Mr. Victor A. Butler (UNDP Consultant) to the Yemen Times: There is a democratic process of work here. The constitution provides that if you want to make changes this is the way to do and that process is being followed [Archives:2000/43/Interview]

Mr. Victor A. Butler is an expert at International Public Service Sector Management, Training and Election Consultant, UN. Yemen Times interviewed him during his recent UNDP/UNEAD mission in Yemen, and filed the following:
Q: Could you tell us a bit about your self?
A: I started working initially for the British Local Government for about 20 years, not continuously, in England and other countries.
My first contact with elections was in 1965, at base level in Britain. As time went by I progressed in my career and I took more responsible work and I was involved in preparation for polling and making sure the legal procedures were complied with and all other aspects of the electoral process essentially. And I have worked in elections when the whole system was done manually, and also now when everything is computerized. So I know exactly what happens in the election process.
Ive got into international work since 1971, when I took leave of absence from my work to do my masters. At the end of which I worked on this process with a number of students from various countries, and got interested in the idea of working in other countries, not in term of elections but in terms of training the local government staff, I worked in Zambia, Papua New Guinea, that time was the nearest I got to the election process. Then I moved on to Malawi in the late 80s and early 90s. At that time I didnt want to go back to work in the British local government and one of the developing topics at that time was election related work. In 1993 I went to Cambodia, and again to Pakistan. In 1994 I was there in South Africa when the elections were taking place. And then I went again to Malawi because the system had changed, and they had their first elections under that system. And again in 1995 I went to South Africa again and so on.
Q: Is this your first encounter in an Arabian Country?
A: It is in that sense. But its my third visit to Yemen. I was here last year with IFES for a period of time when we were doing a report on the management structure and issues for the organization of the SEC (Supreme Election Committee.) And then I came back in August this year with the team UNDP and the election assistance group that the UN posted in New York, had put together. And we produced an assessment for the April 2000 elections which got postponed. And here I am again to look at the new situation and see what the UNDP can do in that situation to assist the process and to ensure that there is support for the SEC.
Q: What is your task basically in mission?
A: My job is to look at the nature of the referendum. In particular the nature of the question, how it is proposed, how the voters of Yemen have been asked to vote on the constitutional amendments. In some countries each member would require a separate vote by the citizens. That is extremely complicated to explain to the people here that they are asked to make a number of choices on the separate constitutional members. And I think I get a sense in my discussions that there will be one question on the whole package on the amendments. I am not sure that that will be the best way to handle it because after all these amendments cover a range of different issues, some environmental, some of them economic, some of them political and perhaps some compromise should be considered to divide it to a number of separate areas before the vote.
The danger is that if some feel strongly against some aspects of the constitutional changes, the only way which they could register that is to reject everything, rather than being able to make a reasonable judgment. On the other hand that maybe expecting too much in a country where the level of understanding the constitution is still low. And lets face it. Peoples main concern on daily basis is to put food in the mouths of their families and themselves. It is a luxury to consider matters of politics and take it in the abstract.
Q: How did you conduct your mission?
A: I have been here only for 12 days, in which I managed to speak with a number of the donors of the international community here like the British, the German, the Dutch, a fair section of the international community. I held talks with representatives of Islah, GPC and YSP. I spoke with Uniformed Constitution Defense Committee. I talked, of course, with a few UN colloquies. I have been to discuss issues on two occasions now at the SEC with government and senior members of the election committee.
And I have talked to representatives of NDI ( National Democratic Institute), IFES (International Foundation for Election System) and ERIS (Election Reform International Services). I have sounded a wide range of opinions in this limited time.
Q: What have you concluded?
A: Some of those opinions are negative about the changes proposed. There are concerns among the donor community in some of the specialist organizations which support the election process, also by some civil societies and the parties about the nature of the changes. Concern is expressed about the idea that the duration of the parliament should extend to 6 years instead of four years, and like wise the presidents term will be extended. People are uncomfortable with this, they see it is a step back in the democratic process. The argument presented on the other side is that the election process is expensive, which I accept and I also accept that the SEC at the moment is not well equipped and well organized as it would like to be, and deliver the elections against a very tight line of time. Also they are planning to have both the local and the house representatives elections in a parallel manner and that would be a very complicated task. Whether that in the end is what happens remains to be seen, but putting those two processes of elections together would be quite complicated.
Q: There are many murmurs that the process is democratic only in the surface level not in the core. What do you say?
A: I think that is not entirely accurate. There is a democratic process of work here. The constitution provides that if you want to make changes this is the way to do and that process is being followed. In other countries if the leadership wants to make changes they simply pass the decree and nobody has any option other than to accept it. So I think that is a positive thing here. And not only the representatives of the parliament are asked to participate but intellectuals from different sectors are asked to. like education, law, health, media, NGOs and others.
Q: How could the media participate in this process?
A: The media certainly has a significant role to play, in educating the people to understand what they are being asked to consider, what the chances for them, what the implications are for the nation. Equally I think it is encouraging to see, like we saw in the two days, the discussion was held in the forum which the speakers committee conveyed to enable people who are not representatives of the parliament to take part. Both the parties and the civil societies are interested in the process to voice their views and opinions on the proposed changes before the parliament decides so that the parliament gets a chance to hear them and take their opinions into account I think that is very healthy.
Q: What are the implications of these changes for the rest of the world?
A: That is a difficult question. That comes back to the concerns of the donors that Yemen is stepping back from the democratic commitment in these changes. And if this perception, is maintained, then of course the donors community may lose confidence in Yemen as a partner for their support, in terms of the government, and support for the electoral process, or in terms of the other support that they are prepared to put forward to assist Yemen in its development issues.
Also international investors may feel less comfortable. And this is the message that the donors send back to their home countries, that unfortunately the track that Yemen was following is not being continued.
Q: What about the report that you are presenting to the UN?
A: The report that I am presenting will essentially say that the UN is not on the same footing as the other donors. It is a global organization to which Yemen belongs. Therefor an agency of the UN such as the UNDP is not quite the same position as a donor. When the government of Yemen and the SEC make an approach for assistance, UN has to view this in a slightly different line,And to look at whether it is legitimate for the UNDP to assist Yemen in its electoral process. My recommendations will essentially be that this should persist the in period after the referendum. That experts should be placed in the SEC in order to provide advice, support, guidance, to the chairman of the SEC in taking forward the work of the SEC for the referendum. Both in terms of technical issues and in terms of developing the mundane of the SEC to inform the people. That is a part of the role of the SEC; to ensure that the people know the whole process and how they make their choices and clearly what the issue is, they are going out to decide.
So, its something, which I feel worked on balance. The UNDP should be in support of the SEC.
Q: Do you think that Yemens lose in terms of the donors is a short term lose or a long term lose?
A: I hope Yemens lose because of the changes is a short term lose. Only time could tell. But I get the sense referring to the people in the government that they perhaps had not got their message across to the donor community clearly. Would they have done more public relations at the time when the constitutional amendments were tabled then they might have not got such a negative reaction as happening at the present time from some of the donor community. If the results come out positively, surely perceptions would change. And that is again something the UNDP has a role in. because if we had people working in the SEC then we are in a position to say to the donor community that this is being a legitimate process. If not then we wouldnt be in a position to the note shortcomings in that process. But we are working hard to ensure that it works satisfactory, and as best as possible.
Q: What do you think the next plan should be in terms of elections for the government, people and SEC?
A: I think that one of the things I heard and bothers me is that elections are expensive. It is not a process without substantial cost. But as I said to a senior person in the GPC, the alternative ways of changing your government can much more expensive than elections. And that has to be born in mind as well. I am sure I dont really need to tell that to people here.
Q: Do you think there is any inclinations for other alternatives?
A: That is what the election process is all about. Even if the same party or the same side maintains its self in power over many years. It is doing so with the assentation of the people. Because they have returned it to power over many years. So it does not govern by right. It governs by popular will. If it steers down to a path that the majority of people do not like. Then they could change it through the democratic process. and then that in essence is the democratic process in work. But that does not mean every time there are elections there is a change of government, but every time there are elections there is a potential of change in the government.
Q: What are your expectations in the next two months from now?
A: Well I would hope if we decide to put technical expertise into the SEC, that we would get someone there within the next month. I think we need people in place as quickly as possible. And that would be my target. And this is what I am telling New York, that they must act as quickly as possible. Whether I came back again or not at some later date further and view things, remains to be seen, but its a possibility. But we need some solid support for the SEC on a day to day basis. So that there is somebody there with a depth of knowledge and experience to be able to give the advice that the chairman needs, based won has happened elsewhere and the things tackled. So that the chairman feels that there is a possibility of an outside experience so that more satisfactory outputs are resulted. If you got knowledge and experience of how things were conducted in a satisfactory way in some part of the world, then that transfers across. Because even if the details differ, the base remains the same, its all about enabling people to make choices in a free and frequent fashion.
And to ensure that the process is not only fair and satisfactory conducted but that people recognize that as well. Because there have been elections where have been elections were legitimate but people could not accept the result because thing which happened by mischance, not deliberate. Make people understand that they are using their rights not only using them.
Q: What is your next step?
A: My next step is to ensure that my report is one the desk of the UNDP and the SEC representative tomorrow, and a copy goes to New York. Then I am going on a holiday to Ireland. And then when I come back well see how things have moved on.

——
[archive-e:43-v:2000-y:2000-d:2000-10-23-p:./2000/iss43/intrview.htm]