“In a few months, the tenure of the most stable government in decades will come to an end,” Netanyahu said. “This stability has helped us achieve the two main objectives we promised the citizens of Israel – to strengthen security at a time when a dangerous upheaval is gripping the Middle East, and [to fortify] the economy during … a financial turmoil.”

“We must maintain a responsible economic and defense policy,” Netanyahu added, “to ensure that Iran does not have a nuclear bomb.” He said that early elections are a “national interest,” and thanked the citizens of Israel for the privilege they have granted him.

The prospect of early elections arose after minister Yishai (Interior) said his party, Shas, would not support wide-ranging budget cuts, particularly cuts to benefits for the elderly, single-parent families and the poor.

Observers agree that it is unlikely that Israel will attack Iran in the meantime. In fact Netayahu indicated already that much in his recent speech or the United Nations, when he positioned his ‘red line’ in the spring of just before the beginning of the summer.

AUTHOR: Martin Hijmans
URL: http://the-pessoptimist.blogspot.com/
E-MAIL: m.hijmans [at] planet.nl

red Judge Damian Lubuva (l) with President Jakaya Kikwete (R)

One of the highly respected judges in Tanzania Justice Damian Lubuva recently failed to satisfy his audience how he could balance his loyalty between the president and that of his duty as chairman of the National Electoral Commission (NEC).

Justice Lubuva was guest of honour at the International Conference with a theme Elections and Transitions to Democracy in Africa, where he presented his paper with a title Elections Management in Africa: Tanzania Experience.
The two days conference was held at the Coral Beach Hotel in Dar es Salaam a fortnight ago. Distinguished academicians in the field of politics, law and management of elections presented their papers.

The conference was organized in collaboration of two research institutions namely the African Research and Resource Forum (ARRF) and the Tanzania based Economic and Social Research Foundation (ESRF).

In the opening speech the host CEO, Dr Bohela Lunogelo, executive director of the ESRF urged participants to discuss the tabled matters freely without fear or favour due to the sensitivity of matters of governance and democracy in the African continent.

“In discussing issues of democracy and management of elections in Africa we need to acknowledge to the evidence based researches given the challenges that this continent has been facing for quite some time now,” he commented.

Bu the core of this discussion was when the chairman of Tanzania’s independent constitution forum, Jukwaa la Katiba, Deus Kibamba when he explained during his presentation that the voter’s apathy in Tanzania has partly been caused by lack of trust that voters have to the NEC.

Moreover, Kibamba said that other reasons are irregularities which are caused by sheer negligence and at times excessive use of the Police Force which distract women to participate fully in the electoral process.

“People do not see any benefit of participating in the elections process if their votes will not bring changes, so they have desperately given up,” he said.

Expanding more his subject Kibamba added, “It has also been noted that there is excessive use of force in areas that are highly contested, people detests to be harassed by law enforcers who at time even teargas them unnecessarily,” he added.

Kibamba criticizes the trend whereby the President of the United Republic of Tanzania is the one who appoints the chairman of the Electoral Commission and his commissioners. It was at this juncture that the NEC chairman protested that he has not been interrupted in his work anyhow.

Justice Lubuva also said that even incidents of Police interruptions are so few and isolated to the extent they cannot be termed as causes of voter’s apathy.

“I think Kibamba is exaggerating the situation is not that bad, these are not the main reasons of voter’s apathy probably there are other reasons we should find out,” Lubuva affirmed.

But in what might be seen as the support to Kibamba’s stance was representative of the main opposition party Chama cha Demokrasia na Maendeleo (CHADEMA), Victor Kimesera who acknowledged that people do not trust the NEC.

“I am 74 years old and I understand how people were motivated during the independence struggles in this country, now people lack that kind of motivation because they do not trust our election management body,” he commented.

Kimesera said that he has been contesting since the re-introduction of multiparty in 1992 but he has been losing due the mismanagement by the NEC.
Moreover Kibamba and Kimesera felt even more comfortable when contributions from outsiders also said that it was difficult for the election body to work independently if the entire leadership is made up of the presidential appointees.

From Sierra Leone, West Africa was an election expert Dr Shekou Sessay, who commented, “it is very difficult to expect a person who has been appointed by the president to turn against him or even to be impartial, I think it would have been better for the chairman and his commissioners to be scrutinized first by an independent body like the parliament, “he said.

But probably this academic would have suggested of another body if he was aware of the dominance the ruling party Chama Cha Mapinduzi has in the august House.

Leaving aside Tanzania politics, it was the response from Uganda’s army spokesperson Major Felix Kulaije who was irritated by presenters who said that soldiers should remain where they belong, the barracks and leave politics to the civilians.

“I am surprised that the discussion here is against soldiers who turn to politics, we should understand that soldiers intervene when politicians have failed to manage their countries, actually it is politicians who ‘invites’ us to ‘rescue’ the situation,” he retorted causing laughter in the hall.

The harsh attack against soldiers was provoked by a presentation from a Kenyan professor who referred to such situations of military dominance in the Democratic Republic of Congo, in Rwanda and Uganda.

Prof Nyong’o went further by even criticizing the civil society and the media by becoming other uninvited guests in the political arena in African politics.

“The civil society and the media are now involved in active politics which they are not supposed to do, this is an invasion indeed,” commented the professor causing astonishment in the hall.

As if to respond to him was Zimbabwe’s Dr Donald Chimanikire an expert in politics who said that you cannot isolate the civil society and the media in politics because the former is pressure groups while the latter is an avenue where politicians meet with their subjects.

But another issue which drew considerable attention was a Governments of National Unity (GNU) as it is the case in Kenya, Zanzibar and Zimbabwe. Some participants saw them being retrogressive while others approved them due to the prevailing political circumstances in the respective countries.

Profesa Nyong’o said that in Kenya there were agreements which were made in 2002, and subsequently after referendum which led to the formation of the National Alliance of Rainbow Coalition (NARC) but these were violated leading to the 2007 post-election violence.

The ARRF Executive Director Prof. Michael Chege who is a Kenyan said that GNUs are just representatives of the democracy which has been denied to the winners, he was supported by George Omondi also a Kenyan.

But in quite a different stance was Prof Gaudence Mpangala from Institute of Development Studies of the University of Dar es Salaam who said in Zanzibar the GNU has proved to be productive.

“I have been an observer in Zanzibar General Elections since 1995 to the most recent one in 2010 and I have observed the GNU has been one source of peace because it was arranged prior to the election and the agreement was the winner becomes the president the loser becomes his vice this was tactical and indeed it has changed the political scenario in Zanzibar,” he commented.

Since gender issues were part of the discussion Prof Maria Nzomo from Kenya said that women are sidelined from African politics because at times they are scared to vote if elections are violent and at times they cannot contest because abusive languages are used against them by their male counterparts.

“I recommend that African Governments provide friendlier environments for women to participate without any kind of fear,” she commented.

But with all these discrepancies it was noted that many of the African governments were far ahead in allowing changes than in the Arab countries, since a good number of African countries experienced upheavals in early 90s and now they are relatively calm.

“What is happening in Egypt, Tunisia and even now Syria is what happened in many countries in Africa immediately after the crumble of the USSR, and its entire satellite states of East Europe said Prof Chege.

Other issues which drew attention although to a small extent were the Union matter between Mainland Tanzania and the Zanzibar isles. Moreover the academics sent a strong call for the two presidents Yoweri Museveni of Uganda and Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe to step down in time in order to avoid chaos in their countries this is after they have overstayed in power to the extent of lacking a new political agenda.

The conference also decided the role of religious leaders in African politics, that they should be agents of positive change rather than cause division based on religious inclinations.

And this was not to put aside the debate on the rulings of the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the meaning of the concept of “the international community” there was a perception that this court is biased and discriminating African leaders.

Probably one of the most disliked debates but surfaced in the conference was marriages and love affairs of people of same sex, the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transsexual and Inter sex (LGBTIs).

Caption
1. Retired Judge Damian Lubuva (l) with President Jakaya Kikwete (R)
2. Deus Kibamba chairman ‘Jukwaa la Katiba’ an independent Tanzania’s Constitutional’s Forum

AUTHOR: Elias Mhegera
URL: http://mhegeraelias.blogspot.com
E-MAIL: mhegeraelias [at] yahoo.com

Web page: www.cipamericas.org

Facebook: CIP Americas Program

AUTHOR: Laura Carlsen
URL: www.cipamericas.org and http://americasmexico.blogspot.com
E-MAIL: lecarlsen [at] gmail.com

Optimism reverberates as the so called Main Street individuals count their blessings; They are happy, the new president, said during his campaign that he would take care of them, the MOFINA (Surinamese: the poor), unlike the incumbency (Venetiaan Administration) who for fifteen years, did nothing to help out the poor. People hoped that the new government would work on the redistribution of land, do great things for the country, such as for example, build extensive infrastructures (a road all the way to Brasil).

They decried the fact that President Venetiaan had turned its back, and failed to communicate, failed to tell the people about the challenges they had to deal with, the possible difficulties. These people felt left-out, divorced from mainstream society, and the traditional ethnic parties had failed to see that ethnicity no longer determined the primary political cleavages, class, the divide between the haves and the have-nots had become the primary cleavage during the 2010 elections.

On social media this footage brought on feelings of repulsion and disgust. People wrote that they did not understand why ‘these people’ supported and venerated Mr Bouterse.  Many people on social media belong to the upper and middle classes, and have little in common with the man in the street, the so called hosselaars, the poor street vendors and small scale gold traders (Sranan; English: Hustlers), most often young urban poor, with limited education and/or skills. The people on FACEBOOK have a different reference cadre, they are part of the so called global village, modernity, Europe, American, Latin American and Asian. Urban poor youth on the other hand feeds from a different culture, Sranan-style, Black American, African and Anglo Caribbean. The cultural gap echoes the deep social and economic divide of a struggling, juxtaposing society in the permanent throes of transition and in constant search for its identity.  

The people in the street strongly expressed their need for autonomy, for freedom to make choices, to have a future, to simply become part of society. One of the interviewees remarks: “What I want is a  permit to sell my goods on the street (…)” ,another one: I want a piece of land to build a house”. They all believed that Suriname would be better off after Five years of penury and disenfranchisement. 

The sad story is that behind these verbalized desires lies a gamut of lies, told by a presidential candidate driven by political opportunism and greed. Today, as the people continue to hold on to their dream, that Suriname will become ‘Nirvana-upon-Suriname’, the new president is turning the country into a undemocratic society, governed by paramilitary and tugs.

For example, on this date, June 19, 2012, a local newspaper writes that profits from gold-mining amasses $1 billion. International credit rating agencies esteemed Suriname’s macro-economic position as sound (BB-rating). But who will benefit? The Mofina, the backbone of the president or his inner circle?  Non of the things promised to the mofina came through,  non of the plans, set out during hour long speeches by the president have materialized. But the president and his cabinet are not to blame, so they say; both avid supporters and the presidential PR machinery are quick to point their fingers at ‘others’, dissidents in the coalition and a disobedient opposition. Is it indeed plausible that government is crossed and obstructed by parliamentary and outer-parliamentary oppositions? Is it plausible that Mr Bouterse is marred by infighting and side-stepped by his opponents?

It is for the sake of discourse interesting to find out if the current government is indeed impeded by obstruction and an ill-willed opposition. But the reality tells a different tale: given the parliamentary majority, obstruction by the opposition is highly unlikely. Party discipline and strict control prevent dissidence within the ranks of the coalition. In other words, government and parliament have free reign, as the amnesty law exemplifies.The manner in which it became enacted, a shift blitz-krieg type of action executed by the most fateful and most loyal MP’s of the Nationale Democratische Partij is illustrative of their numerical superiority. The opposition could do nothing more than watch, hands tied, unable to block this controversial proposal. But the clamorous Mofina feel that the government can do no wrong, for them the president is a Messianic figure who will eventually liberate them from poverty and mayhem.

The irony is that these fateful and loyal followers, are the first victims of bad government, repression, injustice and discrimination. Double digit inflation made life and living harder for the poor. Permits to sell goods on the street never came, and acquiring a piece of land will not happen under this administration. The current government also pays little attention to the needs poor. The socio-economic disparities in Suriname have become more significant. Lack of entrepreneurial opportunities, and joblessness disproportionately affect the young urban poor. Many young poor and jobless individuals become petty criminals to make end meet. But as the rising criminality have been reeking havoc in and around town since the 1970s and disgruntled citizens have been calling for action for the longest time. Those who can afford it have been using private security to protect their belongings since the late 1990s. But criminality seems to have reached unprecedented highs. The new justice minister indeed came with a crime plan, approved by the president. But the patience of the public was running out and the heist in jewelry shop in one of the Malls,was the last drop, and government had to do something to restore calm and order. 

Police started a frenzied manhunt….. or so it seemed. They said they did everything in their power to capture and apprehend the perpetrators and they were killed by the police while running from the law…or so it appeared. The story of anonymous posted in online on www.Mamjo.com put a different light on the story of the Chief of Police and the Attorney General, it explains the bullet ridden car and the massive front torso trauma of the death victims (I have see footage of the bodies) . Let me say that the story of this source is not corroborated by hard evidence. Its fact-value is based on what was revealed by other sources and what is logical based on the evidence of the car and the bodies.

1. There is evidence that small scale gold miners are evicted from their concessions, chased away by Dino Bouterse and his group. This story was revealed by Apinti TV in 2011. There is also evidence linking Dino Bouterse to the under world, with narco-trafficking and arms trading (see previous postings). And all these stories correspond with the information provided by an anonymous source that the gunning down was carried out by a death squat led by Dino Bouterse, the presidents son. 

Dino Bouterse beheerst momenteel samen met enkele handlangers grote delen van de Surinaamse onderwereld. Vrijwel alle grote berovingen worden vanuit dit clubje gecoordineert en uitgevoerd. Soms door zijn eigen mannetjes (met een militaire achtergrond) of door andere rovers die samen met hem werken. Vrijwel alle grote berovingen van de afgelopen 2 jaren komen uit deze hoek. Aangezien men via de CIVD mensen kan afluisteren en tracen komt men aan veel gevoelige financiele informatie. (English translation: Dino Bouterse, together with a few cronies rules the Surinamese under world. Since two years the bulk of all big heists are coordinated and carried out by them, sometimes by his own people (former military) and sometimes by professional tugs who work with him. Through the state they can get their hands on classified financial information.

2.  Today, the online Magazine Obsession published the story of the families of two of the men that were killed by a special police (military) squat last week. According them, their relatives were gunned down, one of the wives, recalled that she saw the riddled car passing her by, while speaking to her husband on the phone. Another relative describes her son as a rehabilitated petty criminal who had turned his live around. This story corresponds with the version of the anonymous source that ‘they’ contacted so called rehabilitated criminals and one of them is confirmed to have been a small scale gold trader:

Er werd contact gemaakt met deze 4 oudbekenden van de politie die lange tijd niks meer hadden gedaan. Maar als je eenmaal in de onderwereld zit dan heb je bepaalde contacten. Er werd aan ze gevraagd of ze geen goud wilden kopen en er werd een afspraak gemaakt om elkaar op een bepaalde locatie te ontmoeten. Daar aangekomen werden ze gelijk doodgeschoten en aan ons werd verteld dat de daders van de beroving in de Mall waren aangehouden. (English translation: They contacted four former [rehabilitated] criminals asking them if they wanted to buy gold and they set up an appointment to meet at a certain hour and at a certain location. Upon arrival they were immediately gunned down)

Conclusion

Last week, human rights organizations filed charges against the state of Suriname, alleging that the four men were killed in an act of police violence. The Attorney General Mr. Punwasi recanted on his original stance in support of the police chiefs’ rendition of events and announced further investigation of the killings. The Attorney General, whose name is mentioned by the anonymous as an accomplice, in 2001 refused to grant a warrant for the arrest of Mr. Bouterse, a suspect in the killing of 15 political adversaries. This latest affair involving the police chief and other members of the prosecution’s office raises new questions on the corruptibility of the Surinamese Justice system. Because as it stands, everybody runs the risk of falling prey to the arbitrariness of Surinamese police and justice system. 

The political ramifications are however massive and irreversible, because inundation of the justice system by the under world seriously undermines democracy. I predict that the political consequences will have a greater impact than one can possibly phantom at this particular moment. There is at this point in time, no clear evidence that the traditional parties are in sync with reality. Many people continue to see the protest vote of the Mofina as something stupid, something irrational.  People on social media blame the Mofina for the crisis, instead of accepting the fact that this specific category of people sent out a powerful message to the nomenclature that they wanted and want change. Suriname is in that sense not unique, everywhere in the world the gap between the haves and the have-nots had widened and continues to widen under the pressures of merit-based social structures and technological advancement. All these developments bring about a slew of unwanted and unwelcome byproducts, such as the rise of the extreme right in Europe and socio-economic marginalization of the poor in the USA. The difference between Suriname and the aforementioned societies is that Suriname is an electoral democracy while the rest are considered polyarchies.

AUTHOR: Natascha Adama
URL: http://natascha23.blogspot.com
E-MAIL: nataliapestova23 [@] yahoo.com

Egypt's Supreme Constitutional Court. (Photo Virginie Nguyen/Egypt Independent). After the reading of the decisions some fights broke out, outside the building.

Egypt’s Supreme Constitutional Court (SCC) took two decisions on Thursday that effectively changed the political landscape and created a kind of constitutional labyrinth. It ruled that a third of parliament is unconstitutional (which effectively dissolves Parliament and returns legislative powers to the military) and it affirmed the legality of former Prime Minister Ahmed Shafiq’s bid to the presidency.

AUTHOR: Martin Hijmans
URL: http://the-pessoptimist.blogspot.com/
E-MAIL: m.hijmans [at] planet.nl

Josefina Vázquez Mota

The Citizen’s Front in Defense of an Effective and Free Vote presented a poll done by the company Berumen and Associates, whose results throw a technical draw between Enrique Peña Nieto and Andrés Manuel López Obrador, candidates to the presidency of the republic under the PRI-Green Party and PRD-PT-Citizens’ Movement coalitions, respectively, followed by Josefina Vázquez Mota, from the PAN, in a distant third place.

Ordered by the Observatorio Universitario Electoral (Electoral College Observatory), composed mainly by academics of the Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana (Metropolitan Autonomous University), the Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (National Autonomous University of Mexico) and El Colegio de México (The College of Mexico), the poll establishes the following data regarding voting intention: EPN, 35.9 per cent; AMLO, 31.9 and JV, 20.7.

In the event, John M. Ackerman gave a context presentation, followed by Amílcar Sandoval who read a rebuttal statement to the one displayed by IFE published during the weekend, in which he affirmed that the electoral umpire presents severe deficiencies fulfilling its role, citing as an example the topic of polls, where the Institute behaves as a mere registrar office by receiving reports on the methodologies without bringing them under analysis.

Edmundo Berumen (general director of the polling company) followed, offering various methodological details on the exercise of registering voters’ preferences: a sample designed under a strictly probabilistic approach to be applied in 600 electoral sections of the national territory. A total of 3 thousand 480 completed interviews were collected, raised between 30 May and 6 June, respecting the implementation of the sample design up until the household level, with up to three visits per household and without a substitution scheme, among other characteristics.

It should be made clear that, according to Berumen, the majority of the polls thus far released in this electoral process do not go over more than 200 electoral sections nor do they respect the probabilistic approach.

According to Ackerman, the poll shows that the ongoing process turned into an election between two, as recently pointed out by Reforma’s poll, and, he noted, is not the poll in this newspaper the one that is out of range but the others – that sustain that a lead very ahead of the rest of the contenders continues to exist- even if they are the majority, because polls are not about majorities but about scientific rigor.

AUTHOR: Laura Carlsen
URL: www.cipamericas.org and http://americasmexico.blogspot.com
E-MAIL: lecarlsen [at] gmail.com

Posters of one of the progressive candidates that not are going to win: Hamdeen Sabahy of the Nasserist Karameh (Dignity) party. He's of rather humble descent, consequently his slogan is 'One of us'. (Reuters).

Egyptians are going to the polls today and tomorrow for the first round of the presidential elections. There are 13 candidates, but only four of them stand a chance to win. All four of them belong in one way or other to the conservative establishment. Two are remnants of the Mubarak era: Amr Moussa was Mubarak’s foreign minister and his choice for the post of secretary-general of the Arab Ligue, and Ahmed Shafiq was Mubarak’s last prime minister. Two others are islamists: Abdel-Moneim Abouel Foutouh is a ‘moderate’, and Mohamed Morsi is the candidate of the Muslim Brotherhood.

The Egyptian revolution was initiated by workers (the textile workers of Mehallat al-Kubra for instance) and spearheaded by young, well educated members of the middle classes who formed the nucleus of the portest of Tahrir and in other cities. A large majority of the Egyptians however is not progressive at all. They may have been happy with the disappearance of the Mubarak-dynastie, but at the moment they are strongly in favour of stability, security and family values. Consequently candidates of the progressive ’25 January at Tahrir” trend are not going to win. There are three of them: the young lawyer Khaled Aly, co-founder of the Hisham Mubarak Law Centre, the judge and human rights activists Hisham Bastawisi and the leader of the Nasserist Karameh party Hamdeen Sabahy.All three are strongly in favour of a ”civic” (codeword for secular) society, based on human rights and a strong constitutional system. The majority of Egyptians, however, will give their vote to representatives of the past.   

The writer Khaled al-Khamissi related in the Egypt Independent (Al-Masry al-Youm) the elections to a of nightmare he had during his sleep. He compared the fact that only thes four candidates stand a chance to a game of Russian roulette: Mohamed Morsy and Abouel Fotouh are opposed to the civil camp that advocates human rights, while Shafiq and Moussa belong to a camp opposed to the values of social justice.

He concludes:

Hundreds of millions were spent on these electoral campaigns, and the media machine has been working to make the Egyptians feel that they are going through a historic experience. They promoted the idea that this presidential election is the outstanding result of the Egyptian revolution and that the people now have a say. The truth is, this election is worthless, for it is being conducted in a society that lacks a healthy political life, one that lacks genuine parties and political powers. This election will bring a useless president who will be unable to change the structure of the old regime. Hope lies in the revolutionary and social mobility. Change will come from the bottom, at the hands of the hundreds of movements, coalitions and blocs that emit hope. It is this that will change the face of Egypt.

And then we did not yet mention the fact that the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF)  apparently is preparing to issue an addition tot the constitutional declaration that was approved by referendum last year. According to press reports this addition, that has been discussed with some political parties, will curtail the power of the president and keep the duty of preserving the stability and security of Egypt in the hands of the military. Consequently the military will retain the right to appoint the key ministers of foreign affairs, finance, interior and defense, while the rest of the cabinet will be appointed by the parliament.   

The president will reportedly only retain the power to dissolve Parliament and appoint the public prosecutor, the grand sheikh of Al-Azhar and the grand mufti of the state. He cannot go to war without approval from Parliament and the SCAF, which also reportedly wanted to keep the last word in any legislation concerning the armed forces and keep the right to keep its budget a secret as it is now.

AUTHOR: Martin Hijmans
URL: http://the-pessoptimist.blogspot.com/
E-MAIL: m.hijmans [at] planet.nl

2010 Iraqi Parliamentary Election Results – From Wikipedia

The political power struggle in Baghdad has significantly escalated since the last U.S. troops withdrew in December 2011, with Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki slowly abandoning the principle of a unity government that gives all stakeholders a share of power and instead trying to consolidate power in his own hands.  The situation has deteriorated so much that in a recent interview with the Associated Press the president of Iraq’s self-rule Kurdish region (Massoud Barzani) demanded that Shiite leaders “agree on sharing power with their political opponents by September or else the Kurds could consider breaking away from Baghdad.”  Tony Karon reports, that even the radical Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, whose support was critical to getting Maliki reelected, has taken to referring to the Prime Minister as “the dictator.”

The most egregious case of power-grab by Maliki, was the ‘politically motivated’ prosecution of Iraqi Sunni leader and Vice-President of the government Tarek al-Hashemi, who was forced to flee Baghdad to escape criminal charges his supporters see as designed to hobble the Sunni political leadership.  According to Mr. Karon, Hashemi fled first to Erbil, capital of Iraq’s Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG), whose terrain the Iraqi security forces are not authorized to enter, and is now in Turkey.

Barzani’s ‘declaration of defiance’ against Maliki, is very much the result of Kurdistan’s long-held desire for independence as well as a consequence of Maliki’s recent attempt to consolidate power.  Although unilateral secession by the Kurds (or the Sunnis) is somewhat unlikely, the escalation of political tensions by Maliki could lead to the eventual break-up of Iraq.

Furthermore, according to the AP, Barzani also said he “wholeheartedly” supports Sunni desires to create their own self-rule regions in Iraq.  Sunni lawmakers, whose Iraqiya political coalition won the most seats in 2010 parliamentary elections but were outmaneuvered by Maliki for the right to form the government, bitterly complain they have no say in Iraq’s power structure.  Unless something is done to alleviate the concerns of Kurds and Sunnis about their place in the national government, Iraq might inevitable collapse.

Salvation however might still lie within, courtesy of the federal elements of the Iraqi constitution.

Iraq’s Ethnic Federalism

Under Iraq’s current ‘ethnic/religious federalism’, major political powers are divided among people representing the three main religious/ethnic division: the Kurds who make up 20% of the population, and between the two Muslim faiths (65% Shia and 30% Sunni).  Therefore, the convention that has emerged since 2005 (when the current constitution came to force) has been to elect a President of Kurdish background, while the Prime Minister has to come from the Shia community, and the Speaker of the Council of Representatives (parliament) from the Sunni community.

In Iraq’s federal structure there are four different levels of government: the central government in Baghdad, the regions (currently only one – Iraqi Kurdistan), the provinces (eighteen) and the local administrations.  The Iraqi constitution is very much typical federal constitution, in the way it distributes powers vertically.  The federal/national government in Baghdad has limited enumerated powers, and the provinces are endowed with their own distinct political/legislative/judicial authorities.  Therefore, the constitution provides that the regions enjoy a great amount of power under this structure, often at the expense of the central government in Baghdad.

The constitutions federalism even grants provinces the power to join together and form ‘regions’ which will be semi-autonomous.  Although Iraqi Kurdistan is the only legally defined region within Iraq, with its own government and quasi-official militia, other provinces can do the same through a referendum (See: Art. 115 of the Iraqi Constitution).

Therefore, Article 115 applies to provinces joining together and forming a region.  In fact, instead of blocking the creation of large and powerful administrative regions in the country that could confront central government or even each other, the constitution actually encourages it. This is particularly worrying considering that separatism is already a very powerful trend in Iraq.

In Iraq, it was very much expected that the governorates will begin the process of grouping together immediately after the parliamentary elections of 2005.  Political tensions between the three communities, could lead to further ethnic/religious divisions and the eventual ‘partition’ of Iraq.  According to Zaid Al-Ali, “the result will most likely be that Iraq will eventually come to resemble Belgium, whose federal structure of government contains three states: Flanders (Flemish-speaking), Wallonia (French-speaking), and Brussels itself.”  Similarly, Iraq is likely to be divided in three parts, with a Kurdish region in the north, a Shia-dominated south and a Sunni region in the center.

Horizontal Federalism – the Iraqi Federation Council

The only way to prevent this from happening is by strengthening ‘horizontal federalism’ within the Iraqi federal government.  Under the Iraqi Constitution, there are to be two legislative houses, the Council of Representatives and the Federation Council.  The Council of Representatives is directly elected by the people, “at a ratio of one representative per 100,000 Iraqi persons representing the entire Iraqi people.”  The Council of Representatives has the power to enact all federal laws, including the approval and adjustment of the federal budget, conduct foreign policy and defense, and consent to a declaration of war or state of emergency.

On the other hand, the Federation Council does not exist yet.  The Federation Council is to be composed of representatives of regions and all governorates that have not joined a region.  The Constitution does not enumerate the formation or functions of the Federation Council, but leaves those particulars to the Council of Representatives.  (See: Article 62 of the Iraqi Constitution)

There are plenty of available models for a second legislative chamber representing sub-national entities (like the German Bundesrat, or the South African National Council of Provinces), but of course the U.S. Senate could be the best model to protect the provinces and curb the federal government’s powers.

A second legislative body, which represents all provinces equally, with a primary function of safeguarding the rights and privileges of the regions and provinces from excessive overreach by the federal government will go a long way in alleviating fears and concerns by the ethnic/religious minorities of Iraq – as well as strengthen federalism and prevent any further talk of secession of break-up.

Getting the Maliki government to implement such a reform is another thing…

Sources:

1. AP Interview: Iraqi Kurd leader hints at secession, by Lara Jakes
2. Power Struggles in Baghdad and Beyond Mean Opportunities for Iraq’s Kurds, By Tony Karon
3. Iraq: a constitution to nowhere, by Zaid Al-Ali

AUTHOR: Nasos Mihalakas
URL: http://mihalakas.wordpress.com and http://chinatrade.foreignpolicyblogs.com/
E-MAIL: nasos.mihalakas [at] gmail.com

Out of the race? Left to right: Hazem Abu Ismail, Khairat al-Shater, Omar Suleiman (Al-Ahram Online)

The body overseeing Egypt’s presidential election, the Supreme Presidential Election Committee (SPEC) disqualified 10 candidates from the race on Saturday. They include some of the leading candidates, like the Muslim Brotherhood’s Khairat al-Shater, former spy chief Omar Suleiman and Salafi sheikh Hazem Salah Abu-Ismail. Others are Ayman Nour and Mortada Mansour, Ahmed Saidi, Mamdouh Qutb, Ashraf Baroma, and Ibrahim al-Ghareeb.

“The commission has disqualified candidates because they do not fill one or more of the required conditions,” the electoral body said in a statement, AFP reported. The candidates have 48 hours to appeal against the decision.

Abu-Ismail’s candidacy has been in doubt since the election commission said it had received notification from U.S. authorities that his late mother had an American passport, a status that would disqualify him from the race. His followers have held demonstations against his possible disqualification in the past. It is not immediately what will happen now. Abu Ismail is the second most popular candidate.  A spokesman for the Shater campaign said their candidate had already prepared his appeal. Shater’s candidacy had been in doubt because of a criminal conviction in the Mubarak-era which was less than six years ago. Ayman Nour, leader of the Ghad al-Thawra Party, was banned under the same rule as the Muslim Brotherhood’s Shater.

Hussein Kamal, a top aide to Omar Suleiman, told Reuters that Suleiman would also challenge the commission’s decision. If the commission’s decision stands, the remaining frontrunners will be former Arab League head Amr Moussa and former Muslim Brotherhood member Abdel Moneim Abu el-Fotouh.

AUTHOR: Martin Hijmans
URL: http://the-pessoptimist.blogspot.com/
E-MAIL: m.hijmans [at] planet.nl

Courtesy of The Irrawaddy

Late last night (Tuesday April 3^rd) Burma’s State Television officially announced that Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy had won 43 of the 44 parliamentary seats it contested in by-elections on Sunday. The ruling Union Solidarity and Development Party (the party led by former members of the Junta) won one, and then in a seat where the NLD candidate had been disqualified. Few if any expected the NLD to carry nearly all before them, fewer still expected that the elections would not be marred in part by some attempts to ‘massage’ the figures. The result generated a whole host of epithets, ‘historic’, ‘landmark’, ‘watershed’, ‘groundbreaking’ as well as scenes of wild jubilation on the streets of the former capital and commercial center of the country Rangoon (Yangon). Equally some among the pro-democracy advocacy groups sought to prick the bubble of rising expectations by both soberly reflecting on the dominance of the military-backed USDP in a relatively powerless parliament and pointing to continued human rights abuses against the country’s ethnic minorities even as millions celebrated Suu Kyi’s victory.

AUTHOR: Dr. Jason Abbott
URL: http://profjabbott.blogspot.com
E-MAIL: jason.abbott [at] louisville.edu