When the Election Commission announced local elections in October for the federal capital, Islamabad, the ruling PML-N government suddenly thought of amending the Local Government Act for Islamabad. The amendment was swiftly passed by the National Assembly and then by the Senate, becoming law after receiving the President’s approval. This delayed the much-awaited local elections once again, forcing the Election Commission to conduct fresh delimitations.
According to the Minister of Law, the amendment aims to provide more representation at the Union Council level in Islamabad and make governance easier. Under the new law, each Union Council will have nine elected general councilors, who will later elect their mayors. The Minister of Law has placed the responsibility of conducting timely local elections on the Election Commission.K
PML-N’s National Assembly member from Islamabad, Tariq Fazal Chaudhry, stated that if the local elections are delayed due to the amendment, it’s not an issue. He added that the first local elections in Islamabad had worsened problems rather than solving them. He questioned the point of holding local elections if they don’t yield positive results.
It should be noted that the PML-N had won the mayoral seat in Islamabad’s local elections, which was intolerable for the PTI government. The PTI repeatedly dismissed the PML-N mayor and obstructed his work. Despite being reinstated by the courts several times, the mayor’s powers were stripped, and his tenure eventually ended amid repeated dismissals orchestrated by the PTI. The PTI government, driven by its animosity towards the PML-N, was determined not to let the mayor function, leading to unaddressed issues in Islamabad.
The blame for the unresolved issues did not lie with the local officials but with the PTI government. Tariq Fazal Chaudhry should have presented the facts in detail, highlighting the failure of the local government system and the PTI’s illegal actions in the assembly. The PML-N mayor was not responsible for the problems, as he was powerless against the federal government’s tactics and had to resort to the courts multiple times due to his illegal dismissals.
A similar situation occurred in Punjab, where the PTI, under the Prime Minister’s orders, dismissed all local bodies and appointed their administrators after PML-N had won the local elections by a large margin. The PML-N mayors and chairpersons were dismissed, and despite being reinstated by the Supreme Court, they were not allowed to function effectively, with their terms ending without meaningful governance.
Local elections across the country were held on the orders of then-Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry. The PTI succeeded in its stronghold of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, where local officials completed their tenure, similar to Sindh, where the PPP-led government allowed its elected officials to serve their full terms.
Both PML-N and PPP were initially reluctant to hold local elections and had dismantled General Pervez Musharraf’s empowered district government system, replacing it with a weak local government structure dependent on the provincial governments. Members of parliament oppose empowered local governance because they receive annual, often illegal, development funds, which the Supreme Court has declared unlawful.
Federal and provincial governments rely on votes from parliament members, making all major parties, including PTI, opposed to local elections. They prefer appointing administrators and giving members of the National and Provincial Assemblies undue priority and funds meant for local bodies. To maintain their grip on power and keep legislators satisfied, governments often evade holding local elections, as exemplified by the situation in Punjab and Islamabad, where local elections are not being conducted, while the courts observe these unconstitutional actions.