D) Electoral system and Election

The PFDJ�s leadership usually claims to be a democratic system and to prove its democratic credentials, at its 14th session the National Assembly has passed a resolution to conduct election at national level and also has approved the chairman of electoral commission, which was nominated by the President. During that occasion, the leadership has also legitimated its electoral law. Very recently, we have learned that the leadership has started to conduct elections in all sub-regions and regions. As the elite group of the leadership said, the public will have the opportunity to choose its governors freely and openly.

Why is the leadership decided to conduct election in the event when there is no constitution and no democratic institutions? What was the main objective of the transitional government that was formed in 1994? Do you think that the outcomes of the election can be helpful for the establishment of a democratic system in the country? Is there any agenda behind it?

Basically, an electoral system is a method of allocating offices to candidates and political parties of transferring votes into seats in the government. Election is also a process of appointing a candidate to public office or a competent political party to talk power in the government by voting. In general, both democratic and totalitarian states have their own electoral institutions. These institutions play a role in the government structures and political processes. The forms that these institutions take and their precise purposes however vary enormously according to the nature of the system of the leadership.

In general, the PFDJ�s leadership is simply conducting a charade election. The electoral system of the PFDJ�s leadership, which is currently in practice, is used as an instrument of mass mobilisation and legitimisation of the regime. This will enable the leadership to maintain and secure its power. Further more, it is used to deceive the general public on the question of democracy and the prevailing political pressure from in and outside the system. That means, the regime is using the election as a defence mechanism for hiding its anti-democratic missions and actions. 

Under a complete monopoly of one-party system, the outcomes of the PFDJ�s electoral system cannot bring any difference on the leadership. The PFDJ�s electoral system may allow the general public to choose its representatives, but the party still remains the same � no change of philosophy, policy and programmes. Most of the time, if not always, the important work of selecting candidates is done within the party machine. The ruling party or its organs such as youth, workers and women associations usually nominate candidates. As a principle, opposition groups are not allowed to participate in the election or nominate their representatives.  Therefore, the voters know that whatever discussions they take in the secret pooling booth the party�s decisions are inviolate. The so-called representatives of the public will then be engaged only supporting and legitimising the behind-the-scenes decisions of the party.

Based on the experience of totalitarian states, the leadership usually organises elections to overcome criticisms and political pressure, which is exerted by opposition groups, or to crackdown political activities, which are undergoing within the ruling party. This situation will allow the regime to discard its political opponents and overall to legitimise choice of candidates.

Most contemporary states seek to demonstrate their democratic credentials under the banner of popular representation. However, there is a wide difference in kinds and degrees of representation. democracy is well expressed in terms of representations. In addressing the issue of representation, in the PFDJ�s National Assembly, half of the seats (75 seats) are reserved for central committee members which are directly appointed by the party machinery;  30% of the seats are reserved for women (in the sense of gender equality) who are members of PFDJ and the remaining seats for candidates who are elected by the general public. The candidates must be PFDJ membership cardholders or must qualify pre-determined criteria of the leadership. At the end, we can find that the National Assembly is entirely dominated by the PFDJ. Under such circumstance nothing can be expected from the Assembly, other than backing the regime. Due to the fact, it is very hard to say that the National Assembly is the true representative of the people of Eritrea . Besides, the Assembly has no power to influence the leadership as well as to protect public interest. The leadership usually appoints its own senior cadres and loyal to its leadership at key positions of various administrative levels, such as governors, administration, personnel, finance heads, etc. Therefore, assembles which are formed at various levels act as part of the party�s machinery � legitimising and executing policies and programmes of the PFDJ. Overall it is employed as a means of mass mobilisation and building up popular support for the regime.

The PFDJ�s electoral system may have more relevance on more personal ground. The candidates may fight among each other and success will often depend on which politician, in the eye of the voters, offers the best deal. Moreover, the size of the turn out of the voters in each region or district may have a great significance to the leadership; it can be taken as one indicator to assess performance of its organs in various areas in mobilising and executing policies of the central government.

Therefore, it is indispensable to see a radical change in the electoral system of PFDJ, because it is has no relevance in creating a stable democratic state of Eritrea . Notice that as the PFDJ leadership took power in the transition government one of its major responsibilities was to set effective electoral law as part and parcel of the democratic institutions which are required to establish a strong and stable democratic system in the country. However, the regime has failed in delivering its pledge to the people of Eritrea practically.

In general, the PFDJ�s electoral system has several drawbacks. First and foremost, it has breached basic human rights of citizens. Basically, election is a question of democracy � fundamental and universal human right citizens. Every Eritrea citizen, unless and otherwise order by court, has the right to elect his/her representative or to be elected regardless his or her political background or opinion, religion, ethnicity, and so on. Eritrea is not for members of PFDJ or its supporters only; it belongs to all Eritrea equally. The electoral system of the regime must address this issue properly. This is clearly stated under the Universal Declaration of human rights (article 21 � 1) as:

Every one has the right to take part in the government of his/ her country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.

Moreover, the general public has the right to exercise its power in choosing its own government in a democratic way. The public should not be restricted to elect only one party and one policy. In Universal declaration of human rights, article 21-3 is stated as:

The will of the public shall be the basis of the authority of the government; this shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections, which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret or by equivalent free voting procedure.

Therefore, a democratic electoral system provides the public to have a wider opportunity to choose political parties (having various policy and programme options) and candidates (having different background and political opinions). Notice that election is one of the fundament mechanisms that ensure the involvement of the public in the political life of the country. Election makes how, when, where and which citizens take part in the political life as a matter of public policy rather than simply a matter of individual choice.

In a democratic system, popular election is seen as the only legitimate source of political authority. In order to be fully democratic, elections must be regular, open and above all competitive. When elections are held regularly the public will have the opportunity to question its representative and the parties whether they pledged their promises or not, that is it is the time to assess performance of the ruling party according to its merits. The core of the democratic process is the capacity of the people to call politicians to account.

A healthy electoral competition among political parties creates, in effect, a political market, in which politicians act as entrepreneurs bent upon achieving government power and individual voters behave rather like consumers, voting for the party whose policies most closely reflect. A system of open and competitive elections serves to guarantee democratic rule because it places government in the hands of the party whose philosophy, values and policies most closely correspond to the preference of the largest group of voters. Moreover, democratic competition creates a power incentive for the emergency of policy consensus, in that parties will be encouraged to shift their policies towards the �center ground� in the hope of appealing to the largest possible number of electors. The parties will very often be engaged modernizing and reforming their policies to meet demands and interests of the general public and also to excel other competing political parties. It is obvious that voting is more volatile and unpredictable and mainly depends on various factors: party image, party leaders, media and party performance.  

To be more realistic, the PFDJ�s leadership couldn�t be expected to establish a high standard or absolute electoral system within a very short period of time. Even in those democratic states there is no perfect electoral system. However, the PFDJ�s elite group are mainly criticised for not laying out at least the minimum requirements to establish the right electoral system in the country. A democratic electoral system usually evolves and persists in process. The first footstep for the establishment of a democratic system is to have a well-founded law that regulates and monitors the electoral system.  The law must be developed based on the general framework of the constitution and objective reality of the country. To avoid unforeseen problems the law must be developed through wider consultation and discussion among all concerned groups of the society. 

Once again, the electoral system, which is adopted by the PFDJ�s regime, has a destructive effect on the political system of the country. The elite group must recognise that it may be possible to deceive the public for some time but not forever. The innocence of the people of Eritrea should not be taken as ignorance.  Therefore, in order to abolish the one-party monopoly, the people of Eritrea is desperately seeking for a democratic electoral system that:

-   guarantees active participation of opposition groups in the electoral system and election process

-  ensures elections to be held openly and in a free and fair competitive manner among all political parties which are qualified under the law governing political parties.

-  reinforces elections to be carried out regularly within prescribed timeframe and in accordance of the constitution approved by all concerned groups.

-  enables the general public to demonstrate its power freely, fairly and secretly without intimidation and subsequent redress.

-  ensures that politically relevant resources are distributed relatively outside the control of the central government and also are utilised by all political parties and individual candidates fairly.

-   secures a peaceful and effective transfer of power to the successfully elected party within the agreed timeframe. Allegations and claims are addressed and also resolved in democratic and legal procedures. Overall, all parties and candidates are committed to abide with the law and regulations governing the electoral system and the adjudged results of the election process, which is conformed by the concerned independent body.

To be continued