THE passage of the 20th Amendment in the National Assembly has kicked off election talk if not election fever. Prime Minster Gilani gained a point or two in his current situation of extreme adversity and rehabilitated himself as a man on the job, at least for now.

The opposition leader Nawaz Sharif managed to create a public profile of a serious contender for power for himself by endorsing the reform in the electoral rules of the game. The parliamentary parties resolved to stand up and be counted.

The PTI, the strident non-parliamentary party, felt alienated by the new piece of legislation. That party found it not a step forward in the direction of free and fair elections — as interpreted by various analysts — but a deal between the two mainstream parties. Extreme pressure was exerted on the PTI leadership by the fact that the party is currently a parliamentary nonentity and the likelihood that it would be neither in the driver’s seat nor the leading contender in the near future. That explains its threat of civil war in the case of not winning the elections.

The two major parties in the fight over election-related legislation have sometimes shown the tendency to become one party in the conflict between parliamentary and extra-parliamentary forces. That reflects the fact that the power game on top is being played in the country at two levels, one on the political stage that is formal and relatively low-pitched, and the other off-stage that is essentially high-stakes in terms of consequences for democracy itself.

The 20th Amendment focused on two aspects of electoral politics: the issue of neutrality of the caretaker government responsible for holding elections and the demand for a non-partisan Election Commission. Some believe that these two dimensions of electoral malpractices represent only the tip of the iceberg because there are multiple issues that adversely affect the fairness of elections.

The other points to the fact that there are more than the two major parties in the field, and all of them have been de-recognised by the provision for agreement between the two leaders facing each other in parliament.

Not surprisingly, this provision for agreement between the two parties has been criticised for being elitist and pro-status quo, as it is understood to be biased against new entrants. Given the controversial character of caretaker governments and the Election Commission in the past, reliance on the will of merely two entities for ensuring clean elections seems to be a tall order. Much more than the subjective input of the leaders of the treasury and opposition benches was needed for the purpose.

The existence of multiple political parties contribute to the division of the electorate and thus to an extremely small number of votes for winning seats, sometimes at less than 10 per cent of the registered votes in a constituency.

However, any restraint on the floating of new parties will be tantamount to curbing freedom of association. One needs to look into the large coalitional arrangements in the US, India and other countries to appreciate the way the interests of various groups and communities are subsumed under two or three nationwide political parties. This is imperative in order to deal with dozens of minuscule parties based on tribes, sects, sectors, ethnic and linguistic minorities or dynastic and ideological breakaway factions.

The 20th Amendment is similarly silent on the politicisation of the army, a judiciary perceived as traditionally anti-democracy as well as the bureaucracy that renders crucially partisan service for electoral contestants through the pre-poll administrative layout. In fact, one can count various kinds of legislative omissions ranging from indirect election of representatives of non-Muslim minorities by the Muslim majority and of women’s reserved seats by the predominantly male members of elected assemblies to the issuance of religious injunctions against political leaders, cadres and workers.

To a large extent, legislation on these issues is possible only when the political initiative is firmly in the hands of politicians. That would have allowed space for responding to crucial questions: why should only judges be appointed to the Election Commission whereas this body performs the administrative function of organising elections? Is it possible to hold elections under the threat of non-acceptance of results, even violence, if a favourable outcome is not forthcoming?

Similarly, emergent ideological movements are bound to hurt the legal-institutional framework of the state, both military and bureaucratic. In Balochistan, an identity-based political platform points to the lack of a pluralistic agenda on the part of the powers that be.

Where do political parties stand after the latest amendment? The PTI is struggling hard to enter the corridors of power. It is in no mood to wait for a long parliamentary career prior to its ascendancy to power. The Jamaat-i-Islami is in disarray in its traditional strongholds. The PML-Q will, in all probability, meet the fate of a typical king’s party after the ouster of the king from power. The JUI’s mercurial leader has alienated the leaders of all other parties because of his directionless manoeuvring.

The 20th Amendment left many outside the future consultation process. They do not consider it relevant for their own politics. But, the fact that public opinion has generally welcomed the move as forward-looking and carrying the potential for legitimising the polling process points to its wider acceptance. At one end, the consensus on the floor of the National Assembly for passing a law to make the election less encumbered with controversy than it has been, elicited praise for politicians. At the other end, many find it a game of exclusion rather than inclusion, seeking to keep them outside the game itself. Their own game is to de-legitimise the main players in the field.

In Pakistan, the rules do not govern the game. If players seek to develop an agreement on some rules, others deny the legitimacy of these rules or those who make them.

The writer is a professor at LUMS.