Pan-Somali Council For Peace and Democracy

Title:

Somalia�s Future Government: Representative or Responsible

The recent�and perhaps still ongoing�discussion of the new Somali parliament on whether to appoint the cabinet from within or from without may have involved more than just meets the eye. One reaction by cynics to the earlier vote of the parliament to appoint the Prime Minister from within the parliament has been that perhaps the members of the parliament wish to keep all the power resources within the house, to share them between themselves. Deeply studied, however, the issues involved are more complex and far-reaching, if less obvious, than that. The seemingly simple question of whether to draw government ministers from within or from without the parliament seems to be still lingering on before the parliament, despite the earlier motion to appoint the Prime Minister from within. The question, however, literally strikes at the heart of some of the issues, defining the choice of the type of future government for Somalia. This essay attempts to analyze the issues involved with a view to instigating some public debate for all of us to consider the options in their right places, more than it is to encourage the decision either way. Political scientists and constitutional lawyers (among others) conceive of generally two types of government in terms of general outlook, structure and focus. One is �representative government�; the other is �responsible government�. Experts say that the political notion of representation is based on the idea that some person or institution acts on behalf of the people, by representing their beliefs, attitudes and perspectives, and�I add�not necessarily their clans. �Representative government� is, therefore, based on the correct assumption and reality that it is not possible for all of the people of a state to be involved all the time with the business of government. Hence, the people must delegate the task of government to representatives chosen at regular elections The big advantage of �representative government� is that, experts say, it allows the citizens of even very large countries such as India to have some influence on their rulers. �However, there is the problem of whether elected representatives �should act merely as a relay mechanism for the views of their constituents, or whether they should act more independently, utilizing their knowledge and skills to lead.� And therefore, by making decisions better for the greater good of the country. �Responsible government� can be considered, as you will see, a potion for curing this anomaly. The term �responsible government�, experts say, is a �system of executive government accountability �. This system of accountability to the parliament, first, and ultimately to the people is termed as �responsible government�. Historically, responsible government, stands in contrast to the �irresponsible� government of those ancient monarchs who ruled with the advice of a small number of elites, who were neither members of nor accountable to the people�s representatives in parliament. More specifically, it is understood, �responsible government� is the term used to describe a political system where the executive government, the Cabinet and Ministry, is drawn from, and is accountable to the legislative branch. In practice, this means that elections to the Parliament is the means by which voters decide who shall govern�in other words, those who shall form the executive branch of government�alternatively known as the Cabinet, which meet in secret from the parliament. �This democratic development brought home the notion that governments existed only for as long as they could maintain the support of a majority of members of the parliament, which represents all the people of a country. A vote of �no confidence� by the house means that the government is obliged to resign and could also mean the dissolution of the house and a general election. Thus, �responsible government� is all about the people�s control of their government, expressed through the parliament, which is the people�s house. You may have noted that both �representative government� and �responsible government� lean heavily on the trio concepts of representation, elections and accountability. So, what is the catch? You might ask! Is all this about a hair-splitting exercise? Actually, the issue is one of emphasis on structures and processes for the allocation of powers and about the chain of accountability. Here, �responsible government� allows those voted in as the majority party to form the government, where they do not only represent the views of their constituents but can, in addition, exercise some degree of independence and judgment to make more informed decisions in leading the nation. For example, in the British, the Canadian and the Australian systems, which are described as �responsible government�, to name a few, the public elects the parliament to office on the understanding that the majority party will form the government. The former constitution of Somalia, during the first nine years of independence, also featured a parliamentary democracy and envisaged the workings of �responsible government�. �By contrast, the United States, for example, is not considered a form of a �responsible government�. It is considered as a form of �representative government�. As matters work today in the USA, the cabinet comes from outside the congress to be confirmed by relevant Senate committees. But, basically, the cabinet is accountable to the President, who is separately accountable to the people, and who may come from a party other than the majority party in the congress. That is why it is also called �Presidential Government� and not �Parliamentary Government�. As the reader of this essay, you may already be asking yourself two pertinent, basic questions. One: how representative is the new Somali Parliament? Two: which term��Representative� or �Responsible��better describes the outcome of the Nairobi Conference of 2004�? The answers to both questions are rather grayish at this embryonic stage of the system. �However, I will take a shot at both of them in an attempt to highlight the issues involved more than it is to answer them. In effect, �representation�, as explained earlier, means that the people have conferred their trust on individuals they have chosen from their voting districts to represent them in the parliament. �Responsibility� means that they want the political party, which has the greatest number of seats in the parliament to form the government�the executive council. The current members of the Somali parliament were rather selected, not elected, for obvious and practical reasons. They were selected by their respective participating delegations, representing the multitude of the sub-clans of the Somali family tree(s), in the Conference. These delegations could, in the end, select the parliament on the premise that they empowered themselves to competence by mutually recognizing themselves as equitable entities, which make up the whole of Somalia. By the resultant equitable distribution of power�negotiated on the basis of the so-called 4.5-formula�the 275-member parliament gives one seat to represent, roughly, every 37,000 persons of the estimated population of 10 million. This ratio of power resources distribution would be considered excellent by many standards�that is, if we can afford the cost. However, it is not yet clear whether this clan-based distribution tallies well with the population distribution across the country, since there are no recent census-based demographics. Therefore, there will have to be a census to adjust the formula, to correct any tilts in the balance between regions and districts and in order to ensure social justice. Of course, this assumes that there shall be some form of redistricting, after a census. In addition, there is one other high looming question. Where do the prerogative powers of the new parliament to represent and execute come from? Fortunately, in the case of Somalia, the symbols of state have remained intact after the dissolution of government in January 1991. There has been no doubt at any time that those symbols of state�including the borders, the flag, the people, even the capital�remained recognized by the international community. �The majority of the Somali people also do still see themselves as subjects of that old sovereign of Somalia, which was formed in July 1960. That old social contract remains intact except in the sense that there has been no effective government to symbolize the state for the last 15 years, for obvious reasons. (I must not pass here without mentioning that the �Somaliland� question will remain one of the most crucial issues for any future undertaking to reconstitute Somalia as a whole again). But, it takes all to tango! To return to my point, the mutual recognition between the various clan delegations as equitable entities have empowered them�therefore, transposing the Conference, at some point, into a Constitutional Assembly�to produce agreements which, in the end, could translate into bonds of law, as is now envisaged in the Transitional Constitution. That is what happened in theory. Practically speaking, the hitherto segmented moral force of the traditional authority and the disjointed political authority of the regional faction/political leaders have somehow been meshed together to gradually evolve and merge into what we now know as the Transitional Federal Constitution. Legally speaking�and I defer to constitutional lawyers here�the moral force of those agreements seems to have empowered the clan delegations to select, because they could not elect under the circumstances, their representatives to parliament. For now, the outcome is nothing but a political arrangement, and an interim one at that. It can only work on the assumption that a majority of the Somali people will support it in good faith and give it the consent of the governed, in order to realize their aspiration to restore government, and in the hope that those selected for parliament are motivated enough to deliver in response to the public aspirations and expectations, as per the mandate provided in the Transitional Constitution. Accountability, at this early stage, can also, only, be gleaned from an assumption that parliament and those they designate as their Ministerial Council or government will remain accountable to the extent that they are motivated to seek re-election, to remain responsive to public aspirations for government in the future, and remain mindful of their places in the annals of history. Given this mind set, it is hoped, they will remain respectful of the oath of office. In that eventuality, they have no choice but to show results in the best interest of the people. The alternative is for them to politically perish together with the arrangement like the TNG before it�God forbid! Regarding profile, the edifice obviously has the pattern of �responsible government�. That is, in the sense that it is not a Presidential government (i.e. styled after the United states government), by design. Left as designed, it will eventually transpire into a parliamentary democracy in the sense that both the President and the Ministers will undoubtedly come from the majority party when the arrangement matures into completion, perhaps as of the next election, when parties contend for office, whenever that is. �In fact, the parliament has already taken the decision in the direction of �responsible government� by already forcing the President to appoint the Prime Minister from within. A fact they cannot change for the rest of the members of the cabinet, unless they change their motion in six months time, now that they have already chosen the First Minister from within. �In the end, �responsible government� is no more no less than the public choosing their government from among those representing them in parliament. True, the extent to which this particular parliament can deliver against the expectations of responsibility for execution depends on their individual and collective knowledge, skills, attitudes and collective political leadership capacity. For now, the credit goes to H.E. Mohamed Dheere, the former Member of Parliament, who had selflessly given up his parliamentary seat to PM Ghedi, who, he thinks�and we all may agree�is a better man for the job of Prime Minister for the country. By this, Mohamed Dheere may have averted a lurking constitutional crisis of the first order, and so early in the process While the system is, by nature, shaped in the fashion of �responsible government�, for the future, it does not hurt if, during this transitional period, some of the cabinet will come from without�since the parliament was not elected, after all�when, and if talent, is occasionally sought from outside. But, the crux of the matter must remain that both the President and the Prime Minister are, at a minimum, accountable to the Parliament, for this term. Hopefully, the Parliament, in turn, will remain accountable to the people by remaining seized of the aspirations and the expectations of the population for peace, stability, governance, and democracy. That defines the future government for Somalia as �responsible�. In the meantime, pray with me for this arrangement to get off the ground and to work.

Hits:

211

Rating:

Rating:0 Votes:0 (Rating Scale: 1 = worst, 10 = best)

Added on:

11/30/2004

Author/Source:

Abdalla A. Hirad

Author's email/website:

n/a

Posted by:

Abdullahi

Comments:

0 Comment(s)

Menu