Other parties’ stands concerning local elections and constitutional amendments League of Yemen Sons (Rai) to Say “NO” The Nasserite Democratic Party to Say “YES” [Archives:2001/05/Law & Diplomacy]
January 29 2001
Head of the Main Office of the League of Yemen Sons League Party
“Local government is an important pillar of any democracy. No developing country can improve unless every one of its citizen contributes to the improvement of democracy.
Striving for local government is a public demand that should come hand in hand with democracy. Those who treat it as something beyond reality tend to ignore the great sacrifices of national pioneers and movement leaders throughout history.
Local councils are not a totally new experience for Yemen. Before unification, there used to be cooperative authorities with reasonable self-governance in former north Yemen. Without doubt, the upcoming local councils are much more democratic and independent. However, there was an attempt by the government to merge these authorities with local councils in 1985 and this shows that local councils have always been on the mind of the leadership.
In the former south Yemen, we used to have local public councils which were, despite people’s participation, controlled and directed by the government. In 1956, the League of Yemen Sons Party was able to establish a unique example of local governance in the Lahj Sultanate. It established a constitution that guaranteed the rights of all citizens and abolished anarchy by conducting elections. An independent judicial system and court were also established. This experience did not appeal to the British colonial rulers who realized the danger represented by the spread of this phenomenon to other Sultanates. So they invaded Lahj in 1985 and arrested the leaders of the League Party.
The League of Yemen Sons bases its position on its political ideology and its realization of local, regional and global changes. Our party was the first to call for the adoption of decentralization in the country, and presented a complete draft law for local elections. The government of the unified Yemen responded by issuing the Local Authority Law which has many drawbacks and contradicted some the constitution’s core articles. So the government has called for modifications to the constitution to suit their new law, instead of the other way around.
The stand of our party in regard to the local council elections is clear and decisive. Our party:
1) will not boycott the local elections.
2) will not make any decisions in regard to the nomination of candidates.
3) has the full freedom to react to any political maneuver according to the general concepts and norms of the party.
4) encourages the nomination of honest independent candidates.
We have decided to participate in the elections to strengthen democratic practice in our beloved country. But we also know that guaranteeing fair and serious elections is a prerequisite for the success of the whole process, and save it from becoming no more than an artificial decoration. Therefore, the League of Yemen Sons believes that the commitment of the Supreme Election Committee to have a fair and accurate election process during all the different stages of the elections is vital for the success of this democratic process. We, as the League of Yemen Sons Party, openly expressed our opinion and clarified our vision to the Conference on Electoral Development Administration in March 1999, in which we affirmed the importance of the participation of all parties, under the conditions of fairness and equal opportunities.
As for the constitutional amendments, we openly reject them and call upon the public to say “NO” to them. We believe that even the constitutional amendments that were applied after the 1994 civil war are not adequate and only served the victorious side, at that time the PGC and Islah. Moreover, the constitution amendments cause more confusion and includes more drawbacks, including:
1) Vagueness in describing how peaceful transfer of power should be carried out.
2) Lack of steps as to how to deal with the election of the vice president once the president is elected.
3)Constraint of democracy by requesting a 10% approval from the parliament before nominating presidential candidates.
4) Ambiguity in articles concerning the economy, and lack of guarantees of capitals and investment.
5) Judiciary and local authorities both controlled by excessive authority.
6) Founds a Shoura Council with no more than artificial authority.
7) Local councils have no right to elect their chairmen.
Despite all the negative aspects of the local authority law and constitutional amendments, we still insist on not boycotting the upcoming local council elections. We believe that total acceptance and total rejection are a fashion of the past, which should not be adopted any more. We need to go forward and express our views openly, and hope for a good result in the coming elections.”
Nasserite Democratic Party Secretary General
“In order to start our debate about the importance of local council elections, we first need to go back to the local authority law so as to understand the authorities involved and their duties. The law has in some sense presented a wide range of guidelines and given reasonable authority to the newly established councils if compared to the previously established local councils, except for the nomination of the governors and districts directors. This means that if and only if voters cast their votes for those who truly deserve to be elected, will our democratic practice be pushed forward. I believe that success in enforcing laws will be one of the main priorities and responsibilities of local councils.
“I support the view that it is better to be optimistic than pessimistic because I feel that local councils will emerge to serve the public, and then political reforms may follow, leading to the enforcement of state laws. This is of great significance, especially when remembering that many violations in administrative, financial and security sectors are attributed to the fact that effective laws are not enforced.
“It seems to me that the biggest difference between the current councils and the previous councils is that the current ones are being set up in a reasonably real democratic environment. It is worth noting that authority is to be granted to local councils in many fields including social development, service and administration, financial development, planning, education, health, security, plus others. All these will positively affect the lives of the Yemeni people. If these councils work properly, there will certainly be remarkable benefit for the public and an increase in the standards of living. Members of these councils will also be protected by law so as they can never be harmed by officials usually appointed by some corrupt governors. The constitution gives these members the right to have a say in the councils and a simple vote could easily cause loss of confidence in these officials and consequently lead to their removal from their position. This will certainly make the government select qualified officials in these councils and local council members themselves may be removed if proven passive or not productive for their respective regions.
It could be true that affiliating the local councils to the Ministry of Local Government would decreases the possibilities of success, especially as we are at the initial stages when more authority and independence are vital for the success of the forthcoming local councils. On the other hand, if local councils are abiding by the law and making use of the authority they are given so as to serve their communities and people, then there would be little effect from the government’s supervision and interference.
All in all, what is important in this democratic practice we are going through, is that the public’s opinion be heard. What is also important is the participation of different parties in a hopefully reasonably fair electoral process.
As for the campaign launched by other parties against the constitutional amendments, we do respect it but we do not agree with it. We have the view that these amendments do not constitute a setback to our democracy. Rather they are necessary steps needed due to social and economic changes taking place world-wide. Some of them are actually measures to enhance our democratic transition and help expand the basis of participation. Besides, these amendments are not the first of their kind. This is the second time that such amendments have been suggested. The actual public referendum on amendments, electing the president and defining his term in office by two rounds, and electing local councils, are all the fruits of the first amendments which in my view were a way to enhance democracy.
In short, the current amendments are not a setback from the democratic transition, just as the constitutional reforms are not a setback. We are also against the belief that the SEC is taking sides with the PGC because there are many members formally representing different political parties in the SEC. These members were from many different parties including PGC, Islah and the YSP. They were also chosen by the members of Parliament.
——
[archive-e:05-v:2001-y:2001-d:2001-01-29-p:./2001/iss05/l&d.htm]
