tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1209670742820403516.post5552483117794125541..comments2024-02-24T06:10:42.255-08:00Comments on Congo Siasa: Are the amendments to the constitution illegal?Jason Stearnshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11454449854081540397noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1209670742820403516.post-37270309539871754932011-01-14T09:42:36.945-08:002011-01-14T09:42:36.945-08:00- Patience,
Ref # “It will cost more money and n...- Patience, <br /><br />Ref # “It will cost more money and not less if someone is elected with 20% of the voting population. This leader will be contested by 80% of the voting constituencies.”<br /><br />That is a fair point. However, are we going to assume that an elected president who only managed, for instance, 1.4% of votes in one province then 80% in another will be, somehow, less legitimate or president in the first province and more in the latter? See the ethnic differentials that stemmed from the East Vs West divide during the 2006 elections.<br /><br />What about the turnout rates? Are we going to say, for instance, when only less than 50% from the total of voting population (and even less when taken from the general population) turnout to cast their ballots, the result of that election will, somehow, be less legitimate? See the case of countries with an increasing low turnout rate(the so called ‘election-fatigued public’)!!! <br /><br />I am not trying to defend anyone but I think lawmakers should think carefully about how they can better define this problem of legitimacy as a reflexion of a given percentage or the absolute number of votes of a given population.Richhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01301460106025447019noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1209670742820403516.post-2150931863610211892011-01-14T04:31:34.043-08:002011-01-14T04:31:34.043-08:00Good analysis but the debate around one or two rou...Good analysis but the debate around one or two rounds of presidential elections in DRC is reversing the priority and focusing on the consequence and not on the essential element of the vote. The tacit democratic consensus is that to rule a country one has to be endorsed or supported by at least half of the population who are allowed to vote.If during the first round of election one of the candidates obtains 50 +1 %, election is over. The most important point is not the number of rounds, but the capacity of gathering the support of more than half of the voting population. It gives one a incontestable legitimacy. If during the second round of an election there are so much white bulletins that none of the two contenders gets at least 50 +1%, there will be a third round. The fundamental idea is the same, to rule with at least the endorsement of the half of the constituents. If Kinshasa does not want a president with more than 50% of supports then it is denying the very reasons of the elections.<br />The financial argument is obsolete and a smoke screen not because it does not make sense, but because it is not correct. The troubles we had in the Congo were particularly due to the lack of legitimacy of the leaders. It will cost more money and not less if someone is elected with 20% of the voting population. This leader will be contested by 80% of the voting constituencies. They will be the majority to context this power and it will cost more money to deal with the trouble dues to lack of legitimacy than to organize a second round to ensure that the president is elected with at least 51% of the votes.Patience Kabambanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1209670742820403516.post-49778028428860509912011-01-13T20:48:19.228-08:002011-01-13T20:48:19.228-08:00This.....
And, of course, Julie M. is right in po...This.....<br /><br />And, of course, Julie M. is right in pointing out that MPs were bribed into passing the law, then it was illegal. But how to prove that?<br /><br />...could happen by organizing a sting. And, if it happened, the key would be to ensure it implicates Kabila. Then ofcourse the law would take its course. <br /><br />Will this happen? Probably not. And if it did happen (a sting), there really isn't a functioning judiciary to ensure prosecutions occur and that is particularly the case now. <br /><br />But that is one way to start catching a thief, Jason. <br /><br />Be interesting to see if the 100,000 petitions process could work in the Congolese favor and/or begin to shake up the coming election. Perhaps an amendment to recall any government official? Or one that reserves most tax raising, budget approval, minster appointments, mineral contracts- a kinda "Magna Carta" amendment- to the Assembly alone? <br /><br />(if the Assembly had clear veto powers of the President, the entire political calculus- not to mention corruption- would shift in the Congo)<br /><br />The current constitution ofcourse says that you can't change terms of service. But it says nothing about recalling politicians and the two aren't the same. <br /><br />In fact, it says NOTHING about removing officials. Odd, but given when it was written understandable. <br /><br />It would be quite instructive to all Congolese to see how their politicians react to such an effort and, if they do so badly, serve the interest of the opposition and by default the Congolese. <br /><br />This is just me theorizing ofcourse. But, as I have posted before, what should be the goals here?<br /><br />a. strengthen the opposition and unify them? <br />b. strengthen one "power center" to clip Kabila's power? (ie Assembly)<br />c. pressure the American government to get serious in the Congo? <br />d. get Tanzania to invade Rwanda and Uganda to remove this element? <br />e. enable a grassroots movement a la what the West (mostly America) did with the various "color" revolutions? <br />f. create some campaign to pressure China and mining companies?<br />g. all the above?<br />h. nothing? <br /><br />MelissaAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com