We Shouldn't Leave Democracy To Chance
By: TANGENI AMUPADHIIT'S perhaps too early to talk about the period after the November elections, but there can be no harm in going off at a tangent to discuss the next President and the National Assembly.
Before the end of next month we should all know who the next
president is and who the new lawmakers will be.
This is after voters have decided in what is expected to be free
elections.
Yet it will take another five months to March 21 2005, before
the voters are presented with their choice of leaders.
Meanwhile, for five months after we have decided who we like,
the people that we have kicked out will continue to rule and take
decisions for the country as if they still have our confidence.
It just does not seem right.
The Constitution is silent about when and how the transition
between newly elected leaders and the outgoing ones should be
handled, except to say that the terms of office of both the
National Assembly members and the President will be five years.
It appears there is no legislation regulating the speedy
transfer of power from one regime to the next.
Thus, because the President and Assembly MPs were sworn in on
March 21 five years ago, it is readily accepted that their term of
office expires then.
In addition the President's term of office shall also expire
when the National Assembly is dissolved, and elections will be held
at the same time to fill the vacancies.
What is clear is that "a member of the National Assembly shall
remain a member of the National Assembly and remain competent to
perform the functions of a member until the day immediately
preceding the first day of the election held" following the
dissolution of parliament.
Otherwise, the Namibian Constitution states that "members of the
National Assembly shall be representatives of all the people and
shall in the performance of their duties be guided by the
objectives of this Constitution, by the public interest and by
their conscience".
It will be noble if people who have just been given the boot
were guided solely by conscience and public interest.
But to rely on the goodwill of people, especially ones who may
be facing a long time in a financial and political wilderness, is
dicey.
Already there has been talk that some of the MPs wanted to seize
the opportunity of designing a pension for the State President to
award themselves golden handshakes in addition to their existing
hefty retirement package.
But pick an extreme example of a sitting President who is
hell-bent opposed to the President-elect.
The incoming leader has five months to shape his administration
in the way that it could frustrate the incumbent.
For instance, appointments of certain bureaucrats will be made
for terms five years or longer.
Assembly MPs will be expected to pass laws strictly in the
interest of the public that gave them a no-confidence vote, while
waiting perhaps for their political opponents to replace them.
Imagine they will be proposing new laws long after they had been
outvoted.
It is not unheard of that outgoing politicians take decisions
that will hamstring their successors.
Even in the well-established democracy of the United States,
complaints abound of outgoing presidents "sabotaging" work in the
White House or taking documents that belong to the state.
What hope is there for a burgeoning democracy if rules and
regulations for speedy hand-over of power are not in place? It is
time the vacuum is filled.
Relying on people's goodwill without legislation to guide them
and giving is them so much time before the hand-over is as good as
leaving sheep in the care of a hungry hunting dog.
This is after voters have decided in what is expected to be free
elections.Yet it will take another five months to March 21 2005,
before the voters are presented with their choice of
leaders.Meanwhile, for five months after we have decided who we
like, the people that we have kicked out will continue to rule and
take decisions for the country as if they still have our
confidence.It just does not seem right.The Constitution is silent
about when and how the transition between newly elected leaders and
the outgoing ones should be handled, except to say that the terms
of office of both the National Assembly members and the President
will be five years.It appears there is no legislation regulating
the speedy transfer of power from one regime to the next.Thus,
because the President and Assembly MPs were sworn in on March 21
five years ago, it is readily accepted that their term of office
expires then.In addition the President's term of office shall also
expire when the National Assembly is dissolved, and elections will
be held at the same time to fill the vacancies.What is clear is
that "a member of the National Assembly shall remain a member of
the National Assembly and remain competent to perform the functions
of a member until the day immediately preceding the first day of
the election held" following the dissolution of
parliament.Otherwise, the Namibian Constitution states that
"members of the National Assembly shall be representatives of all
the people and shall in the performance of their duties be guided
by the objectives of this Constitution, by the public interest and
by their conscience".It will be noble if people who have just been
given the boot were guided solely by conscience and public
interest.But to rely on the goodwill of people, especially ones who
may be facing a long time in a financial and political wilderness,
is dicey.Already there has been talk that some of the MPs wanted to
seize the opportunity of designing a pension for the State
President to award themselves golden handshakes in addition to
their existing hefty retirement package.But pick an extreme example
of a sitting President who is hell-bent opposed to the
President-elect.The incoming leader has five months to shape his
administration in the way that it could frustrate the incumbent.For
instance, appointments of certain bureaucrats will be made for
terms five years or longer.Assembly MPs will be expected to pass
laws strictly in the interest of the public that gave them a
no-confidence vote, while waiting perhaps for their political
opponents to replace them.Imagine they will be proposing new laws
long after they had been outvoted.It is not unheard of that
outgoing politicians take decisions that will hamstring their
successors.Even in the well-established democracy of the United
States, complaints abound of outgoing presidents "sabotaging" work
in the White House or taking documents that belong to the
state.What hope is there for a burgeoning democracy if rules and
regulations for speedy hand-over of power are not in place? It is
time the vacuum is filled.Relying on people's goodwill without
legislation to guide them and giving is them so much time before
the hand-over is as good as leaving sheep in the care of a hungry
hunting dog.