MPs Angered by The Approval of The Local Authority Law [Archives:2000/05/Law & Diplomacy]
January 31 2000
The Parliament endorsed the local authority law last Wednesday January 26, 2000 despite the fact that it was the subject of much controversy between the government and different political blocs of the opposition which constitute a fraction, if compared to the ruling party which controls more than two thirds of the members.
Many politicians have talked vigorously about the law of local governance as the real and the only way out of the current crisis the government is going through. However, this law was replaced by the local authority law which has actually deformed the local governance law from its content. In other words, all the wide-range authorities used to be granted to people in terms of electing general directors and governors are no more in the new draft of the local authority law. This is so mainly because these officials are to be appointed by the ruling power and not elected by the people.
The law has been endorsed despite all the limitations as well as violations it contains of the constitutional articles. The opposition forces, being very few, could do nothing to stop this except presenting a letter of complaint to the president which has not yet been responded to. Yemen Times interviewed some members of parliament and politicians representing different political blocs and parties, both from the authority and the opposition, and inquired about the way voting was conducted, the pros as well as the cons of the law, whether it was voted for by the majority or what other measures used to pass it. All this has been presented by Mohammed bin Salam of Yemen Times who filed the following:
The Local governance is a legal democratic practice in any democratic country, for citizens will take part in making their destiny and managing their affairs. Besides, they will be able to develop their community. However, what has been presented by the government can never be considered a local governance for the simple reason that it serves nothing except increasing the power of the administration centralization. It can never satisfy the ambitions and hopes of the Yemenis to handle their affairs. Appointing the districts directors and governors by a Republican decree is a flagrant violation of the constitution especially articles number 143 and 144. We are struggling to convince the high forces to re-consider the decision of endorsing the law. We have presented a letter to the president and we hold out hopes that the president will do justice and take the side of the constitution. Otherwise, we are going to bring the government to the Supreme Court.
A MP from the PGC quoting his words said that their party do not control except 61% of the Republic. Therefore, is it not rational that the party will never grant people many powers and authorities to nominate and elect the district’s directors and governors.
The ruling party has also oppressed the opposition members while discussing the draft law by not giving them the chance to talk. Besides, the amendments of the draft of the local authority were made by the parliament presidium without allowing members to check them or know what they were.
MP and Member of the PGC
Q: Could you please tell us how the law was approved?
A:What happened inside the parliament last weak was not expected from some members. In fact, it is the institution that organizes our life and since we have agreed on it we should not agree on something that does not agree with it. The items that go against the constitution were those related to electing heads of the local authorities either in governorates or districts. It is crystal clear that the items did not agree with the constitution, despite the attempts made by some members to convince others that it did. However, it was very clear, especially to those who are good at Arabic. Since the constitution gives us the freedom to elect or choose, we can begin with choosing which is not mostly different from electing and this was the opinion of the majority in the parliament. The majority agreed that there should be a gradual shifting of the law. For example, we begin with choosing 15 or 20 members from the Capital city and then 3 of them and from these three the president will choose one.
Q: How was the vote? Did the law really get the number required to be passed?
A: According to law there should be an agreement of the majority of the attendants and not the majority of the MPs as it used to be. There has been a heated discussion over this point, however, it is a healthy sign to have such arguments for the sake of the country.
Q: It was said that the attendants were not more than 150 and the result announced by the parliament was that 169 were for and 22 opposed and 19 abstained from voting. What is your comment?
A: I think the answer to this question should be by the Parliament presidency and Secretary because it was they who counted the attendants.
Q: Some members said that some names which were announced to be in favor of the law were actually of dead and absent members. What is your comment?
A: I have heard about the same thing.
Q: How such names appeared on the screen?
A: Actually, it seems that some colleagues try to do it on purpose.
Q: Was it not the Parliament presidency that is responsible for names appearing on the screen?
A: I do not know a lot about computers. In fact, I heard the Presidency warning against writing names of absentees.
Q: Local Authorities are important for strengthening and expanding democracy in the country. Do you think that the law passed by the parliament is satisfactory?
A: I think that the law is deficient and it will not meet the people’s ambitions and it will not solve the problem?
Q: What is the difference between this law and the Administration of Local Authority?
A: Of course some power has been given to the local authority. However, the local council will not be able to practice this power. I do not think that there is a difference because the control will be centralized.
Q: What about the different nomenclatures; the local authority, local governance and local administration, which one seems to suit our society most?
A: Of course, the constitution talks about the local governance and the government’s draft speaks of the local administration.
Q: Some members suggested that they would bring the case before the Constitutional Court if the President did not reconsider the law passed by the Parliament. Do you think that articles (143) and (144) upon which the draft of the local authority has been based need to be reconsidered?
A: In fact, we need to reconsider the articles of the law, not the constitution itself. The constitution was prepared and discussed by intellectual people. The ambiguity is in the law and not in the constitution. The constitution is very clear and the law in fact goes against it, in my opinion.
Q: What are advantages and disadvantages of this law?
A: The disadvantage is that the local authority will not be able to enjoy any power. The advantage is that it can be considered as a good beginning and a thing is better than nothing, at least we get used to such experience. However, I do not think that this will solve the problems and bring an end to the difficulties faced by the governorates and districts.
Q: Many MPs think that such a law in fact has been passed to reserve the system of centralization? What do you think?
A: This is right. If the district’s director gets orders from the governor and the governor gets orders from the minister and the minister gets orders from the Prime Minister and so on, where is the local governance? But as I have already stated that something is better than nothing.
Q: It is said that the PGC is in a real dilemma because it forms only 62% and it is facing the upcoming parliamentarian elections, so it had to create this law in order to ensure its existence in all over Yemen and thus guarantee its success in the upcoming elections. What is your comments?
A: I should say the PGC and the Islah. It was clear in the Parliament and all members realized this and one of the members announced that the Islah party agreed on the law. In fact we do not know the justifications of passing such a law. It is right that in some districts and governorates like Al-Jawf, it is difficult to get a response, But since we are determined that this experience should be lived, at least we should start in a right way. In fact we should believe in the peaceful transfer of power and in success and failure be us in the PGC or Islah or others.
Q: Any last word?
A: I hope that the law will be brought back to the parliament and that the president will amend what does not agree with the constitution.
Member of the PGC Permanent Committee
Q: The law of the local governance was passed by the parliament last Wednesday January 26th.
How did the vote take place and did it get the required majority?
A: Formally, it did get the required majority. There was a good number of the PGC members who voted for the law as it was. However, there was a hurry in voting for it. Members were supposed to read the last version before voting. In fact, there was a trend to pass the law despite its violations of the constitution. The members who opposed the law were motivated by those violations. The rest of the members voted just to please their party. There were also some members of Islah who voted for the law. I can say that the leadership of the two big parties were determined to pass the law.
Q: It was said that the attendants were not more than 150 and the result announced by the parliament was that 169 were for and 22 opposed and 19 abstentions. What is your comment?
A: I can not tell. It is difficult to know if the attendants were 150 or 170. However, this is not the point, the point is that the law was passed by the majority of the attendants and there was a desire to get the majority of the whole members and not only the attendants in order to make it strongly passed. Of course, some names of absent and dead members appeared on the list of the voters, however I can not tell who played with the computer keyboard. I think that this mistake resulted from the fear of not passing the law and the determination to pass it.
Q: Local Authorities are important for strengthening and expanding democracy in the country. Do you think that the law passed by the parliament is satisfactory?
A: I think that this law has nothing to do with the local governance or the local authority except the nomenclature. The law in fact is a reinforcement of centralization. It, in fact, establishes branches for centralization in all administrative units. I think that centralization will be even more strong because this law gives the right to the central authority to appoint heads of the administrative units. The law also gives them many authorities while members of the elected local councils are entitled to formal authorities. When the head of the administrative unit is appointed of course he will do what the central authority wants because he will be afraid of not being appointed the next time, consequently he will serve the party which appointed him more than the people. In addition, this law goes against article 4 in the constitution. If the people are not entitled to choose whom they know is able to serve them, where is democracy?
Q: What is the difference between this new law and the Ministry of Local Administration?
A: No difference. Just adding a decorated picture that the present system is democratic and decentralized. We hope that the president will realize these points and reconsider the law.
Q: If this does not happen, will you go to the Constitutional Court?
A: Some members have this idea but will they do it, I am not sure.
Q: What about the different nomenclatures; the local authority, local governance and local administration, which one seems to suit our society most?
A: The local authority, because it agrees with he constitution and I think that the nomenclature does not matter much if the content of the law does not really aim at establishing the local authority.
Q: What is the law that we desire?
A: We are looking for a real authority that care about people and has authorities parallel to that of the central authority. This is what we are dreaming of. I think that without electing the local authority and heads of administrative units there will be no real local authority.
Q: What are the advantages and disadvantages of the law?
A: I think that there will be no advantages for the law. As far as the advantages are concerned, I think that we will give the society a false picture about the existence of a local authority while in fact there is not. What will be there is nothing more than enhancing the system of centralization which has been proved to be a failure.
Statement about The Local Authority Draft Law
We the undersigned have studied vigorously the draft law of the local authority as it is considered to be of prime importance to life, stability, development, prosperity and national unity of our people and our democratic process.
It has become clear since the discussion of article (2) that the government has been determined to pass this law despite its violation to article (143) of the constitution. This led to postpone voting for the law many times despite the opposition of many members. When discussions on the issue of appointing governors in spite of its violation to article (143), we were surprised at the determination of the Parliament presidency to pass article (33) as it was without discussing the postponed articles. This, of course, caused some dissatisfaction among the members. With passing this law and the support of the majority of the attendants a certain kind of disappointment overshadowed the place. Consequently, this led to passing the rest of the articles: (34) to (113) without discussions. Even when the members got rid of their shock articles (113) and (164) were not seriously discussed. After this a number of members requested the re-discussion of articles: (33, 43, 44, 56, 60, 73) hoping that the majority will reconsider its attitude that was against the constitution. Unfortunately, the majority did not pay this an y attention, for this reason we would like to clarify the following:
1- Appointing the Head of the administrative unite is against article (143) in the first place, and appointing the chairman of the local council instead of electing him is against article (4) of the constitution.
2- The content of the law does not agree with the contents of articles: (4,143,144,145) of the constitution.
3- We have noticed that sessions of the parliament are run in a way that does not agree with its standing order, especially when discussion important projects.
——
[archive-e:05-v:2000-y:2000-d:2000-01-31-p:./2000/iss05/l&d.htm]
