|
Full
Representation in Afghanistan and Iraq
updated February 2005
Read
FairVote's Analysis
of the Iraqi elections, which uses actual Iraqi election returns
to model how different voting systems would have affected who won representation.
"Why
is it that the people of Afghanistan can vote directly for the
Afghanistan president, unlike Americans, who cannot vote directly
for the American president? . . . If the Electoral College is so important in America, then shouldn't
Afghanistan have an Electoral College? Shouldn't Iraq have an
Electoral College? The answer is that they don't because it's not
relevant. "
--
Anthony Medina, The Seattle Times
���Securing democracy
in Iraq is�Ķ a massive and difficult undertaking -- it is worth our
effort, it is worth our sacrifice, because we know the stakes�ĶThe
establishment of a free Iraq at the heart of the Middle East will be
a watershed event in the global democratic revolution. �Ķ [W]e
believe that freedom -- the freedom we prize -- is not for us alone,
it is the right and the capacity of all mankind. ���
-- George W. Bush���s
address to the National Endowment for Democracy, November 11, 2003.
The stated rationale behind the USA���s
recent interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan has been to spread
���the freedom we prize���, and American traditions of democracy, to
the Middle East and the rest of the world. Massive amounts of American resources, and even lives, have
gone towards securing a peace in these countries which would allow
elections to take place.
In this context, it is interesting to note
exactly what election systems are being implemented in the two
countries. The
democracy which America is exporting is different to that which it
is using at home. In
Afghanistan and Iraq, a decision has been taken ��� with US support
��� to implement full representation systems. In both instances, as in South Africa after the end of
apartheid, full representation has widely been recognized as the
best possible way of healing rifts between communities and bringing
conflicting groups to co-operate with one another.
Bush's speech
to the National Endowment for Democracy suggested that Americans should be ready to intervene
around the world to advance the cause of democracy. Implicit
in this is a belief that tradition and habit should not limit
a country's political infrastructure, and that fair democracy should
be within the reach of everybody. Surely this principle
applies just as much within the United States itself. At a
time when the country is politically and culturally divided, full
representation systems could help to bring disparate groups
together, and give everyone a chance for fair representation.
Iraq
Elections for Iraq's 275 seat assembly, held
on January 30, 2005, used a national closed party list form of
full representation. A New
York Times graphic explains how the system functioned. Voters across the country
chose from
among rival lists of candidates, with the lists typically backed by
political parties. Candidates were elected at a
country-wide level, rather than from districts, since it was hoped that
this would encourage the growth of national political parties, and
multi-ethnic coalitions. By contrast, any system employing
single-member districts, or even regional multi-member ones, tends
to foster regional factions and tribalism. Speaking about the
electoral system, the U. N. electoral assistance director, Carina
Perelli, said that a significant benefit would be the advantage
which it gives to smaller parties, ultimately resulting in a more
inclusive elected body. A country-wide election system would
also have security advantages since it would guard against candidate
intimidation. Perelli suggested that "proportional
representation at a national level���removing the politics from just
the local level where people can be easily identified and taken
down���is an extra layer of security for the candidates".
To ensure a certain level of female assembly
members, Iraqi election law mandates that every third candidate on
each list must be a woman. Unlike Afghanistan, Iraq has
no separate presidential election. The Iraqi president is not elected directly by the people.
Rather, the
members of the assembly choose a president and two deputies on
the basis of a single list by two-thirds vote. This
presidential council will then nominate a Council of Ministers. Media
Coverage of Iraqi elections
Afghanistan
Elections for the Afghan lower house, the
Wolesi Jirga, are scheduled to take place April 2005 using
multi-member at-large districts where representative are elected
under a one-vote form
of limited voting (also known as single non-transferable vote). The
entire country will be divided into districts corresponding to
existing provinces. The number
of seats allocated to a province will be determined by its
population, although each will be guaranteed a minimum of two seats.
However many seats there are to be filled, each voter will
have only one vote. This
ensures that a group making up 51% of the population cannot swamp
100% of the seats, and that minority groups and parties will have a
chance to win their fair share of representation.
The Afghan constitution sets aside a quota of
seats in the Wolesi Jirga to be allocated to women, amounting in
total to roughly one quarter of the entire assembly. Within
each voting district, the highest female vote-getters will be
awarded a predetermined number of seats, regardless of their
position in the overall vote totals. In principle, the number
of female designated seats is equivalent to 2 per province. However, in provinces with only two representatives, only one will
be mandated female, the difference being made up in other more
populous regions.
There are numerous logistical obstacles in
the way of successful Afghan elections. The country's infrastructure as a
whole is in very poor condition, making it difficult to get polling
equipment to outlying areas. This is compounded by the
fighting which still persists in certain regions. In addition,
literacy levels in Afghanistan are low; as many as 80% of Afghan
women are illiterate.
Early plans were for a list system of full
representation to be used. Unfortunately, this was later
abandoned, and instead the country adopted limited voting. This goes some way towards giving all
groups a hope of fair representation while at the same time being
simple for voters to understand. However, because this is a
system where the drawing
of district boundaries still affects different candidates' chances
of representation, the system creates problems as well as solving
them. Afghan law stipulates that electoral boundaries must be
determined 120 days before an election, and this process is likely
to cause friction over the coming months. In a recent panel
discussion convened in New York by the Asia society, experts on
Central Asian affairs suggested that interested groups would place
increasing pressure on election authorities to establish new
provinces, new boundaries, and more parliamentary seats.
Elections with local districts also
have implications for candidate intimidation. Robert Templer,
the Asia Program Director of the International Crisis Group, thinks
that parliamentary elections will bring difficulties which were not
a factor in the recent presidential elections, since " real
local authority will be at stake at this election in a way that it
wasn't in the presidential election. So local forces, local militias
are going to be competing more thoroughly to influence the outcome
of the parliamentary and council votes. "
Media
Coverage of Afghan elections
|
