OPINION | Pakistan’s Generals’ Election: How the Army Stole the People’s Mandate

by Ashu Mann

Pakistan’s powerful military’s iron grip over the country’s political system was glaringly visible during the 2024 general elections.

Despite a massive voter turnout, the elections established former cricketer-turned-politician Imran Khan’s party, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), as the clear favorite of the people, even though it was forced to contest without official party status.

Yet the elections and their outcomes were overshadowed by systemic rigging, coercion, and post-election engineering by the military establishment. These efforts were aimed at cobbling together a weak, submissive, and pliable government led by the Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz) and the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP).

The entire electoral process, from voting to results, transformed Pakistan’s elections into a carefully managed army operation rather than a genuine democratic exercise. This blatant military manipulation during and after the polls has effectively stripped the Shehbaz Sharif government of popular political legitimacy, both domestically and in the eyes of the international community.

The run-up to the elections was itself deeply troubling. Imran Khan, arguably one of Pakistan’s most popular prime ministers, was imprisoned, barred from contesting elections or holding public office, and his party was stripped of its election symbol. As a result, PTI candidates were forced to run as independents.

This maneuver was clearly designed to fragment votes and render PTI electorally ineffective, denying it the parliamentary strength required to form a government even if it secured a majority. Human rights organizations and international observers warned from the outset that the 2024 elections were among the least free and fair since Pakistan’s return to civilian rule in 2008. They noted that the electoral environment was heavily constrained and unlikely to meet democratic standards.

Election day validated these concerns. The military imposed nationwide internet shutdowns and suspended mobile phone services, severely restricting citizens’ ability to share polling information, particularly in urban areas and PTI strongholds. Authorities justified these measures as security precautions, but they were widely criticized for undermining transparency and public oversight.

These actions resulted in prolonged delays in vote counting and the announcement of results. Such restrictions on free expression have been a recurring feature of Pakistan’s electoral history and are often followed by post-poll manipulation.

Despite these measures, voters’ preferences initially prevailed. PTI-backed independent candidates led in a majority of constituencies by large margins as counting progressed. However, as communication restrictions remained in place, unexplained “corrections” by polling officials reversed these trends, and PTI-backed candidates suddenly began trailing as the counts neared completion.

The results triggered widespread allegations that Pakistan Army’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and the Directorate General of Military Intelligence directly influenced the outcome. PTI-backed candidates, party leaders, and independent observers reported pressure from military intelligence operatives on election officials to alter results and coerce independents into defecting.

PTI workers faced intimidation, and arrests before and after the polls were used to force political realignments in favor of military-backed parties. Pakistan’s courts, expected to safeguard constitutional rights and electoral integrity, remained largely silent, reinforcing perceptions that the so-called hybrid regime of civilian governance under military supervision was firmly entrenched.

Despite these constraints, PTI-backed independents emerged as the single largest bloc in the National Assembly. Without a unified campaign, a common symbol, or centralized leadership, they still outperformed established political parties. This outcome exposed the limits of the military’s political engineering and its inability to deliver a decisive victory for favored parties, particularly PML-N.

The election results reflected deep public anger toward the military establishment and the political elite. Yet the post-election phase proved even more controversial. Managed court rulings, rapid political bargaining, and sustained pressure were used to prevent PTI-backed independents from forming a government.

Instead, Shehbaz Sharif was installed as prime minister through a hastily assembled coalition between PML-N and PPP. This arrangement was imposed rather than negotiated, raising serious questions about its legitimacy and durability.

Subsequent developments revealed the military’s broader political design. The Sharif government oversaw sweeping constitutional changes, beginning with the 26th Amendment in October 2024 and culminating in a far-reaching amendment in November 2025. These changes entrenched military authority, altered Pakistan’s civil-military balance, limited judicial oversight, and curtailed civil liberties under the guise of national security.

The Army chief was granted powers surpassing those of the civilian government, effectively exercising unchecked control over the polity. He later elevated himself from the rank of General to Field Marshal, assumed the position of Chief of Defence Forces with authority over all branches of the military, and secured lifetime immunity for his actions.

These moves by Field Marshal Asim Munir, endorsed by the Sharif government, have reinforced fears of the institutionalization of military dominance in Pakistan, reversing hard-won constitutional principles of civilian supremacy.

Recent developments evoke memories of Pakistan’s long history of military coups that dismantled civilian governments on dubious pretexts. They suggest that the 2024 elections were not an aberration but a continuation of authoritarian consolidation under military rule.

While Western governments issued routine congratulatory messages, they also emphasized the need for transparency, adherence to the rule of law, and democratic norms. International and domestic observers, along with members of the Pakistani diaspora, have called for an independent audit of the elections, particularly given the communication blackouts and delayed results.

Ultimately, the 2024 elections defied the expressed will of Pakistani voters, severely damaging the credibility of the electoral process and the military’s intentions. They deepened political polarization without any credible audit, delivering little more than short-term military triumphalism that could unravel at any moment.

---

About the Author

Ashu Mann is an Associate Fellow at the Centre for Land Warfare Studies. He was awarded the Vice Chief of the Army Staff Commendation card on Army Day 2025. He is pursuing a PhD from Amity University, Noida, in Defence and Strategic Studies. His research focuses include the India-China territorial dispute, great power rivalry, and Chinese foreign policy.