Zawaya

Political participation for all

By: Mahmoud Belhimer

First of all, we should note that the election, which is supposed to be a means for peaceful change, has become a means to perpetuate the status quo. Its function is merely to perpetuate the permanent monopoly of the ruling elites on power, and thus denying the vast majorities of society the right to actual participation in public affairs and participating in politics. This case applies to all the Arab regimes where elections are held.

The easiest way to build a sound democratic process in the region starts by convincing the ruling elite that using elections to maintain an unreal democratic façade poses major risks to national stability. The existence of political will among the ruling elites to move forward on the path of profound regime change would lead to cutting the road towards change. This requires putting an end to political and media monopoly and the method of sovereign control of political life and of civil society. Authority in the four countries has always been the only source of reforms, which it runs the way it likes in total disregard of society. In addition, the military should basically cease to interfere in political life and its control.

Someone may say: how can we ask those in power to adopt transparent rules that will make them lose it? However, what we mean is to relinquish the obsessive regime tools, such as tailor-made constitutional amendments, crackdowns on the opposition, and imposing pressures on people with different opinions. What we need is to abide by the constitution and democracy as a system of rule that guarantees the rights and interests of all citizens.

On the other hand, the region’s regimes boast of their ability to organize “successful elections,” i.e. the poll as a technical process that is organized every 4 or 5 years without any hope of change. But the election is a long political process that requires opening the field to opposition parties, civil society and citizens, and endorsing freedom of the press and the neutrality of administration. This should be on a permanent, rather than temporary, basis.

This long path would allow for strengthening political parties and nascent societies, and would give the elites the chance to take their places at the head of political establishments. The citizens, moreover, would be enticed to voluntarily participate in politics. On the other hand, monopoly would keep the parties extremely weak and prevent the appearance of new elites capable of ruling and handling the affairs of government, and would make people shun politics.

It is also necessary to “institutionalize” political life, i.e. building strong political institutions in place of the extremely weak current institutions, such as allowing justice to play its role as a judiciary authority that is subject only to the law, and the parliaments to be independent and enable them to hold the governments accountable and lead the investigation committees.

There is fear that Islamists may control the government to abort democracy itself! However, people’s sympathy with Islamists was boosted by the crackdowns and closure of fields of expression. This sympathy will not last simply because they defend Islam, as they don’t have effective solutions for economic issues and the daily problems of people.

The strict organization of political exercise will guarantee the peaceful, transparent rotation of power without the need to justify the rigging of elections and the regimes’ exercise of parenthood on society.