Getting
Representation Right
A food for thought as we are heading to the 2017
parliamentary election
By:
Menukai Pinheiro
As
2017 draws closer, many in Timor-Leste have set their minds to both
presidential and parliamentary elections. Timor-Leste has made quite a stride
in the past 15 years since reclaiming independence from Indonesia in 1999. It
has held 3 presidential and parliamentary elections respectively in fair and
free environment. The Economist Intelligence Unit ranks Timor-Leste higher than
all ASEAN members in its 2015
Democracy Index.
The
freedom that the Timorese enjoy in their political exercise particularly in
general election however, should not be seen as an end in itself. The question
of representativeness of those elected through political parties has popped up
recently as a theme worth considering and merits further scrutiny. This comes
as voters are becoming increasingly disenchanted with the performances of
members of parliament (MPs) and with the current electoral system. The
following is a translation of a community member’s dissatisfaction in a
discussion held by a local NGO Judicial System Monitoring Program (JSMP);
“we are really not happy with the performances of member of parliament which are not representing the people in law making, oversight and decision making after general election. We urged the government and the parliament to improve the electoral law for national parliament, particularly on setting rigorous criteria to ensure that quality member of national parliament are elected”.
The
existing electoral system is a closed list, proportional representation model,
and the whole of the country is treated as a single national constituency. Apart
from the president of the republic, all members of both the executive and the
legislative bodies are not elected directly by the people. Members of the
legislative body are drawn from closed-list figures of political parties
winning seats in the national parliament – meaning candidates to the parliament
are selected by the party leadership.
The
nature of representation is therefore, broad-based as the national character of
the closed list system does not guarantee representation for each and every one
of the municipalities in Timor-Leste. The quality of representation is hence,
questionable. Arguably, legislations or policies in this context, might be
enacted on the basis of one-size-fits-all kind in nature – meaning legislations
or policies from both the parliament and the government, while may appear as
inclusive in general, they may not reach or cover some groups of people in
specific areas.
Consequently,
for particular issues to get the attention of the national parliament or that
of the government, they either have to be brought to the national parliament or
be heard by MPs in their occasional visits to municipals, which may not be
accessible by all people in some areas. So, question of access is also crucial.
Those with access and more organized interests at least have some bearing in
law and policy making while those without are at a huge disadvantage.
The
absence of regional representation in the system actually reduces the national
character of the parliament and may weaken the government’s effectiveness to
implement appropriate policies in specific areas across the country.
Challenges
remain even for those with access nonetheless. For example, even after an issue
is heard, subsequent actions by the national parliament depends largely on to
which MPs it was presented, how big the issue were and whether or not it shared
national feeling – leading to issues confined to certain geographical areas or
groups of society may not generate as much interest and consideration.
While
the internet and social media in particular, is providing a much-needed
additional platform for people to voice their issues and concerns openly and
directly to MPs and members of government for example through Facebook (FB),
not everyone has access to the Internet and use Facebook. The Internet World
Stats for Timor-Leste for 2016 shows that only slightly more than a quarter of
the total population are internet users with users for FB having about the same
penetration rate at 27% as a total share of the population, and it’s unclear
how many out of this are actually using it for raising issues or discussions
relevant to policy making. Also, the effectiveness of this sort of platform
remains either understudied or uninvestigated.
JSMP’s
Parliament Watch Program Annual Report for 2015 reported on MPs performances
which more or less echoes the above expressed discontent. They range from less
than full house participation rate in plenary and other debates on average,
unjustified absent from work, to basic disciplinary issues such as timekeeping
and being orderly during plenaries and parliamentary debates- adding fuel to
public’s growing frustration. These behaviors lessen the national parliament’s
productivity and have resulted in a backlog of important laws and legislation
the report concluded.
On
top of that, blatant disregard exhibited by successive parliamentarians to
scrap the pension law for former MPs and member of government despite a
nation-wide protest is further proof to how out of touch the national
parliament is with the people and epitomizes the lack of representation in the
system.
These
sorts of challenges could be dealt with differently in a system where
individual MPs accountability isn’t only upward, but more importantly, downward
to the people who elected them. The current system allows underperformed MPs to
hide behind the mask of political parties – shielding them from being held
accountable by the public. The impersonal nature of the electoral system
actually works against the competitive nature that comes with democratic
election, which is to elect political parties with possibly better and more
representative figures to the national parliament. It is also working against
the spin-offs that competition breeds to enhance the workings of a system or an
organization.
MPs
in a system where they are answerable to the people or whose constituency is
divided by a fixed geographical line on the other hand, have both exogenous and
endogenous drive to be representative. His/her constituents’ trust and not only
that of the political party’s is the primary determinant in one remains elected
or not. In such a system, the electorate have the freedom to elect potentially
the best candidates at their own discretion, to represent them and contribute
to an inclusive national legislation or policies.
At
the same time, the system compels political parties to attract and draft the
best people into their ranks if they wished to be seriously regarded as
contenders in every election – contributing to increasing democratic efficiency
and accountability. Democratic efficiency refers to the degree to which the
results of democratic processes reflect the will of the people. In this
context, it refers to the ways in which the system encourages or compels
depends how one views it, both political parties and the electorate to make the
best choices under a given condition. For example, political parties come forward
with the best possible candidates to represent an electorate, voters elect
politicians they believe would serve their interests best in law and policy
making, and elected candidates and their respective parties answer to the
electorate – creating a mutually binding relationship between all actors and a
much clearer expectations between the electorate and the elected politicians.
The
current system is less so. Given accountability is to political parties instead
of the electorate, the incentive is somewhat unclear and MPs reelection aren’t
necessarily reflective of their actual performances as far as representation
and accountability are concerned. The system discourages efforts to exploit the
potentials of representative democracy as a delegated system of government, and
could undermine the core principle and values underpinning democracy most
notably, government of the people, by the people and for the people the system
meant to safeguard in the first place.
Timor-Leste
is becoming increasingly diverse in its demographic as it is maturing as a
nation-state. This is reflected in the growing number of returning diaspora,
groups of Timorese societies realizing their rights in post-independence era
and new generations with their new needs and rights are becoming eligible to
vote. Ideally, the electoral system should reflect these changes and their
associated issues. It should serve not only as a mechanism to elect
politicians, but also as a means to ensure that the values of representative
democracy are exercised and maintained.
The
point is we can make the system works better for our democracy and that
encompasses making selective changes to the current system or scrap the law
altogether and introduce an alternative to improve the workings of our
representative democracy.
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário