Lack coordination between closely linked government institutions is a major stumbling block to governance in Afghanistan. Instead of assisting one another and complementing each other’s work, the flaw often pits organizations against each other by challenging decisions, which leads to a stalemate in extremely important decision-makings. The invalidation of all Kabul votes by the Independent Electoral Complaints Commission (IECC), and the rejection of the decision by the Independent Election Commission (IEC) is a recent instance indicating deep discord between the two government entities. Before the two election bodies reach a common, rational conclusion, the IECC hastily declared all votes cast in the parliamentary election in Kabul province invalid.
No matter whether IECC had the legal authority to invalidate all votes or not, or was to do so the most logical solution, the key point of discussion here is who is to hold responsible for the failure to properly manage the election. The Independent Election Commission unfortunately failed to manage the parliamentary election at the very beginning. It could not hold a relatively transparent election even in the country’s capital. The irregularities during the two days of election were unprecedented in the history of Afghanistan. Comparatively speaking, even the 2004 parliamentary election cannot be compared with the recent election in terms of transparency. Over the last decade and a half, the country’s electoral institutions should have been strengthened to an extent that could have gradually boosted public’s faith in the democratic process, as well as assured Afghans that election is the most logical, peaceful method of transfer of power. However, it did not happen, and the people of Afghanistan gradually lost faith in this key element of democracy. Afghanistan has unfortunately badly backtracked on this gain, more particularly due to the disputed 2014 presidential and the recent parliamentary elections.
Much of the blame for the failure of the election commission rests on the National Unity Government that delayed the parliamentary poll for three years in the pretext of electoral reforms, which were concentrated on reshuffle of election commissions only, and the electoral system was not overhauled. The management reshuffle in the electoral bodies unfortunately did not yield any fruitful results. Individuals, who not only lacked enough relevant experience but also were weak in management, were appointed as commissioners and to other key posts. Thanks to these problems, IEC performed extremely poorly in the parliamentary election, the responsibility of which largely lies especially on the president and the chief executive officer.
