|
|
|
|
International Forum >> The Democracy Forum for East Asia>> Inaugural Conference
|
|
|
SESSION II Role of Elections and Parliaments The institutionalization of elections and parliaments is paramount in making the transition to a consolidated democracy. It is just as important for the policy-making process in more established democracies. In non-democratic countries that are gradually making the transition towards a democratic state, the upsurge in popular demand for self-government takes the form of free and fair elections and the constitution of a legitimate government, consisting of elected officials in the executive and legislative branches of government. The consolidation of democracy depends on how these institutions are able to carry out their respective roles in ensuring that the political process operates according to democratic principles and values. The sudden emergence of greater democracy in Indonesia in the wake of the economic crisis is a stark reminder of how central free and fair elections are in laying the foundations for a democratically legitimate government. The process of electing new representatives at local and national levels and the eventual successful transfer of power with the election of a new president is a significant break from the dictatorship of the past, marking the beginning of a long and complex process of establishing a full-fledged democracy. The changes that have taken place in Indonesia over the last year have been remarkable, to say the least. State control over the press and the organization of political parties has been lifted, new independent election authorities have been established and the legal framework for political institutions has also been substantially reformed. The Indonesian experience reminds us that free and fair elections not only are a prerequisite for the establishment of a democracy, but that they also inevitably set off a chain reaction of political reform, preparing the groundwork for a broader democratic political system. A top priority for fledgling democracies is constitutional reform. The extremely weak legislative and judiciary branches and the failure to guarantee civil and political rights are just some of the areas that must be addressed immediately by reforming Indonesia? current constitution. In addition, the national legislature and regional assemblies must be given a more meaningful role in public debate, policy development and overseeing the role of the executive branch as well as the military. Electoral reform should also include measures such as abolishing the practice of reserving national and regional assembly seats for representatives of the military and police. Also to be encouraged is the debate over specific reforms, such as the current debate over the adoption of a district electoral system to increase legislative accountability. In order to establish genuine democracy, Indonesia must not only carry out basic structural reforms, but also initiate an informed and broadly based debate about the reforms themselves. Ten years ago, the first democratic election in Mongolia marked the transition from a communist regime dominated by a single party to a democratic multi-party system. With the passage of the National Parliamentary Election Law in 1992, free and open elections guaranteeing the right to political participation for all became the cornerstone of Mongolian democracy. However, the simple majority system used to elect members of parliament led to some unexpected results. In the parliamentary election of 1992, the Democratic Association Party won 40% of the national vote but only 6 of the 87 parliamentary seats. Consequently, the MPRP party, which gained the majority of seats, was able to steer the direction of public policy with very little opposition from either governmental or non-governmental sources. Fortunately, the results of the parliamentary election of 1996 were more representative, in that the Democratic Association, which gained 47.4% of the popular vote, won 50 of the total 76 parliamentary seats. The Mongolian case has shown that, given the importance of the role of parliament in a democracy, it is imperative that people vote. If the electoral system is free, fair, and open, then the electoral results will be representative of the electorate as a whole. It is only then that democracy will be able to flourish. For other countries that have made the initial transition to a stable democracy, e.g. Korea, or have been a democracy for some time, e.g. Japan, electoral reform continues to be an important political issue. In 1998, the Korean government passed a campaign financing law that made elections less costly in an attempt to reduce the corrupting influence of money on politics. In addition, the creation of a new legal framework for electing members to the National Assembly is currently being discussed among members from both the ruling and the opposition parties. Electoral reform greatly affects the political system as a whole, a fact borne out by the impact of electoral and campaign finance reform in Japan since 1993. From 1955 to 1993, Japan? electoral system remained much the same. Members of the House of Representatives were elected in medium-sized districts with three to five seats (under a system called the "single nontransferable vote". To avoid unnecessary competition between candidates from the same party, factions emerged to sponsor different candidates in the same electoral district and to work for a more effective distribution of votes. With the splintering of the dominant Liberal Democratic Party in 1993 and subsequent electoral reform, Japan entered into a period of political instability. Under the new electoral system, members of the House of Representatives are elected under a mixed system of proportional representation (for 200 seats) and single-member districts (for 300 seats). This new system has made it more difficult to form stable party coalitions. The resulting volatility has significantly affected the policy-making process, as parties in the same ruling coalition are forced to spend more time negotiating policy, weakening party discipline and encouraging party defections in voting. There are many extremely complex issues involved in assessing democratic political reforms. First, there is a tendency to compare political trends in Asia with idealistic models of Western political development. Many participants felt that while it is important to keep abreast of international developments, strictly following Western benchmarks is neither useful nor realistic, and could significantly hamper the region's own efforts towards political reform. Each nation has its own political culture, which clearly affects the scope of reform, but it is important to remember that political behavior can also eventually change political culture. Institutional changes outside the political system (such as land reform) can also have a huge impact on the political system itself, making it more democratic. Democratic reform is thus mainly an incremental, rather than revolutionary, process. One thing that is unlikely to change is the relative cost of elections, which will always be high. Thus, the focus of campaign finance reform should be to make the financing transparent and accountable. In non-democratic countries that are gradually making the transition towards a democratic state, the upsurge in popular demand for self-government takes the form of free and fair elections and the constitution of a legitimate government, consisting of elected officials in the executive and legislative branches of government. Each nation has its own political culture, which clearly affects the scope of reform, but it is important to remember that political behavior can also eventually change political culture. |
|
| |