Op-Ed by JayaKhmer
On the web at http://modernprogressivekhmer.blogspot.com
The Cambodian People’s Party (CPP) decisively won the election. On July 27, 2008 Cambodia held its fourth Parliamentary Election in 15 years. Although 11 political parties participated in the election, CPP managed to capture 90 seats out of 123 according to official result. This means even without the 2006 constitutional amendment to change the requirement from a super majority to a simple majority (50+1) to form a government, CPP could have easily met the former requirement.
If democracy is only about elections, Cambodia shows an impressive progress considering the country had just emerged from decades of wars and conflicts. Democracy, however, is much more than elections though they serve as important processes. Rather, the principles and practices are characteristics necessary to determine whether a nation is democratic.
While I want to offer my heartfelt congratulations to CPP for its impressive victory, I have lingering concerns as to what political progress will this victory bring.
As CPP is poised to form a new government, its actions after the election will determine the direction of the country. CPP is credited for the country’s impressive economic progress. As an optimist, I hope that CPP will take this golden opportunity to addressing these important political issues.
Political Liberty is core of a democracy. The U.S. would not be the way it is now if the founding fathers failed to incorporated the Bill of Rights in the constitution. According to John Stuart Mill, liberty is “the protection against the tyranny of the political rulers.” The first ten amendments of the U.S constitution practically restrict the power of government and protect individuals’ liberty.
The current Cambodian constitution recognizes citizens’ rights, but it fails to restrict the power of government. There is a thin line between tyranny and democracy. Restricting the power of government and a devotion to creating a well-ordered society by all where no one is above the law will push Cambodia rapidly toward democracy.
This is also a perfect time for CPP to set term limit for office of the prime minister. The U.S did not impose term limit for president until the ratification of 22nd amendment in 1947. Most countries allow their prime ministers to serve without term limits; Cambodia under CPP should take this bold step by making term limit as a permanent part of the constitution.
CPP has to look beyond this transitional period. The country must keep changing to progress. With term limit, the country knows and expects new policies and new ways of governing after a leader’s term limit is expired. Even if the country keeps voting for the same party, at least term limit will provide opportunities for other capable members of that party to serve the nation. With term limit, the country also will depend on the rule of law to change a leader rather than depends on the mercy of a leader to relinquish his/her power.
The checks and balances are also very important in a democracy. Perhaps, the framers of the Cambodian constitution overlooked this important issue. In a unitary system, as oppose to the federal system, Cambodian government wheels tremendous power. Realistically, there is no separation of power between different branches of the government. Therefore, currently there are no checks and balances.
CPP happens to be the winner this time around. What would CPP do if it were to become an opposition party? As Cambodia becomes more developed, it is conceivable that country’s political landscape will also change and can change drastically. This is the right time to make sure that there is reflective equilibrium that provides ample opportunity for opposition parties to participate in political deliberation process to provide the much needed checks and balances.
If election in a democracy is a way in which a political party justifies its legitimacy to govern a nation, CPP should use this people’s mandate to create a legacy for all citizens – not just for CPP - that last from one generation to the next. Political liberty, term limit to the highest office in the nation, and legitimate checks and balances that encourage political oppositions a continued cooperation will be the most precious legacy that a political party or an election can offer.
If democracy is only about elections, Cambodia shows an impressive progress considering the country had just emerged from decades of wars and conflicts. Democracy, however, is much more than elections though they serve as important processes. Rather, the principles and practices are characteristics necessary to determine whether a nation is democratic.
While I want to offer my heartfelt congratulations to CPP for its impressive victory, I have lingering concerns as to what political progress will this victory bring.
As CPP is poised to form a new government, its actions after the election will determine the direction of the country. CPP is credited for the country’s impressive economic progress. As an optimist, I hope that CPP will take this golden opportunity to addressing these important political issues.
Political Liberty is core of a democracy. The U.S. would not be the way it is now if the founding fathers failed to incorporated the Bill of Rights in the constitution. According to John Stuart Mill, liberty is “the protection against the tyranny of the political rulers.” The first ten amendments of the U.S constitution practically restrict the power of government and protect individuals’ liberty.
The current Cambodian constitution recognizes citizens’ rights, but it fails to restrict the power of government. There is a thin line between tyranny and democracy. Restricting the power of government and a devotion to creating a well-ordered society by all where no one is above the law will push Cambodia rapidly toward democracy.
This is also a perfect time for CPP to set term limit for office of the prime minister. The U.S did not impose term limit for president until the ratification of 22nd amendment in 1947. Most countries allow their prime ministers to serve without term limits; Cambodia under CPP should take this bold step by making term limit as a permanent part of the constitution.
CPP has to look beyond this transitional period. The country must keep changing to progress. With term limit, the country knows and expects new policies and new ways of governing after a leader’s term limit is expired. Even if the country keeps voting for the same party, at least term limit will provide opportunities for other capable members of that party to serve the nation. With term limit, the country also will depend on the rule of law to change a leader rather than depends on the mercy of a leader to relinquish his/her power.
The checks and balances are also very important in a democracy. Perhaps, the framers of the Cambodian constitution overlooked this important issue. In a unitary system, as oppose to the federal system, Cambodian government wheels tremendous power. Realistically, there is no separation of power between different branches of the government. Therefore, currently there are no checks and balances.
CPP happens to be the winner this time around. What would CPP do if it were to become an opposition party? As Cambodia becomes more developed, it is conceivable that country’s political landscape will also change and can change drastically. This is the right time to make sure that there is reflective equilibrium that provides ample opportunity for opposition parties to participate in political deliberation process to provide the much needed checks and balances.
If election in a democracy is a way in which a political party justifies its legitimacy to govern a nation, CPP should use this people’s mandate to create a legacy for all citizens – not just for CPP - that last from one generation to the next. Political liberty, term limit to the highest office in the nation, and legitimate checks and balances that encourage political oppositions a continued cooperation will be the most precious legacy that a political party or an election can offer.
3 comments:
Op-Ed by JayaKhmer
Well written article indeed, however, there's af ew question to ask relating to your thought.
The current Cambodian constitution recognizes citizens’ rights, but it fails to restrict the power of government.
Can you actually tell people any democratic countries around the world where consitution restrcit the power of the government? For instance, USA [glad that you mentioned The first ten amendments of the U.S constitution practically restrict the power of government and protect individuals’ liberty] when decided to go to war in Iraq [from the on set was based on inflated dossier about WMD, then had to change course to war against terrorist as there's no WMD found] President W. Bush was facing opposition from its citizens and congress also from other allied leaders in Europe and other part of the country. DId he take into consideration of constitution restriction on his part? the answer is no. Another issue when congress tried to block for more budget for war in Iraq, what did presdient Bush did - I will use my presidential veto to over-rule any decision. So is this the way US consitution shall work? The answer is again "no".
One shall remember that any bill or legislation is written in a way that opens to many interpretation [too broad and none specific] in which loophole is existed for people to get away.
-----------------------------------This is also a perfect time for CPP to set term limit for office of the prime minister.
Personally, can't see this happend at this stage and many years to come. In fact, throughout Cambodia's political history this [limit term] has never happended.
-----------------------------------
This is the right time to make sure that there is reflective equilibrium that provides ample opportunity for opposition parties to participate in political deliberation process to provide the much needed checks and balances.
In the 3rd mandate National Assembly, there were members of opposition in the parliament watch-dog, from my personal level and point of view, but failed on their part to effectively and constructively scrutinize the government on core issue and too often opt to boycott or walk out from the parliament instead of having the courage to debate and push the government into one corner citing either the bill[s] is there in the interest of CPP or else. If this kind of action is to be carrying on in the 4th mandate mandate National Assembly then Oppostion cannot blame the government but themselves for the failure of much needed checks and balances.
By the way, it's time that opposition shall learn how to work along side and cooperate with the government in term of passing bill[s]/legislation on certain issue where are serving the interest of the country, economy and its people as whole particularly the current border situation.
-----------------------------------
Opposition party[ies] has a long road ahead of them, has a lot to learn and shall even work harder than before if to land in the top job.
2013 might be a long way to go but it's actually short in time if failure to find an effective and constructive strategic policy to convince publics that they are best for the top job.
Thank for a very constructive comment for the Govt. The first time I see a modest writing in this blog.
4:26 AM, your comment is also very constructive. However,the implementation of law and regulation is the main concerns in Cambodia. The law is technically acceptable should the govt. or people in power just obey it.
Limiting term for the PM never technically mentioned in the Paliamentary regimes. In paliamentary nation, Govt. has no mandate, but the parliament does have. Govt. can be removed at any time by the non-confident vote from the MP, should they don't perform well.
It is totally different from Presidential or semi-presidential regime like US or France that the President can't be removed from office by Parliament. Impeachment is the only way to pressure the president, but still if the president don't resign he is still legally in power.
so I agree that the check n balance is the only way to improve or limit the power of the govt. and Rule of law is also what we need to improve.
How can we ensure the power of National Assembly members when there were tanks, guns, and security guards surrounding the day of electing PM?
Also, who dares to vote no when the voting is done by raising up hands not by secret ballot?
Please wait and see how many tanks and guns again during the first assembly meeting this time.
Why intimidation now has been the growing part of Cambodian political culture?
Why we move backward?
Package vote did not exist in the 1st and 2nd mandate.
What will be worst happen in the 4the mandate by package vote and raising up hands voting?
Post a Comment