| Submit your comments on this article |
| Iraq-Jordan |
| UN Elections Official: Iraq Elections Possible Even Amid Serious Violence |
| 2004-06-04 |
| Surprise meter at high Carina Perelli, a senior United Nations elections official, said the organization’s team had decided to hold elections based on a system of proportional representation, whereby voters across the country would choose a list of candidates, ordinarily supported by political parties. The number of votes tallied by a party nationwide would determine how many of its candidates who appeared on the list would take office. Under the system, the percentage of votes received by a particular party would roughly equal the percentage of seats they would be awarded in the national assembly. Ms. Perelli said United Nations officials and the Iraqis with whom they consulted favored a proportional system, in part because that system tends to award seats to smaller parties, which a system of district elections would not. Ms. Perelli said the job of setting up districts would be difficult to do quickly. The election commission announced today, and made up of eight Iraqis, is empowered to draw up a list of voters and to set up the vast infrastructure, thought to require at least 20,000 polling places, for the elections. They would also have the power to postpone the elections, across the country or in parts, if they decided that the level of violence would not allow the elections to go forward. But Ms. Perelli said she was optimistic that elections could go forward here, even amid guerrilla insurgency and terrorist attacks. To illustrate, she listed several war-ravaged countries where the United Nations had either helped set up elections or was currently trying to do so: Congo, Rwanda, Afghanistan, Sierra Leone and Liberia. "We have conducted elections in areas with rampant levels of violence," she said. Optimism? From the UN? About achieving America’s goal? I would have expected gloom and despair, excuses, and predictions of failure. Good news indeed. Can’t let the terrorists derail the elections--they can’t be given that power. |
| Posted by:Sludj |
| #5 Either system (proportional/party list or constituency) can work -- but in Iraq's situation, I agree that constituency would be best. Proportional tends to shift power towards the well-organized and funded elites from each region or ethnic group -- who probably were the ones "consulted" by the UN on this. In a post-totalitarian system, I think creating the maximum web of restraint and accountability on government is desirable; electing individuals who would be on the hook to produce for their districts is far superior to proportional in this respect. See Michael Rubin of AEI (articles at NRO and I think AEI website) for a much better analysis along these lines. |
| Posted by: Verlaine 2004-06-04 10:12:56 PM |
| #4 Anonymous5125, here here! |
| Posted by: Damn_Proud_American 2004-06-04 6:55:44 PM |
| #3 A5125 is right that under a list system you vote for the party and not the person. The advantage is that you get away from personality driven politics and towards issue driven politics, which I would argue is a good thing. The way you get around the lots of fringe parties problem is to set a threshold for anyone to be elected from a party list, as in Germany, where I beleive the threshold is 5% of votes cast. I think this a sensible decision, although I dislike the fact the UN gets to make it, but maybe its a bone after the recent snub to the UN by the IGC. |
| Posted by: Phil B 2004-06-04 6:34:02 PM |
| #2 Bad news on the voting system. We need decentralized power bases, not a bunch of holdover elites pulling the strings from Baghdad. |
| Posted by: someone 2004-06-04 6:18:13 PM |
| #1 "The list...the list is life." One thing I don't understand is why we keep pushing, putting, the most unstable form of democratic guv'mint, the Parliamentary system. The Brits do well by it, but the further you enter the hinterlands (europe, the middle east) the more unstable it becomes. Opens guv'mints up to the tryanny of the minority. In America, we don't have a "Green" problem because they don't pass the common sense test. When you form these coalition guv'mints you often have to give the kooks a say. Need to stop being ashamed of being American, and start pushing the strong tripod, seperation of powers and such. Elect individuals. Not lists. |
| Posted by: Anonymous5125 2004-06-04 5:44:31 PM |