying the name of every such person. (3) The returns submitted under sub-section (2) shall be accompanied by an affidavit of the candidate in the prescribed form.

        The campaign period normally remains between 2-3 months depending upon the below two conditions found in Article 224 of the Constitution of Pakistan: (1) A general election to the National Assembly or a Provincial Assembly shall be held within a period of sixty days immediately the day on which the term of the Assembly is due to expire, unless the Assembly has been sooner dissolved, and the results of the election shall be declared not later than fourteen days before that day. (2) When the National Assembly or a Provincial Assembly is dissolved, a general election to the Assembly shall be held within a period of ninety days after the dissolution, and the results of the election shall be declared not later than fourteen days after the conclusion of the polls.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where political parties and individual candidates must report monthly their financial information to the oversight authority during the electoral campaign.

        A MODERATE score is earned where the requirement exists on a quarterly basis. A MODERATE score is also earned where the requirement only applies to one actor (whether political parties or individual candidates).

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources

        THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE ACT, 1976 (ACT No. LXXXV OF 1976); Article 50. http://ecp.gov.pk/ElectionLaws/Volume-I.pdf

        The Constitution of Pakistan 1973, Article 224. www.na.gov.pk/publications/Constitution.pdf

      • expand button!
        23
        Score
        MODERATE
        In law, political parties and individual candidates are required to report their financial information on a quarterly basis outside of electoral campaign periods.More about indicator

        Parties are required to report annually outside of election campaigns. No such provisions exist for candidates.

        Article 4 of the Political Parties Rules, 2002 states: Every political party shall maintain its accounts in the manner set-out in Form-I indicating its income and expenditure, sources of funds, assets and liabilities and shall, within sixty days from the close of each financial year (July—June), submit to the Election Commission a consolidated statement of accounts of the party audited by a Chartered Accountant, accompanied by a certificate, duly signed by the Party Leader to the effect that no funds from any source prohibited under the Order were received by the party and that the statement contains an accurate financial position of the party.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where political parties and individual candidates must report quarterly their financial information to the oversight authority outside of electoral campaign periods.

        A MODERATE score is earned where the requirement exists on a yearly basis. A MODERATE score is also earned where the requirement only applies to one actor (whether political parties or individual candidates).

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources

        The Political Parties Rules, 2002, Article 4. http://ecp.gov.pk/ElectionLaws/Volume-I.pdf

      • expand button!
        24
        Score
        0
        In practice, to what extent do political parties and individual candidates report itemized financial information monthly?More about indicator

        Political parties have to maintain accounts for party funds and expenditures annually, and they have to submit annual statement of accounts duly audited and signed by a charted accountant (Article 4 of the Political Parties Order, 2002). Similarly, political parties have to maintain statement of accounts i.e. receiving and expenditures on annual basis. However, in 2014, Only 26 of the 282 registered political parties submitted details of their accounts and assets for the last financial year to the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP).

        The individual contesting candidates have to submit itemized financial information within 30 days of the elections held, and the returned candidates in elections have to submit financial information within 10 days of elections, otherwise their notification as returning candidate in official gazette is not published (Khalid Wahid, IFES). The candidates have to provide itemized information on prescribed forms provided by ECP.

        However, in practice, the contesting candidates generally do not comply with the provisions, and some of the contesting candidates do not submit financial information at all. Generally, reporting candedates always submit their reports though they sometimes delay doing so. As there is no specific mechanism of enforcement of the law, investigation, and oversight on these provisions, there are observed violations in this provision. For the first time, ECP provided the list of ‘assets & liabilities’ of returned candidates on its website.


        Peer reviewer comment: Agree - Legally obliged reporting is rarely practiced and most of the candidates do not submit the report of their expenses on a regular basis to the Election Commission of Pakistan.

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where: 1) political parties and individual candidates report on their financial information monthly, and 2) the reports include both itemized contributions and itemized expenditures.

        A 50 score is earned where: 1) the reports are occasionally general rather than itemized or don't contain all accounts, or 2) the reporting frequency is quarterly.

        A 0 score is earned where: 1) political parties and individual candidates rarely or never file reports, 2) the reports are filed but are rarely or never itemized or refer only to either contributions or expenditures, or 3) the reporting frequency is less than quarterly.

        Sources

        Interview with Khalid Wahid, Electoral Dispute Resolution & Political Finance Officer, IFES, September 17, 2014 in person.

        Interview with Sahibzada Saud, Director Election Oversight, Research, & Reforms, FAFEN (Free & Fair Election Network), September 18, 2014, in person.

        ECP. Record of Returned Candidates with Annexes. http://ecp.gov.pk/NominationWithAnnexure.aspx, accessed on September 18, 2014.

        Interview with Shahid Jatoi, Voter & Civic Education Officer, CPDI (Centre for Peace & Development Initiatives), September 15-17, 2014, in person.

        The Express Tribune, "Only 26 of 282 registered political parties submit asset details to ECP", August 30, 2014. http://tribune.com.pk/story/755732/only-25-of-282-registered-political-parties-submit-asset-details-to-ecp/

        Reviewer's sources: Waqas Naeem (2013). Spending limits: only four candidates submit details of poll expenses. Express Tribune, 9 May 2013.

      • expand button!
        25
        Score
        50
        In practice, to what extent do financial reports by political parties and individual candidates include all types of contributions?More about indicator

        Political parties have to maintain accounts for party funds and expenditures annually, and they have to submit an annual statement of accounts duly audited and signed by chartered accountants (Article 4 of the Political Parties Order, 2002). Similarly, political parties have to maintain statements of accounts i.e. receiving and expenditures on annual basis.

        Candidates have to provide financial information. Therefore after elections, the individual contesting candidates have to submit itemized financial information within 30 days of the elections. According to an ex-ECP official dealing with political finance, the expense sheet that has to be filled by candidates in practice contains the names and addresses of donors who contribute to election campaigns.

        The returned candidates in elections have to submit financial information within 10 days of elections; otherwise, their notification as returning candidate in official gazette is not published (Khalid Wahid, IFES). The candidates have to provide itemized information on prescribed form provided by ECP. The reports filed by returned candidates, however, often lack names and/or addresses of donors. For example, page 23 of the election expenses of Haji Ghulam Ahmed Bilour does not disclose any donor information. Note that financial information, and in particular, election expenses, is not usually proactively published by the ECP. Acquiring documents about financial information of parties and candidates requires time, as an application has to be filed with the ECP.

        As there is no specific mechanism of enforcement of law, investigation, check & balances, and oversight on these provisions, therefore there are observed violations in this provision. Violations are found as returned candidates submit information, while few of the contesting candidates submit. Additionally, ECP just receives the information and retains it without publishing it and even without passing it into verification processes.


        Peer reviewer comment: Agree. In practice, only names are provided in reports submitted to the ECP. According to an official investigating the affairs of politicians and political parties, the reporting criteria given in the Representation of the People Act of 1976 have never been followed in any Pakistani election to date.

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where: 1) reports include an itemized list of all contributions indicating their type (in-kind, cash where allowed, etc.) and amount (estimated value for in-kind contributions), and 2) contain donors' names and addresses (or other personal identifier).

        A 50 score is earned where only one of the two conditions listed in the 100 criteria is met.

        A 0 score is earned where neither condition is met.

        Sources

        Interview with Khalid Wahid, Electoral Dispute Resolution & Political Finance Officer, IFES, September 17, 2014, in person.

        ECP. Record of Returned Candidates with Annexes. http://ecp.gov.pk/NominationWithAnnexure.aspx, accessed on September 18, 2014.

        See in particular the Form of Haji Ghulam Ahmed Bilour: http://ecp.gov.pk/ScanNF/RECORD%20OF%20RETURNED%20CANDIDATES%20WITH%20ANNEXURES/NATIONAL_ASSEMBLY/GENERAL%20SEATS/NA-1/HAJI%20GHULAM%20AHMED%20BILOUR.PDF

        Interview with Shahid Jatoi, Voter & Civic Education Officer, CPDI (Centre for Peace & Development Initiatives), September 15-17, 2014, in person.

        Reviewer's sources: Interview of an Investigation Officer, National Accountability Bureau (NAB), Islamabad. Date: 11 December 2014

    • expand button!
      Availability of Electoral Campaigns' Financial Information to the Public
      More about category
      • expand button!
        26
        Score
        MODERATE
        In law, financial information from political parties and individual candidates must be available to the public.More about indicator

        There is no legal requirement for the proactive publication of financial information of candidates and political parties. However, citizens can acquire such information through filling application and paying of specified fees to ECP. The legal provosions mentioned below stipulate this.

        Section 29A. of the Representation of People (Rules), 1977 states: Inspection of documents, etc.— (1) The Nomination Form, accompanying declaration and statements, including the statement of assets and liabilities submitted under sub-section (2) of section 12 and/or section 42A shall be open to inspection by the public, during office hours on payment of fee of rupees ten per page in the shape of court fee stamps. (2) The copies of documents referred to in sub-rule (1) may be supplied to a person, making application in that behalf, on payment of fee of ten rupees per page in the shape of court fee stamps]

        Section 32 of the Representation of People (Rules), 1977 states: Fees for inspection of election expenses return, etc.— (1) The return and documents submitted by a contesting candidate under section 50 shall be open to public inspection at the office of the Returning Officer during office hours on payment of a fee at the rate of one rupee for each document. (2) Copies of or extract of return or of the documents mentioned in sub-rule (1) shall be furnished upon an application made by any person on payment of a fee at the rate of one rupee for the first two hundred words or a fraction thereof and fifty paisa for every additional hundred words or a fraction thereof. (3) Every application for inspection of the return or of the documents or supply of copies thereof shall be accompanied by court-fee stamps of the requisite value.

        There is no law explicitly requiring this availability for political party information. However, in practice political parties annual statement can be obtained through the same procedure such as for inspection of candidates’ financial information.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where in law financial information of political parties and individual candidates must be made available to the public, whether online or digitally within two days of request.

        A MODERATE score is earned where financial information must be made available to the public, but no requirement exists regarding cost, format or number of days within which it must be made available.

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources

        The Representation of People (Rules), 1977, Section 29A & 32. http://ecp.gov.pk/ElectionLaws/Volume-I.pdf

      • expand button!
        27
        Score
        25
        In practice, to what extent can citizens easily access the financial information of all political parties and individual candidates?More about indicator

        The financial information of all political parties, returned candidates, and contesting candidates is available with the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP). However, the ECP does not publish this information online. The candidates provide this information on prescribed format provided by ECP. Often this practice is limited to returned candidates and to somewhat to political parties, and as matter of fact the contesting candidates do not submit that information.

        This financial information is not available free online; however, citizens can acquire this information in hard copy by paying fee to ECP (approximatly 10 rupees (approx. 0.10 USD) for each page photocopied). There are no rules about the provision timeline of this information. According to political finance specialists, as citizens themselves do not have information about such type of legal right, and as there is no specific mechanism to oversight, monitor, and verification of financial information. Therefore on the one hand, the submission of financial information by candidates is a formality, and there is also no interest and practice of acquiring such information by citizens. Such requests are generally not made.

        Additionally, if someone is interested of acquiring such information, it may take him several months after continuous pursuance of application. FAFEN reported that it acquired such information from ECP and was going to publish the research report by the end of September 2014. The report issued by ECP itself admitted that a centralized scrutiny cell was set up in the ECP Secretariat with members from NAB (National Accountability Bureau), SBP (State Bank of Pakistan), FBR (Federal Board of Revenue) and NADRA (National Database & Registration Authority) to verify the candidates’ nomination papers, this cell did not perform effectively (pg 11).

        While the ECP website provides pdfs of the list of assets and liabilities of returned candidates that are provided by candidates in their nomination papers, such information does not regularly include the expenses incurred on election campaigns.

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where: 1) all relevant financial information is freely available online, 2) it can be obtained digitally within two days of requesting it, and 3) it is in a machine readable format (for example in csv or xml format).

        A 50 score is earned where: 1) information is available but in some cases is incomplete or lacking detail, 2) obtaining complete information takes up to a month, or 3) it's not necessarily digital or in machine readable format.

        A 0 score is earned where: 1) the information is not publicly available, or 2) obtaining it takes more than three months, or 3) the cost of obtaining it is prohibitive for the regular citizen.

        Sources

        FAFEN. 2013 General Elections: Observation and Analysis of Pre-Election Processes, June 2014. http://www.fafen.org/site/v6/publications

        ECP. Record of Returned Candidates with Annexes. http://ecp.gov.pk/NominationWithAnnexure.aspx, accessed on September 18, 2014.

        ECP. Post Election Review Report: General Elections 2013, December 9, 2013. http://ecp.gov.pk/Post Election Review Report.pdf

        Interview with Khalid Wahid, Electoral Dispute Resolution & Political Finance Officer, IFES, September 17, 2014, in person.

      • expand button!
        28
        Score
        50
        In practice, to what extent is financial information published in a standardized format?More about indicator

        The financial information of all political parties, returned candidates, and some of the contesting candidates are available with Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP). However, ECP does not publish this information in any format, nor it is available on ECP website.

        The candidates are required provide this information on a prescribed form which includes both contributions and expenditures. Often this practice is limited to returned candidates and somewhat to political parties, and as matter of fact the contesting candidates don’t submit such information.

        The information is not proactively published, but ECP provides the photocopy of prescribed form filled by candidate to information seeker after submitting application and paying of fees. In the same way, the forms submitted by parties are available for photocopy, though this is limited by the number of parties to have submitted information, which is a low percentage, as detailed in #24.

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where financial information for all political parties and individual candidates is available to the public in a standardized format.

        A 50 score is earned where only part of the information is published in a standardized format. A 50 score is also earned where the information is standardized, but it doesn't cover all political parties and individual candidates.

        A 0 score is earned where financial information is not available in a standardized format.

        Sources

        Interview with Sahibzada Saud, Director Election Oversight, Research, & Reforms, FAFEN (Free & Fair Election Network), September 18, 2014, in person.

        The prescribed form on which candidate have to provide financial inform, ECP website, accessed on November 18, 2014. http://ecp.gov.pk/ElectionExpenses.pdf

        ECP. Record of Returned Candidates with Annexes. http://ecp.gov.pk/NominationWithAnnexure.aspx, accessed on September 18, 2014.

        Interview with Khalid Wahid, Electoral Dispute Resolution & Political Finance Officer, IFES, September 17, 2014, in person.

      • expand button!
        29
        Score
        0
        In practice, to what extent do mainstream journalism media outlets use political finance data in their reporting?More about indicator

        After the May 2013 general elections, the mainstream media reported many violations of the code of conduct for general elections. For example, there were numerous lavishly organized rallies, instances in which food and jobs were promised to constituents in return for votes, and instances in which development projects were initiated in specific constituencies, in addition to the use of prohibited expensive advertising materials.

        However, no media report were found that were based on financial information obtained from ECP. However, during 2013 General Elections, numerous media outlets and channels reported a report shared by FAFEN about violations of elections code of conduct that also includes violations regarding political finance regulations.

        Mainstream media outlets do often publish statements of accounts of political parties and the assets and liabilities of individual candidates. However, they never use financial information on election contributions or expenses submitted by candidates (Umar Cheema, the News). The simple logic behind not using financial information for reporting purpose is that when the ECP does not have effective enforcing mechanism and the ability to exercise thorough oversight and a verification process about candidates’ financial information, then there's little point in using the unverified information that candidates have manipulated and stipulated within limitations (Shahid Jatoi, CPDI).

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where at least three independent mainstream journalism media outlets have used officially published political party or individual candidate financial information as part of their reporting.

        A 50 score is earned where one independent mainstream journalism media outlet has used officially published financial information as part of its reporting.

        A 0 score is earned where no mainstream journalism media outlet has used officially published financial information as part of its reporting.

        Sources

        Interview with Umar Cheema, CEO, Center for Investigative Journalism, and columnist in the Daily News, September 22, 2014, via telephone.

        Interview with Shahid Jatoi, Voter & Civic Education Officer, CPDI (Centre for Peace & Development Initiatives), September 15-17, 2014, in person.

        The Dawn, "Political rallies violate ECP's code of conduct: FAFEN", April 12, 2013. http://www.dawn.com/news/802131/political-rallies-violate-ecps-code-of-conduct-fafen

        Interview with Khalid Wahid, Electoral Dispute Resolution & Political Finance Officer, IFES, September 17, 2014, in person.

      • expand button!
        30
        Score
        0
        In practice, to what extent were there no news reports or other documented incidents of violation or abuse of political finance laws?More about indicator

        After May 11, General Elections, the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP), set up post-election tribunals comprised of retired judges of the High Courts to hear poll complaints. ECP received a surprising 435 complaints. ECP decided around 30 cases through summary trials and the remaining complaints were referred to 14 tribunals. These tribunals were supposed to decide a case within 120 days; however, after more than a year, dozens of cases are still pending.

        The statistics received by Express Tribune provided that the tribunals have announced decisions in around 300 cases in one year. Of the 100 pending cases are some high-profile ones, including the four constituencies in Lahore challenged by Imran Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf.

        Similarly a report released by FAFEN, revealed that as many as 71,397 irregularities and violations of electoral processes were observed on 38,274 polling stations across 263 National Assembly constituencies on Election Day that also contains thousands of violation related with political finance that according to FAFEN representatives were about the use of extravagant expenses during election campaign such as providing food, transportation, hoisting much printed material that costs much more than stipulated amount of PKR 15,00000. FAFEN report is covered for all mainstream media.

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where there were no news reports or other documented incidents of violation or abuse of political finance laws during the most recent national election.

        A 50 score is earned where there were news reports or other documented incidents of no more than two cases of violation or abuse of political finance laws during the most recent national election.

        A 0 score is earned where there were frequent news reports or other documented incidents of violation or abuse of political finance laws during the most recent national election.

        Sources

        The Express Tribune. May 11 elections: a year after polls, tribunals wade through complaints, May 11, 2014. http://tribune.com.pk/story/706933/may-11-elections-a-year-after-polls-tribunals-wade-through-complaints/

        FAFEN, 2013 General Elections: Observation and Analysis of Pre-Election Processes, June 2014. http://www.fafen.org/site/v6/publications

        Interview with Sahibzada Saud, Director Election Oversight, Research, & Reforms, FAFEN (Free & Fair Election Network), September 18, 2014, in person.

      • expand button!
        31
        Score
        50
        In practice, to what extent were there no news reports or other documented incidents of vote-buying?More about indicator

        There were many accusations and counter accusation of vote buying and election rigging during the May 2013 General Elections, invoked by opposition & losing parties, and reported by almost all mainstream media. From May 2013 to date, such accusations coupled with decisions of elections tribunals regarding the results and alleged rigging has produced a political crisis. Rigging, mishandling, and malfeasance in some of the constituencies have been proved and election tribunals have ordered for re-elections in several constituencies at national and provincial levels.

        The media also reported several violations of election rules. Nevertheless, there were not any reported incidents of the direct buying of votes. FAFEN identified 1550 incidents of voter inducements (pg 58) that they termed these vote buying in terms of providing food and jobs to the constituents, and initiating some development work in specific locality of constituency during elections. According to an election specialist at FAFEN this occurs but hasn't been proven: ‘there were many instances of direct and indirect vote buying in 2013 General Elections that you are neither able to observe nor you can prove it’ ( Sahibzada Saud, FAFEN).


        Peer reviewer comment: Agree - In the 2013 electoins, there are no confirmed accounts of vote buying. However, according to a researcher, he witnessed people selling their votes for $10 in previous elections. The major and natural reason that confirmed reports of vote buying are scarce is the stigma attached, for both the party and the voter involved. As a matter of prestige, both actors try to hide the matter. However, it is common to hear that such incidents, however covert, are rampant.

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where there were no news reports or other documented incidents of vote-buying during the most recent national election.

        A 50 score is earned where there were news reports or other documented incidents of no more than two cases of vote-buying during the most recent national election.

        A 0 score is earned where there were frequent news reports or other documented incidents of vote-buying during the most recent national election.

        Sources

        FAFEN. 2013 General Elections: Observation and Analysis of Pre-Election Processes, June 2014. At http://fafen.org/2013-general-election-observation-and-analysis-of-pre-election-processes-2/

        The Express Tribune, Election tribunal orders re election in Na-267 kachhi jhal magsi, September 19, 2014. http://tribune.com.pk/story/764496/election-tribunal-orders-re-election-in-na-267-kachhi-jhal-magsi/

        Interview with Sahibzada Saud, Director Election Oversight, Research, & Reforms, FAFEN (Free & Fair Election Network), September 18, 2014, in person.

        Reviewer's sources: Interview with Ziaud Din Hassan, Member of Pakistan Tehrik Insaf, and formerly a member of the Pakistan Muslim League, and an experienced party worker, December 1, 2014, over telephone.

        Interview of an Investigation Officer, National Accountability Bureau (NAB), Islamabad. Date: 11 December 2014

      • expand button!
        32
        Score
        50
        In practice, to what extent do civil society organizations use political finance data?More about indicator

        There are no specific reports published in pakistan by NGOs related with political finance regulations, though some organizations have had published some policy recommendations for legal reforms.

        FAFEN has reported to have acquired financial information of returned candidates and parties from ECP and was planning to publish the research report in 2014; as of November 18, the report is not yet published.

        Prior to the study period, the Centre for Civic Education Pakistan developed a research report for policy recommendations for the legal reforms of political finance in Pakistan. The document is based on international best practices related with political finance regulations especially public funding. The document highlights the reported fragile nature of party funds in Pakistan, and critical analysis of existing legal framework related with political finance that is based on prohibitions, limitations, and penalties.

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where at least three civil society organizations have used officially published political party or individual candidate financial information as part of their advocacy or awareness work.

        A 50 score is earned where one civil society organization has used officially published financial information as part of its advocacy or awareness work.

        A 0 score is earned where no civil society organization has used officially published financial information as part of its work.

        Sources

        Interview with Sahibzada Saud, Director Election Oversight, Research, & Reforms, FAFEN (Free & Fair Election Network), September 18, 2014, in person.

        Interview with Shahid Jatoi, Voter & Civic Education Officer, CPDI (Centre for Peace & Development Initiatives), September 15-17, 2014, in person.

        Interview with Umar Cheema, CEO, Center for Investigative Journalism, and columnist in the Daily News, September 22, 2014, via telephone.

        Additional source for context: Cener for Civic Education in Pakistan, Clean Money for Clean Politics: Integrity and influence can co-exist? 2005. http://www.civiceducation.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Clean-Money-for-Clean-Politics.pdf

      • expand button!
        33
        Score
        --
        Open Question: Have there been political finance legal reforms or reform bills presented to the legislature in the last 10 years?More about indicator

        In each of the last 10 general elections in Pakistan, from 1977 to 2013, there have been many accusations (and counter accusations) of pre and post election vote rigging, manipulation, and mandate snatching. Opposition parties often make these claims, and the mainstream media reports them. In a famous Supreme Court decision after the 1990 elections, the Asgher Khan Case reguarding the use of money for poll rigging, the Court established that the Army had bought political loyalty. Such stories have regularly been in evidence all the way up until 2013.

        In the last ten years, there were no legal reforms regarding political finance in Pakistan. According to Khalid Wahid (IFES), who is a former official of ECP, there were not any bills presented to the legislature regarding political finance. Only the matter of increasing the upper limit of election expenses (from 1.5 million rupees (approx 15,000 US dollars)), was even discussed in a cabinet meeting. The basic reason for this is that candidates do, in practice, spend much more than the stipulated amount; however, in order to conceal the violation of Article 49 of The Representation of the People Act, 1976, candidates deliberately submit misleading reports on their expenses to the ECP. As the ECP does not have mechanisms to enforce, monitor, and verify the reported elections expenses and violations of regulations and the established code of conduct, it is easy for candidates to mislead the ECP without repurcussions.

        Nevertheless, the existing electoral reforms committee, which has representation from all political parties with seats in parliament, is reportedly considering some matters related to political finance regulations. In this regard, the committee has sought proposal from different political parties and civil society organizations that work for electoral reforms. However, according to rules of the committe the information is being kept secret (Article 15 of the rules of parliamentry committee). Further, the committee had sought from general public and civil society the recommendations for amendments or improvements in the election reforms and elections code of conduct by September 1.

        Scoring Criteria

        Please list and describe all documented instances of: 1) political finance reforms, including bills passed, executive orders signed, court rulings and any other legal act that had a direct effect on existent political finance regulation, and 2) all legal reform attempts presented to the legislature even if they were not approved. Please describe the political context that produced the reforms or reform attempts.

        Sources

        The Daily Times, "Poll reforms committee seeks suggestions from public", August 13, 2014, http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/national/13-Aug-2014/poll-reforms-committee-seeks-suggestions-from-public

        Interview with Khalid Wahid, Electoral Dispute Resolution & Political Finance Officer, IFES, September 17, 2014, in person.

        Interview with Khurram Badar Alam, Voter Education Officer, IFES-Pakistan, August 21, 2014, via telephone.

        The Dawn, Supreme Court Issues detailed Verdict of Asghar Khan Case, November 8, 2012. http://www.dawn.com/news/762533/sc-issues-detailed-verdict-of-asghar-khan-case

        The Dawn, Detailed judgment in Asghar Khan case issued, November 8, 2012. http://www.dawn.com/news/762723/detailed-judgment-in-asghar-khan-case-issued

        The Gazette of Pakistan, "The Rules of Procedure for the Parliamenttary COmmittee on Electoral Reform"s August 23, 2014, http://www.na.gov.pk/uploads/documents/1409654123_240.pdf

  • expand button!

    Third Party Actors

    More about category
    composite
    0
    • expand button!
      Applicability of the Law to Third-Party Actors
      More about category
      • expand button!
        34
        Score
        NO
        In law, third-party actors (foundations, think tanks, unions, political action committees, etc.) report itemized contributions received and expenditures to an oversight authority and the information is made publicly available.More about indicator

        No such law exists.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where: 1) third-party actors are required to report to the oversight authority itemized contributions received and expenditures related to their support of electoral campaigns, and 2) the information must be publicly available.

        A MODERATE score is earned where third-party actors are required to report itemized contributions received and expenditures related to their support of electoral campaigns, but the information is not required to be publicly available. A MODERATE score is also earned where regulations exist, but only apply to electoral campaigns of one actor (whether political party or individual candidate).

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources

        No such law exists.

      • expand button!
        35
        Score
        0
        In practice, to what extent do third-party actors (foundations, think tanks, unions, political action committees, etc.) report itemized contributions received and expenditures to an oversight authority?More about indicator

        No law compels third party actors to report on their campaign related contributions and expenditures. As such, no such reports are submitted to the ECP in practice. Direct contributions from third party actors to parties are prohibited in law. See #37 for more information.

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where all third-party actors report to an oversight authority both itemized contributions received and itemized expenditures.

        A 50 score is earned where third-party actors report to an oversight authority either itemized contributions received or expenditures, but not both. A 50 score is also earned where the reports refer only to one type of third-party actor, but do not cover others.

        A 0 score is earned where third-party actors rarely or never report itemized contributions received or expenditures.

        Sources

        Interview with Sahibzada Saud, Director Election Oversight, Research, & Reforms, FAFEN (Free & Fair Election Network), September 18, 2014, in person.

        Interview with Shahid Jatoi, Voter & Civic Education Officer, CPDI (Centre for Peace & Development Initiatives), September 15-17, 2014, in person.

      • expand button!
        36
        Score
        0
        In practice, to what extent can journalists and citizens easily access the financial information of third party actors, including the political spending of those actors in support of political parties and individual candidates?More about indicator

        No law compels third party actors to report on their campaign related contributions and expenditures. As such, no such reports are submitted to the ECP in practice nor is any such information available to the public. For more information, see #37.

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where: 1) all relevant financial information is freely available online or in hard copy at the cost of photocopying, 2) it can be obtained within two days of requesting it, and 3) it is in a machine readable format (for example in csv or xml format).

        A 50 score is earned where: 1) information is available but in some cases is incomplete or lacking detail, 2) obtaining complete information takes up to a month, or 3) it's not necessarily in machine readable format.

        A 0 score is earned where: 1) the information is not publicly available, or 2) obtaining it takes more than three months, or 3) the cost of obtaining it is prohibitive for the regular citizen.

        Sources

        Interview with Sahibzada Saud, Director Election Oversight, Research, & Reforms, FAFEN (Free & Fair Election Network), September 18, 2014, in person.

        Interview with Shahid Jatoi, Voter & Civic Education Officer, CPDI (Centre for Peace & Development Initiatives), September 15-17, 2014, in person.

      • expand button!
        37
        Score
        --
        Open Question: Please describe how third party-actors (even if they are not regulated by your country's laws) obtain contributions and spend in support of political parties and/or individual candidates.More about indicator

        In Pakistan, the law prohibits spending on elections other than the spending made by candidates, political parties, and contributions received from individuals. All other contributions made, directly or indirectly, by any foreign government, multi-national or domestically incorporated public or private company, firm, trade, or professional association are not explicitly permitted by the law.

        Third party actors such as non-profit civil society groups, lawyers, NGOs, CBOs, religious groups, and different trade and industrial unions don’t contribute directly to campaign funds. Indeed, the law restricts them from contributing to political parties. Nevertheless, some non-profit organizations covertly and indirectly support political parties by spending on campaigns. Their spending is associated with certain political agendas, ideologies, and the manifestos of some specific parties. Such support by non-profit civil society groups cannot be identified and investigated by any mechanism (Sahibzada Saud, FAFEN).

        Similarly, some trade and industrial unions also reported apparent support to some political parties. Although this kind of support is mainly covert, after being elected, some third pary groups often emerge congratulating the parties. This signifies that they support certain political parties (Shahid Jatoi, CPDI).

        Scoring Criteria

        To answer this question please: 1) list the types of third-party actors that exist in your country and describe how they work to influence campaigns, 2) explain how important such actors are or not in the context of campaigns, including whether their expenditures are substantial in relation to that of political parties and individual candidates, and 3) if documented evidence indicates they circumvent laws intended to regulate political finance, please explain how and include references to the evidence.

        Sources

        Interview with Sahibzada Saud, Director Election Oversight, Research, & Reforms, FAFEN (Free & Fair Election Network), September 18, 2014, in person.

        Interview with Shahid Jatoi, Voter & Civic Education Officer, CPDI (Centre for Peace & Development Initiatives), September 15-17, 2014, in person.

        The Business recorder, May 14, 2013. 'APTMA felicitates PML-N on securing landslide victory' http://www.brecorder.com/cotton-a-textiles/android:/1185660:aptma-felicitates-pml-n-on-securing-landslide-victory/?date=2013-05-14

        The News, May 14, 2013, by Correspondent. Aptma congratulates PML-N http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-3-177155-Aptma-congratulates-PML-N

  • expand button!

    Monitoring and Enforcement

    More about category
    composite
    60
    • expand button!
      Monitoring Capabilities
      More about category
      • expand button!
        38
        Score
        MODERATE
        In law, political finance information is monitored by an independent oversight authority.More about indicator

        The Electoral Commission of Pakistan (ECP) is mandated to recieve political finance information from candidates and parties. However, there is no legal provision empowering the ECP with investigatory or audit powers. The Constitution, Part VIII, Chapter, 1, Article 218, notes: "It shall be the duty of the Election Commission to organize and conduct the election and to make such arrangements as are necessary to ensure that the election is conducted honestly, justly, fairly and in accordance with law, and that corrupt practices are guarded against."

        Section 4. of the Political Parties Rules, 2002 provides: Submission of statement of accounts.— Every political party shall... within sixty days from the close of each financial year (July—June), submit to the Election Commission a consolidated statement of accounts of the party audited by a Chartered Accountant, accompanied by a certificate, duly signed by the Party Leader to the effect that no funds from any source prohibited under the Order were received by the party and that the statement contains an accurate financial position of the party.

        Section 6. of the Political Parties Rules, 2002 provides: Confiscation of prohibited funds.— Where the Election Commission decides that the contributions or donations, as the case may be, accepted by the political parties are prohibited under clause (3) of Article 6, it shall, subject to notice to the political party concerned and after giving an opportunity of being heard, direct the same to be confiscated in favour of the State to be deposited in Government Treasury or sub-Treasury in the following head of the account:— “3000000-Deposits and Reserves-B-Not Bearing interest- 3500000-Departmental and Judicial Deposits-3501000-Civil Deposits-3501010-Deposits in connection with Elections”.

        Article 30 of the Representation of People (Rules), 1977 states: (2) The contesting candidate shall, after the publication under section 20 or section 42 of the name of the returned candidate, submit to the Returning Officer an account of election expenses as required by section 50 in Form XVIII. (3) All vouchers shall accompany the account of election expenses duly arranged according to the date of payment and serially numbered and such serial number shall be entered in the appropriate column of the relevant account.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where: 1) an independent oversight authority is mandated to monitor political finance information, and 2) the authority has investigation and audit powers.

        A MODERATE score is earned where the independent oversight authority is mandated to monitor political finance information, but doesn't have investigation or audit powers.

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources

        The Constitution of Pakistan 1973, Article 218. http://www.pakistani.org/pakistan/constitution/

        The Political Parties Rules, 2002, Article 4, 5, & 6. http://ecp.gov.pk/ElectionLaws/Volume-I.pdf

        The Representation of People (Rules), 1977, Articles 30 & 31. http://ecp.gov.pk/ElectionLaws/Volume-I.pdf

      • expand button!
        39
        Score
        MODERATE
        In law, high-level appointments to the oversight authority are based on merit.More about indicator

        Appointments to the ECP are made as stipulated in the Constitution. The appointment process is merit based, but not public. Conflicts of interest are not specifically mentioned. Nevertheless, in law, appointments of the Chief Election Commissioner are made by a parliamentary commission comprised of the treasury and the opposition in a consensual process, and this process of appointment is recognized as legal, constitutional, and transparent.

        Article 213 of the 1973 Constitution of Pakistan says: (1) There shall be a Chief Election Commissioner (in this Part referred to as the Commissioner), who shall be appointed by the President. (2) No person shall be appointed to be Commissioner unless he is, or has been, a Judge of the Supreme Court or is, or has been, a Judge of a High Court and is qualified under paragraph (a) of clause (2) of Article 177 to be appointed a Judge of the Supreme Court. (2A) The Prime Minister shall in consultation with the Leader of the Opposition in the National Assembly, forward three names for appointment of the Commissioner to a Parliamentary Committee for hearing and confirmation of any one person. (2B) The Parliamentary Committee to be constituted by the Speaker shall comprise fifty percent members from the Treasury Branches and fifty percent from the Opposition Parties, based on their strength in Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament), to be nominated by the respective Parliamentary Leaders: Provided that in case there is no consensus between the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition, each shall forward separate lists to the Parliamentary Committee for consideration which may confirm any one name: Provided further that the total strength of the Parliamentary Committee shall be twelve members out of which one-third shall be from the Senate. Provided also that when the National Assembly is dissolved and a vacancy occurs in the office of the Chief Election Commissioner, the [total membership of the Parliamentary Committe shall consist of] the members from the Senate only and the foregoing provisions of this clause shall, mutatis mutandis, apply. (3) The Commissioner shall have such powers and functions as are conferred on him by the Constitution and law.

        Article 2. of THE ELECTION COMMISSION ORDER, 2002 states: (1) There shall be a Chief Election Commissioner, hereinafter referred to as the Commissioner, who shall be appointed by the President, in his discretion, for a term of three years. (2) As provided in clause (2) of Article 213 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, no person shall be appointed to be Commissioner unless he is, or has been, a Judge of the Supreme Court or is, or has been, a Judge of High Court and is qualified under paragraph (a) of clause (2) of Article 177 of the Constitution to be appointed a Judge of the Supreme Court. (3) The Commissioner shall have such powers and functions as are conferred on him by this Order and the law. (4) The Commissioner may, by writing under his hand addressed to the President, resign his office.


        Peer reviewer comment: Agree - There are no legal provisions prohibiting conflicts of interest in the appointment of the Chief Election Commissioner; nor are there provisions restricting the appointment of political party officials to the position.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where: 1) high-level appointments must be based on merit in a public appointment process; and 2) appointees must be free of conflicts of interest due to personal loyalties, family connections, political party affiliations, business partners or other biases.

        A MODERATE score is earned where high-level appointments must be based on merit in a public appointment process, but the regulations don't forbid appointments involving conflicts of interest or other biases.

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources

        The Constitution of Pakistan 1973, Article 213. http://www.pakistani.org/pakistan/constitution/

        THE ELECTION COMMISSION ORDER, 2002, Article 2. http://ecp.gov.pk/ElectionLaws/Volume-I.pdf

      • expand button!
        40
        Score
        50
        In practice, to what extent are high-level appointments to the oversight authority based on merit?More about indicator

        The appointments of member commissioners and the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and other key officials are made in accordance with the proper process laid down in the 1973 Constitution, the Election Commission Order, and ROPA. The competition is usually not advertised in newspapers and is not passed through public vetting (Khalid Wahid, IFES). However, the Prime Minister, in close consultation with leader of the opposition, nominates three persons to a parliamentary committee of 12 members comprised of equal members from the treasury and the opposition benches, and that committee sends one person's name to the president for appointment to the post of Chief Election Commissioner (Article 213). The CEC is appointed for a five year term and cannot be removed without the due process stipulated in the Constitution (Article 209).

        Some opposition political parties have challenged the process of appointment of ECP members, high officials, and tribunals, and alleged the biased decision in favour of ruling party. These allegations and some experiences of political parties coupled with tribunals’ inability to decide cases within 120 days of receiving complaints, have resulted into political crisis in Pakistan (Shahid Jatoi, CPDI). This is matter of routine, though the constitution clearly provides the process of recruitment, that opposition political parties or the political parties losing elections blame afterwards the appointment of CEC. During july 2012, CEC Mr. Fakhrudin G Ibrahim was appointed as CEC unanimously by parliamentry committee mandated by constitutional article 213 (Dawn, 13 July 2012). All political parties in treasurey and opposition benches and outside parliament reposed confidence on his appointment. However, after elections 2013 which have become controvesial by allegations levelled by opposition political parties about mass scale rigging, the appointment of CEC also became controversial and Fakhrudin resigned from the post (Dawn, july 31, 2013). Pakistan Tehreek-i Insaf (PTI) that made the appointment of Fakhrudin controversial after loosing GE-2013, have had welcomed his appointment earlier (PTI offical portal, July 2012). Currently, the appointment of CEC is again being done according to article 2013 of the constitution.

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where: 1) there is an advertised competition and public vetting process, 2) candidates with the most merit and without conflicts of interest or other biases are appointed.

        A 50 score is earned where the public competition is usually advertised and the vetting process public, but exceptions exist. A 50 score is also earned where candidates with the most merit and without conflicts of interest or other biases are appointed but exceptions exist.

        A 0 score is earned where there's rarely or never a public competition, or appointees are rarely selected on merit or without conflicts of interest or other biases.

        Sources

        The Dawn, July 13, 2012. by reporter. Fakhruddin G. Ebrahim appointed CEC as President approves summary. At http://www.dawn.com/news/733999/fakhruddin-g-ebrahim-appointed-cec-as-president-approves-summary

        The Dawn, July 31, 2013. by Mubashir Zaidi. Chief Election Commissioner Fakhruddin G Ebrahim resigns. At http://www.dawn.com/news/1033217

        Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (July 9, 2012). TI welcomes consensus on Fakhruddin G. Ebrahim as CEC . http://insaf.pk/news/national-news/item/12189-PTI%20welcomes%20consensus%20on%20Fakhruddin%20G.%20Ebrahim%20as%20CEC

        Express Tribune, August 4, 2014. By Zahid F Ebrahim. Ten truths about electoral rigging. At http://tribune.com.pk/story/743813/ten-truths-about-electoral-rigging/

        Interview with Khalid Wahid, Electoral Dispute Resolution & Political Finance Officer, IFES, September 17, 2014, in person.

        Interview with Shahid Jatoi, Voter & Civic Education Officer, CPDI (Centre for Peace & Development Initiatives), September 15-17, 2014, in person.

        The Representation of the People Act, 1976 (Act No. LXXXV of 1976). http://ecp.gov.pk/ElectionLaws/Volume-I.pdf

      • expand button!
        41
        Score
        YES
        In law, the independence of high-level appointees is guaranteed.More about indicator

        High level appointees to the ECP, in law, enjoy security of tenure, due process, and the authority to review cases and issue decisions.

        Article 215. of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973, provides: Term of office of Commissioner.— (1) The Commissioner shall, subject to this Article, hold office for a term of three years from the day he enters upon his office: Provided that the National Assembly may by resolution extend the term of the Commissioner by a period not exceeding one year. (2) The Commissioner shall not be removed from office except in the manner prescribed in Article 209 for the removal from office of a Judge and, in the application of the Article for the purposes of this clause, any reference in that Article to a Judge shall be construed as a reference to the Commissioner. (3) The Commissioner may, by writing under his hand addressed to the President, resign his office.

        Per Article 209, the Election Commission itself shall investigate and recommend to the President whether a member has been guilty of misconduct or is incapable of performing his duties. If the Commission assents, the President may remove a commissioner from his position.

        Section 6. of the Election Commission Order 2002 states: Powers of Election Commission.— (1) The Election Commission shall have power to issue such directions or orders as may be necessary for the performance of its functions and duties, including an order doing complete justice in any matter pending before it and an order for the purpose of securing the attendance of any person or the discovery or production of any document. (2) Any such direction or order shall be enforceable throughout Pakistan and shall be executed as if it had been issued by the High Court.

        Section 7 of the Election Commission Order 2002 provides: Duties of Commissioner.— The Commissioner shall be charged with the duty of— (a) organizing and conducting election to fill casual vacancies in the National Assembly, the Senate or a Provincial Assembly ; and (b) appointing Election Tribunals.

        [7A. Application of certain laws etc.— (1) Subject to this Order and any Order, from time to time, made by the Chief Executive, the provisions of Part VIII of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and all electoral laws, Orders, Acts, Ordinances and regulations, rules, notifications and instructions made or issued thereunder for the time being in force and amended from time to time shall form part of this Order.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where: 1) appointees have the authority or mandate to review cases and issue decisions, 2) the law establishes security of tenure, and 3) removal or disciplinary actions are based on due process conducted by a peer panel or independent oversight body.

        A MODERATE score is earned where appointees have the authority or mandate to review cases and issue decisions, BUT one of the second two conditions mentioned in the YES criteria is not met.

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources

        The Constitution of Pakistan 1973, Articles 209, 215. www.na.gov.pk/publications/Constitution.pdf

        THE ELECTION COMMISSION ORDER, 2002 (CHIEF EXECUTIVES ORDER NO. 1 OF 2002), Sections 6 & 7. http://ecp.gov.pk/ElectionLaws/Volume-I.pdf

      • expand button!
        42
        Score
        50
        In practice, to what extent is the independence of high-level appointees guaranteed?More about indicator

        The high-level appointments in ECP are the appointments of members of ECP, the chief of ECP, and tribunals set to address the complaints of the elections. The appointment of these persons is stipulated in the 1973 Constitution, Election Commission Order, 2002, and the Representation of People Act, (ROPA) 1976. However, in case of hearing of complaints of election disputes, rigging and violations of code of conduct, ECP sets tribunals that under Article 60 of the ROPA, 1976, shall have all the powers of a civil court trying a suit under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, (Act V of 1908), and shall be deemed to be a civil court within the meaning of sections 67[476] 480 and 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 (Act V of 1898). An Election Tribunal shall consist of a person who has been, or is, or, at the time of his retirement as a District and Sessions Judge, was qualified to be, a Judge of a High Court [Article 57(2) of ROPA, 1976]. Similarly, chapter 7 of the ROPA, 1976 clearly defines the sanctions, award, and punishments related with all types of election disputes, rigging and violations. The law does not contain any provision regarding the transfer and removal of tribunals during hearings. However, appointees in ECP are removed by following specified mechanism.

        Nevertheless, some opposition political parties have challenged the process of appointment of ECP members, high officials, and tribunals, and alleged the biased decision in favour of ruling party. These allegations and some experiences of political parties coupled with tribunals’ inability to decide cases within 120 days of receiving complaints, have exacerbated the political crisis in Pakistan. Before 18th amendment to constitution, previously the appointments were always made without following merit and were subject to political loyalties. However, after historic 18th amendment to Constitution, that gurantees the unanimous, merit based appointment of CEC and indepence of the ECP.

        However, the appointment of first CEC post 18th amendment was of Mr. Fakhrudin, whose term was for five years till 2017, but Fakhrudin resigned because he thought the judiciary was interfering in ECP affairs, especially in case of presidential elections. Presidential elections were originally scheduled by the Election Commission to be held on August 6, and the commission had earlier rejected a government request to change the date of the poll. However, two days later the Supreme Court ordered the commission to hold elections on July 30 as sought by the federal government in a petition filed in the court. Fakhrudin termed this attack on their independence.

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where all of the following conditions are met: 1) appointees review cases and issue decisions without fear or favor from other branches of government, and 2) appointees are granted security of tenure and 3) no appointees are removed, disciplined or transferred without due process by a peer panel or independent oversight body.

        A 50 score is earned where any of the following conditions apply: 1) appointees generally operate without fear or favor from other branches of government but exceptions exist, or 2) some but not all appointees are granted security of tenure, or 3) appointees are occasionally removed, disciplined or transferred without due process by a peer panel or independent oversight body.

        A 0 score is earned where at least one of the following conditions apply: 1) appointees operate with fear or favor from other branches of government, or 2) are not granted security of tenure, or 3) are usually removed, disciplined or transferred without observing due process by a peer panel or independent oversight body.

        Sources

        Interview with Khalid Wahid, Electoral Dispute Resolution & Political Finance Officer, IFES, September 17, 2014, in person.

        The Express Tribune. July 31, 2013. by web desk. Chief Election Commissioner Fakhruddin G Ebrahim resigns. At http://tribune.com.pk/story/584518/chief-election-commissioner-fakhruddin-g-ebrahim-resigns/

        The Dawn, July 31, 2013. by Mubashir Zaidi. Chief Election Commissioner Fakhruddin G Ebrahim resigns. At http://www.dawn.com/news/1033217

        Express Tribune, August 4, 2014. By Zahid F Ebrahim. Ten truths about electoral rigging. At http://tribune.com.pk/story/743813/ten-truths-about-electoral-rigging/

        Sahibzada Saud, Director Election Oversight, Research, & Reforms, FAFEN (Free & Fair Election Network), September 18, 2014 at FAFEN Secretariat

      • expand button!
        43
        Score
        --
        Open Question: How does decision-making work in the oversight authority?More about indicator

        The Election Commission of Pakistan is comprised of a chief commissioner and four commissioners. One of each the commissioners is from one of the four provinces of Pakistan (Punjab, Sindh, Balochistan, and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa). The ECP has the powers to prepare electoral rolls, conduct elections, appoint caretaker governments as last option, and set election tribunals to address electoral complaints.

        Khalid Wahid informed that, according to Article 8 of the Election Commission Order 2002, (1) All decisions of the Election Commission shall be expressed in terms of the opinion of the majority of its members, including the Chairman. (2) No election conducted, or other action taken or thing done, by the Election Commission shall be invalid or called in question only on the ground of the existence of a vacancy therein or of the absence of any member from any meeting thereof.

        Single member tribunals address all the election disputes and complaints (Sahibzada Saud, FAFEN). However, in case of appointment of care taker Prime Minister (PM) or Chief Ministers (CMs) of provinces are not done by mutual consultation of existing PM and Opposition leader, and CMs and opposition leader respectively, and only if the parliamentary committees set to select care taker PM and CMs within three days of receiving matter, also fails to come to unanimous decision, then article 224A of the constitution 1973 is invoked. According to this the parliamentary committees at national and provincial level sends the nominees to ECP for final decision. ECP comprising five members pick the PM and CM, as the case may be, by majority vote.

        The ECP acquired this power from historic 18th amendment to Constitution in 2010, and during, 2013 General Elections, the ECP exercised this power. During the election period, all parties accepted majority decisions taken by the ECP. However, after elections, the opposition parties questioned the appointment of the caretaker government as well as the decisions taken by the ECP (Shahid Jatoi, CPDI). These accusations and counter accusations have produced a political crisis in Pakistan.

        Scoring Criteria

        Please describe: 1) the composition of the decision-making body within the oversight authority, 2) the type of decisions it's allowed to make and makes in practice, and 3) in which cases majority is required. If there have been well substantiated complaints about the decision-making process being ineffective or politicized please explain.

        Sources

        Interview with Khalid Wahid, Electoral Dispute Resolution & Political Finance Officer, IFES, September 17, 2014, in person.

        Interview with Khurram Badar Alam, Voter Education Officer, IFES-Pakistan, August 21, 2014, via telephone.

        Interview with Sahibzada Saud, Director Election Oversight, Research, & Reforms, FAFEN (Free & Fair Election Network), September 18, 2014, in person.

        Interview with Shahid Jatoi, Voter & Civic Education Officer, CPDI (Centre for Peace & Development Initiatives), September 15-17, 2014, in person.

      • expand button!
        44
        Score
        0
        In practice, to what extent does the authority have sufficient capacity to monitor political finance regulations?More about indicator

        According to the rules, the political parties have to submit their annual accounts to the ECP. Individual returned and contesting candidates have to submit itemized details on election expenses and contributions on prescribed forms to returning officers (ROs) (who are often session and civil judges in Pakistan) until now. Returned candidates must report their financial information within ten days of the announcement of election results, and contesting candidates must do so within thirty days.

        As a matter of practice, the returned candidate submits financial information to ROs, while some of the contesting candidates also submit such information. As ROs hitherto have been the judges of lower judiciary, who do not have enough time to spend on affairs of ECP. For some time, they give notice to candidates for submission of election expenses returns. Then then send record to ECP. ECP pressurizes the returned candidates by not issuing their notification in official gazette until the returned candidate submit their financial returns. As far the other, contesting candidates are concerned, there is no specific mechanism to make them comply with the law.

        Therefore, on the one hand, ECP do not have complete records of financial information of candidates, and on the other hand, it has no mechanism and sufficient staff to retain, review and monitor the incoming information (Khalid Wahid, IFES). The ECP has not reviewed a single case.

        The report issued by ECP itself admitted that a centralized scrutiny cell was set up in the ECP Secretariat with members from NAB (National Accountability Bureau), SBP (State Bank of Pakistan), FBR (Federal Board of Revenue) and NADRA (National Database & Registration Authority) to verify the candidates’ nomination papers. However, this cell did not perform effectively (pg 11). The report recommended certain changes to make electoral processes more transparent and effective. The report only includes one suggestion related to political finance: to increase the power of returning officers to verify the accounts of candidates and to take further steps to enforce section 49 of the ROPA, 1976 (pg 163). However, this monitoring cell was set for the first time during GE-2013 and that too without any legal backing, and therefore there was no monitoring of the candidates any sort of information inclusive of information of finances incurred in election campaign.

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where: 1) the authority has sufficient budget to monitor all incoming reports, and 2) it has sufficient staff to review all incoming reports.

        A 50 score is earned where: 1) the authority has insufficient budget to monitor all incoming reports, or 2) its staff can only review half of all incoming reports.

        A 0 score is earned where: 1) the authority can't fulfill most of its essential functions due to budget constraints, or 2) its staff only has the capacity to review 25% or less of all incoming reports.

        Sources

        Interview with Khalid Wahid, Electoral Dispute Resolution & Political Finance Officer, IFES, September 17, 2014, in person.

        ECP, Post Election Review Report: General Elections 2013, December 9, 2013. http://ecp.gov.pk/Post Election Review Report.pdf

        Interview with Shahid Jatoi, Voter & Civic Education Officer, CPDI (Centre for Peace & Development Initiatives), September 15-17, 2014, in person.

      • expand button!
        45
        Score
        0
        In practice, to what extent does the authority conduct investigations or audits when necessary?More about indicator

        After the recent 2013 general elections, there were no cases in which the ECP investigated any of the 410 complaints received by election tribunals during the elections.

        The report issued by ECP itself admitted that a centralized scrutiny cell was set up in the ECP Secretariat with members from NAB (National Accountability Bureau), SBP (State Bank of Pakistan), FBR (Federal Board of Revenue) and NADRA (National Database & Registration Authority) to verify the candidates’ nomination papers, but this cell did not perform effectively (pg 11).

        The report recommended certain changes to make electoral processes more transparent and effective that only includes one suggestion related with political finance and that is to increase power of returning officers to verify the accounts of candidates and to take further steps to enforce section 49 of the ROPA, 1976 (pg 163).

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where the authority conducted at least three investigations or audits during the most recent electoral campaign.

        A 50 score is earned where the authority conducted at least one investigation or audit during the most recent electoral campaign.

        A 0 score is earned where the authority didn't conduct any investigation or audit during the most recent electoral campaign.

        Sources

        Interview with Khalid Wahid, Electoral Dispute Resolution & Political Finance Officer, IFES, September 17, 2014, in person.

        ECP, Post Election Review Report: General Elections 2013, December 9, 2013. http://ecp.gov.pk/Post Election Review Report.pdf

        Interview with Sahibzada Saud, Director of Election Oversight, Research, & Reforms, FAFEN (Free & Fair Election Network), September 18, 2014, in person.

      • expand button!
        46
        Score
        0
        In practice, to what extent does the authority publish the results of investigations or audits?More about indicator

        No such practice existed, no investigations or audits took place, and thus no reports were available in any format.

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where the authority publishes reports of all its investigations or audits a month or less after their conclusion.

        A 50 score is earned where reports are available to the public more than a month after the conclusion of the investigation or audit.

        A 0 score is earned where reports are not available to the public or they become available after six months or more after conclusion of the investigation or audit. A 0 score is also earned where only summaries of the reports are publicly available.

        Sources

        Interview with Khalid Wahid, Electoral Dispute Resolution & Political Finance Officer, IFES, September 17, 2014, in person.

        Interview with Khurram Badar Alam, Voter Education Officer, IFES-Pakistan, August 21, 2014, via telephone.

        Interview with Sahibzada Saud, Director of Election Oversight, Research, & Reforms, FAFEN (Free & Fair Election Network), September 18, 2014, in person.

    • expand button!
      Enforcement Capabilities
      More about category
      • expand button!
        47
        Score
        YES
        In law, there are sanctions in response to political finance violations.More about indicator

        Pakistani law clearly defines both violations of political finance regulations and sanctions for those violations.

        Article 15 of the Political Parties Order, 2002 stipulates: (1) Where the Federal Government is satisfied that a political party is a foreign-aided party or has been formed or is operating in a manner prejudicial to the sovereignty or integrity of Pakistan or is indulging in terrorism, it shall make such declaration by a notification in the official Gazette. (2) Within fifteen days of making a declaration under clause (1), the Federal Government shall refer the matter to the Supreme Court whose decision on such reference shall be final. (3) Where the Supreme Court upholds the declaration made against a political party under clause (1), such party shall stand dissolved forthwith.

        Similarly, Article 16 of the Political Parties Order, 2002 states: (1) Where a political party is dissolved under Article 15, any member of such political party, if he is a member of the Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) or a Provincial Assembly, shall be disqualified for the remaining term to be a member of the Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) or as the case may be, the Provincial Assembly, unless before the final decision of the Supreme Court, he resigns from the membership of the party and publicly announces his disassociation with such political party. (2) A person becoming disqualified from being a member of the Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) of Provincial Assembly under clause (1) shall not participate in election for any elective office or any legislative body till the expiry of four years from the date of his disqualification from being a member of the Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) or, as the case may be, the Provincial Assembly. (3) The order of members of a political party becoming disqualified from being members of Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) of the Provincial Assembly on its dissolution shall be notified in the official Gazette.

        Section 6. of the Political Parties Rules, 2002 states: Confiscation of prohibited funds.— Where the Election Commission decides that the contributions or donations, as the case may be, accepted by the political parties are prohibited under clause (3) of Article 6, it shall, subject to notice to the political party concerned and after giving an opportunity of being heard, direct the same to be confiscated in favour of the State to be deposited in Government Treasury or sub-Treasury in the following head of the account:— “3000000-Deposits and Reserves-B-Not Bearing interest-3500000-Departmental and Judicial Deposits-3501000-Civil Deposits-3501010-Deposits in connection with Elections”.

        Section 96.of the ROPA 1976 states: Court proceedings relating to election expenses.— The Commission shall direct the Returning Officer to launch proceedings in the appropriate court against persons who contravene the provisions of section 49 or fails to comply with the provisions of section 50"

        Article 100.of the ROPA 1976 states: Disqualification on account of certain offenses.— (1) where a person has been [convicted for having exceeded the limit of election expenses laid down by section 49 or having failed to file the return of election expenses in accordance with section 50 or for any other] offence under this Act, or has been found guilty of any corrupt or illegal practice by a Tribunal, he shall, if the Commissioner makes an order to that effect, be disqualified, for such period not exceeding five years as may be specified in the order from being or being elected as, a member of an Assembly.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where: 1) the law clearly defines violations of political finance laws, and 2) there are clearly defined sanctions for specific violations.

        A MODERATE score is earned where violations are clearly defined but sanctions for specific violations are not.

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources

        The Political Parties Order, 2002 (Chief Executive’s Order No. 18 of 2002, Article 15 & 16, pg 65-66. http://ecp.gov.pk/ElectionLaws/Volume-I.pdf

        THE POLITICAL PARTIES RULES, 2002, Section 6, pg 74. http://ecp.gov.pk/ElectionLaws/Volume-I.pdf

        The Representation of the People Act, 1976, Articles 96 & 100, pg 181. http://ecp.gov.pk/ElectionLaws/Volume-I.pdf

      • expand button!
        48
        Score
        YES
        In law, the oversight authority has the power to impose sanctions.More about indicator

        The law gives the ECP the authority to both impose sanctions and to carry out prosecutions.

        Section 6. of the Political Parties Rules, 2002 states: Confiscation of prohibited funds.—Where the Election Commission decides that the contributions or donations, as the case may be, accepted by the political parties are prohibited under clause (3) of Article 6, it shall, subject to notice to the political party concerned and after giving an opportunity of being heard, direct the same to be confiscated in favour of the State to be deposited in Government Treasury or sub-Treasury in the following head of the account:— “3000000-Deposits and Reserves-B-Not Bearing interest-3500000-Departmental and Judicial Deposits-3501000-Civil Deposits-3501010-Deposits in connection with Elections”.

        Section 96.of the ROPA 1976 states: Court proceedings relating to election expenses.—The Commission shall direct the Returning Officer to launch proceedings in the appropriate court against persons who contravene the provisions of section 49 or fails to comply with the provisions of section 50"

        Article 100.of the ROPA 1976 states: Disqualification on account of certain offenses.— (1) where a person has been [convicted for having exceeded the limit of election expenses laid down by section 49 or having failed to file the return of election expenses in accordance with section 50 or for any other] offence under this Act, or has been found guilty of any corrupt or illegal practice by a Tribunal, he shall, if the Commissioner makes an order to that effect, be disqualified, for such period not exceeding five years as may be specified in the order from being or being elected as, a member of an Assembly.

        Scoring Criteria

        A YES score is earned where: 1) the oversight authority has the power to impose sanctions, and 2) it can directly prosecute violators before the courts or is independent to send cases to public prosecution.

        A MODERATE score is earned where the oversight authority has the power to impose sanctions, but it can't directly prosecute violators before the courts or is not independent to send cases to public prosecution.

        A NO score is earned where no such law exists.

        Sources

        The Political Parties Order, 2002 (Chief Executive’s Order No. 18 of 2002, Article 15 & 16, pg 65-66. http://ecp.gov.pk/ElectionLaws/Volume-I.pdf

        THE POLITICAL PARTIES RULES, 2002, Section 6, pg 74, http://ecp.gov.pk/ElectionLaws/Volume-I.pdf

        The Representation of the People Act, 1976, Article 96 & 100, pg 181. http://ecp.gov.pk/ElectionLaws/Volume-I.pdf

      • expand button!
        49
        Score
        50
        In practice, to what extent do offenders comply with sanctions imposed?More about indicator

        None of the 410 electoral complaints filed with electoral tribunals in the aftermath of the 2013 general elections addressed violations of political finance regulations. Among these, the total number of decided cases are 331 out of 410 (305 out of 384 by the tribunals and 26 by the ECP) while 79 petitions (19%) are still pending with the election tribunals.

        Given the backlog, the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) seems to have failed to ensure compliance with the mandatory legal provision of disposing of election petitions within 120 days of receipt. Section 67(1)A of the Representation of Peoples Act 1976 says that “where a petition is not decided within four months further adjournment sought by any party shall be given only on payment of special cost of Rs 10,000 per adjournment and an adjournment shall not be given for more than three days.” (FAFEN).

        There never have been political finance complaints in electoral processes of Pakistan (Khalid Wahid, IFES). However, regarding the decisions with other matters pertaining to election disputes, organized and on-spot rigging and violation of code of conduct and other laws of electoral procedures, the decisions made by election tribunals can be challenged in appeal to Supreme Court. As matter of practice, the though decisions are mostly delayed, when made by election complaints tribunals are often immediately imposed by ECP. However, some of these are often challenged in superior courts. In the courts, the matter remains pending possibly due to 'non availability of relevant laws & rules (Dawn, Sep 24, 2014), or due to candidates tactics of engaging the courts in legal intricacies or courts inability to settle the cases in a timely fashion (Dawn, Sep 24, 2014 ).

        Scoring Criteria

        A 100 score is earned where: 1) offenders comply with the sanctions imposed without exception, and 2) they are not repeat offenders.

        A 50 score is earned where: 1) offenders usually comply with the sanctions imposed but exceptions exist, or 2) most are not repeat offenders but some exceptions exist.

        A 0 score is earned where: 1) offenders rarely comply with the sanctions imposed, or 2) most are repeat offenders.

        Sources

        FAFEN, Sep 12, 2014. 79 election petitions still await decisions. A press release, At http://www.fafen.org/site/v6/press-releases/79electionpetitionsstillawaitdecisions20140912_1982

        The Dawn , May 11 2013, by Iftekhar A Khan & Amir Wasim. 'One year on, poll acrimony reigns'. At http://epaper.dawn.com/DetailImage.php?StoryImage=11052014001006

        The Express Tribune, 11 May 2014. by Irfan Ghori. ' May 11 elections: A year after polls, tribunals wade through complaints'. At http://tribune.com.pk/story/706933/may-11-elections-a-year-after-polls-tribunals-wade-through-complaints/

        Interview with Khalid Wahid, Electoral Dispute Resolution & Political Finance Officer, IFES, September 17, 2014, in person.

        The Dawn, Sep 23, 2014. By Nasir Iqbal. 'SC wants all poll-related cases clubbed together'. At http://www.dawn.com/news/1133966

      • expand button!
        50
        Score
        --
        Open Question: How strong is enforcement, and what impedes more effective enforcement?More about indicator

        The enforcement mechanism for political finance regulation is extremely fragile. ECP itself in its post-election report admitted that a centralized scrutiny cell set up in the ECP Secretariat with members from NAB (National Accountability Bureau), SBP (State Bank of Pakistan), FBR (Federal Board of Revenue) and NADRA (National Database & Registration Authority) to verify the candidates’ nomination papers, did not perform effectively (pg 11). There is not a mechanism to receive financial information effectively and to monitor and verify financial information (Khalid Wahid, IFES).

        Though the monitoring cell for financial information was formed during the 2013 General Elections, this was essentially a formality. The cell did not produce effective results (Khurram Badar Alam, IFES). There were several violations of the code of conduct, including violations of political finance regulations (Sahibzada Saud, FAFEN). There was a dearth of political will by political forces, especially in parliamentary parties and among the administrative capacity of the ECP, to enforce political finance regulation. There is also a fragile legal framework for the enforcement of political finance regulations in Pakistan (Shahid Jatoi, CPDI). Further, there is also a gap of certain legal provisions related with political finance for both political parties and individual contesting candidates (Shahid Jatoi, CPDI).

        The post election report prepared by ECP recommended certain changes to make electoral processes more transparent and effective that also includes one suggestion related with political finance and that is to increase power of returning officers to verify the accounts of candidates and to take further steps to enforce section 49 of the ROPA, 1976 (pg 163). There is need of changes in legal framework that shall incorporate the public funds, strict provisions of use of single bank account, promotion of simple electoral campaign, exceptions about limitations of upper sealing of election expenses based on geographical locations, and most significant the implementation of such laws through fully independent section within ECP. For this, ECP should be given the authority to frame its own regulations.


        Peer reviewer comment: Agree - According to Mian Hafizullah of Toba Tek Singh (a politician), the enforcement of political finance regulations is very weak. He added that, “the best thing for financial monitoring is that the Asset Declarations of the politicians are duly verified by FBR and NAB as well State Bank. These declarations and the accounts specified for election expenses either by contestants or their supporters need to be frequently verified through a department working under direct control of Election Commission with authorization to take practical action of confiscation and disqualification if complaints are proved correct."

        Scoring Criteria

        Please provide a general explanation of the effectiveness of enforcement, describing: 1) any conditions that may prevent effective enforcement, and 2) explain what are the most urgent areas of reform in the country's political finance system.

        Sources

        Interview with Khalid Wahid, Electoral Dispute Resolution & Political Finance Officer, IFES, September 17, 2014, in person.

        Interview with Khurram Badar Alam, Voter Education Officer, IFES-Pakistan, August 21, 2014, via telephone.

        Interview with Sahibzada Saud, Director Election Oversight, Research, & Reforms, FAFEN (Free & Fair Election Network), September 18, 2014, in person.

        Interview with Shahid Jatoi, Voter & Civic Education Officer, CPDI (Centre for Peace & Development Initiatives), September 15-17, 2014, in person.

        ECP, Post Election Review Report: General Elections 2013, December 9, 2013.
        http://ecp.gov.pk/Post Election Review Report.pdf

        CCE. Clean Money for Clean Politics: Integrity and influence can co-exist? 2005. http://www.civiceducation.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Clean-Money-for-Clean-Politics.pdf

        Reviewer's sources: 1. Interview of Mian Hafizullah, a politician in Toba Tek Singh, via phone on 10 December 2014.

Pakistan has a parliamentary system with a Prime Minister as the head of government. The President of Pakistan holds a ceremonial position as the head of the state of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. All the executive powers of Pakistan rest with the Prime Minister.

The legislature is comprised of two chambers, the National Assembly (lower chamber) and Senate (upper chamber). The National Assembly is comprised of 342 members (272 general, 60 seats reserved for members, and 10 seats reserved for minorities). Members on General seats are elected directly based on single constituency; women and minorities are elected on proportional party position in general elections. The Senate is comprised of 104 members elected equally from all four provinces. Members are elected by an Electoral College comprised of the members of provincial assemblies. The configuration of seats are general, women, technocrats/Ulema (clerics/Islamic scholars), and minorities, federal and the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA). Parties and individual level candidates manage campaign funds for these elections together.

The President is the head of the state who is elected by attaining simple majority from an electoral college constituted of members of Senate, National Assembly and members of four provincial assemblies.

On 11th May 2013, general elections were held to elect the members of the 14th National Assembly and the four provincial assemblies of Punjab, Sindh, Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Elections were also held in Islamabad and the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) of Pakistan.

The Senate is a permanent body, and half of its members retire after 3 years. The last elections to Senate were held in March 2012.