These are heady days for followers of Pakistani politics. The winds of change are in the air. New political alignments and alliances are being forged. Everyone is preparing for a transition. How should this transition take place? There is a method prescribed in the constitution. It is quite straightforward. The current National Assembly’s term expires on March 18, 2013. A general election must be held within 60 days of this date unless the National Assembly has been dissolved earlier. If the National Assembly is dissolved earlier, a general election must be held within 90 days after the dissolution. The power of dissolution vests in the prime minister under Article 58(1). Once the National Assembly is dissolved (either on completion of its prescribed term or earlier), the president is required to appoint a caretaker cabinet as per Article 224(1A). This Article is qualified by the proviso that the caretaker prime minister shall be selected by the president in consultation with the prime minister and the Leader of the Opposition in the outgoing National Assembly. The members of the caretaker cabinet are to be appointed on the advice of the caretaker prime minister. Members of the caretaker cabinet, including the caretaker prime minister, are not eligible to contest the elections. The aim is to try and ensure neutrality and to have an independent political dispensation in place when the elections take place. Under the constitution, only the president, the prime minister and the Leader of the Opposition have a say in the caretaker setup. That is the constitutional method for a transition. The prime minister dissolves the National Assembly and new elections are held under a caretaker setup. Is there any other way to remove the government and force early elections? Under Article 58(2) the president can dissolve the National Assembly if a vote of no-confidence has been passed against the prime minister and no other member of the National Assembly commands the confidence of the majority. This is a discretionary power of the president. There have been statements from the leaders of some political parties that fair elections are not possible under the current president. The president was elected on September 6, 2008. His term expires on September 6, 2013. Under the constitution, there are only two ways he can be removed prior to this date. Either he can resign. Or he can be impeached by parliament under Article 47. An impeachment resolution requires a two-thirds majority at a joint sitting of parliament. The constitution contemplates that an independent Election Commission comprising a chief election commissioner and four members will supervise the organisation and holding of the elections. The president appoints the chief election commissioner and four members (one from each province). The four members were appointed in June 2011. The constitution is silent on the duration of their term of office. Unless they resign, they will be members during the next election. The government is considering legislation that will specify the term of office of the members as two years. The term of office of the current chief election commissioner expires on March 17, 2012. He was appointed on March 17, 2009 for three years. The 18th Amendment has prescribed a new method for the selection of the next incumbent who will hold office for five years. The prime minister, in consultation with the Leader of the Opposition, is required to send three names to a parliamentary committee. If the prime minister and the Leader of the Opposition cannot agree on three names, they can each forward a separate list to the committee for consideration. The committee comprises 50 percent members from the Treasury benches and 50 percent from the Opposition parties based on their representation in parliament. The parliamentary committee has 12 members. One-third are to be chosen from the Senate. It is this committee that is required to undertake a ‘hearing’ and to confirm one person as the chief election commissioner. Although the president makes the appointments of the chief election commissioner and four members, he no longer has discretion in this regard. He must appoint individuals confirmed by the parliamentary committee. Under the constitution, the personnel responsible for overseeing a smooth and fair transition are to be selected by the government and the Opposition. The new political force predicting a tsunami need not be consulted. The tsunami will have to take place under neutral umpires selected by its opponents. This should not deter the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) or encourage it to promote a transition that is not contemplated by the constitution. According to the Election Commission of Pakistan, out of approximately 80 million registered voters, roughly 36 million are “NADRA augmented voters”. These are the people who have been issued new CNICs since the last electoral roll. About the same number of votes (37 million) from the previous electoral roll have been removed as ‘unverified’, as they could not be verified against the CNIC database. It is difficult to make an assessment of the comparative composition of the electorate simply on the basis of these figures. At least part of the unverified votes that have been removed could have been added as part of the NADRA augmented voters if these individuals obtained a new CNIC after the preparation of the previous electoral roll. In such case, the net impact on the composition of the electorate is zero. Regardless of this fact, it seems that the electoral roll for the forthcoming election will constitute a fairer representation of the actual electorate than in the past. The turnout in the last general elections was 43 percent with only about 34 million valid votes out of an eligible 81 million. These numbers provide ample opportunity for a tsunami. Just get the eligible voters to register and get the registered voters to vote. The stage is set for a hard fought political campaign. That is where the energies of politicians of all hues should be focused. Hold rallies, go from door to door, campaign, form alliances. That is all part of the democratic process. ‘Go Zardari Go’ is fine as a political slogan just as threatening a civil disobedience if the leaders fail to declare their assets is fine as a political stunt. But do not look over your shoulder to the men on horseback or robes expecting deliverance from our present woes. There are certain rules to any game. They should be followed. The writer is a barrister practising in Lahore and a senior partner at Ebrahim Hosain