Op Ed by Jayakhmer
Originally posted at http://www.modernprogressivekhmer.blogspot.com/
If Cambodia were to hold the general elections today, it is safe to assume that the results would be similar to that of the last election. With the 2006 constitutional amendment that allowed governments to be formed with a simple majority in the parliament rather than the previously required two-thirds majority, the last general elections gave a political party a decisive victory for the first time since 1993.
In the 2008 National Assembly General Elections, the Cambodian People’s Party (CPP) captured 90 of 123 seats, the Sam Rainsy Party (SRP) won 26, and the rest was shared by other political parties.
Cambodia is scheduled to hold its fifth General Elections in 2013. Two years in politics is a life time. Anything can happen during this time that could change the political dynamic and hence the political climate. It is this uncertainty that drives all kind of speculations. Until such change occurs, current political reality is the only basis from which political speculations should be derived.
For the purpose of peeking into the next elections, let us look at just a few factors that may give credence to the above assumption.
Currently, Cambodia has but two major political parties – CPP and SRP. Other political parties such as the once dominant and now almost defunct National United Front for an Independent, Neutral, Peaceful, and Cooperative Cambodia (FUNCINPEC) and the newly formed Human Rights Party (HRP) are politically too insignificant. (FUNCIPEC captured 58 seats in the 1993 United Nations sponsored parliamentary election. The last election, it managed to secure only 2 seats.) Under the new constitutional requirement, it is conceivable that only CPP or SRP could easily gain a simple majority in any given election without needing to form coalitions with smaller political parties.
At this juncture, though, it seems safe to infer that it will take the SRP more than a few election cycles to get to the point where they are a serious threat to the CPP.
SRP will surely be participating in the next general elections. However, if nothing changes until the elections, SRP will be a much damaged party with its leader is in exile. Furthermore, political defections usually occur prior to major elections. As some of the SRP members need to survive literally and politically, political defections are expected. If these defections do occur, this would potentially weaken SRP further.
Judging from recent political events, the SRP and its leaders do not seem to understand that they are in a political environment where real politics is at play every breathing moment. In real politics, one should not give his/her opponent endless political ammunition. If one takes actions without thinking things through regarding how to achieve a political objective or how to give oneself an honorable exit strategy, one will be taken advantage of every single time. That is a guarantee.
The SRP and its leaders should always remember that in real politics winning is not everything -- ‘winning is the only thing.’ Those who practice real politics usually, if not always, use every means necessary to achieve their political goal(s) or their desired outcome(s).
Here is an example of how the SRP getting itself bogged down in a new trend:
It is quite obvious that a new trend has started in Cambodian politics. High profile law suits and counter law suits seem to capture the country’s headlines frequently. This could be a healthy new trend if the country does it right. It is a good practice to mediate political disputes in the courts. Thus far, though, the results are lopsided.
The odds seem to work against members of the opposition parties. Ms. Mu Sochua, a high profile SRP member, recently lost her case which resulted in a reduction of her salary. Mr. Sam Rainsy, the leader of the opposition party that bears his name, was convicted and sentenced by a provincial court on charges of racial incitement and destroying demarcation posts on the border with Vietnam in January of this year. Mr. Rainsy is also being sued by the government for allegedly spreading a falsified document and misinformation. The impending lawsuit could decide the fate of his political career. If convicted, Mr. Rainsy could face years in prison. But if he chooses to stay out of Cambodia to avoid the trial and/or the sentence, this could be the end his political career in Cambodia. Getting another royal pardon is plausible, but this scenario is highly likely to occur only after the elections – if it will happen at all. If Mr. Kem Sokha, current president of HRP, were to be involved in a lawsuit, chances are he too would lose.
Sometimes, the SRP puts itself into a hole, too. What seemed to be a natural advantage for the SRP, discussing the corruption issues, turned out to be a loss of opportunity. A political blunder on the part of SRP occurred when all its National Assembly members extricated themselves from voting on the country’s only anti-corruption law in March of this year. SRP’s parliament members walked out in protest for being given too little of time to review the proposed legislation. This action gave CPP full ownership of the anti-corruption law when the law was passed without SRP’s votes.
CPP, on the other hand, has been able to continue pilling up its political scores. This should not surprise anyone. CPP has vast resources and full control of the government. CPP can legitimately claim successes in these major areas: the Preah Vihear issue, economic concerns, and corruption.
As long as the Preah Vihear issue with Thailand does not result in a full scale war between the two nations, the government under CPP is credited for exercising self-restraint. At this juncture, a full scale war between the two nations is highly unlikely.
Juxtaposed to its political success, CPP can also claim success in the economic arena. During this worldwide depression, Cambodia is doing moderately well. In a recent IMF review, Cambodia was credited with growth of 4 to 5% in their GDP for 2010. Cambodian infrastructures also improved significantly during CPP’s tenure. All this contributes significantly to CPP being positioned to do very well heading into the next election.
The implementation of information technology (IT) infrastructure by the National Information Communications Technology Development Authority (NiDA) proved to be another major step forward during CPP’s governance simply allowing government institutions to be connected while providing basic services to the public was an instant improvement. As Cambodia tries to catch up technologically with developed nations, it has only one way to go and that way is up. If Cambodia needs to have functional institutions to become a functional democracy, adopting technologies wisely will be an important part of Cambodia’s success in achieving that goal.
The implementation of the long awaited anti-corruption law was not as clearly a defined step forward as Cambodia’s economic and technological advances. It was welcomed with skepticism by some observers and critics because the government appointed its own man, Mr. Om Yentieng, a senior adviser to the prime minister and chairman of the government-run Cambodian Human Rights Committee, to head the anti corruption unit (ACU). Still, it represents forward movement in the effort to make government more transparent and less vulnerable to those with deep wallets who attempt to sidestep the democratic process to achieve their own goals. Heading to the next elections, the ACU will only need to make a few arrests leading to convictions to give teeth to this new law. The country is desperate for such a law and will welcome any arrest and or conviction of any official. They probably will not care whether the actions were done with political motivation or not. Care will have to be exercised when considering how best to implement this law.
So, what does this mean?
This means Cambodia has come far, but till has a long way to go. Everything is not rosy. The people are watching. For some life is wonderful, for others the struggle continues. Despite noticeable progress, human rights, the border, the economy, environmental issues, and natural resources – just to mention some common concerns– remain important to many voters.
On one hand, in a democracy, despite the maneuvering by politicians, people have the ultimate power to decide and they decide through elections. Although sometimes voters do not seem to be rational in their decisions, ultimately they will get it right.
On the other hand, while one should trust the voters to decide, it is everyone’s responsibility, regardless of the political persuasion each may hold, to make sure that the country’s political system remains vibrant and faithful to its original intent so it at least provides people with choices during the elections.
It is also everyone’s responsibility to find ways to promote healthy competition among political parties. CPP does not have to be bad for SRP to win, for instance, nor does SRP has to be completely destroyed for CPP to look good. There must be a way for both parties to find rooms to compromise. Otherwise, we all lose.
In democratic elections, choice is a fundamental requirement. Without choices, democratic elections have no meaning. Without choices, elections are merely symbolic ceremonies that give false legitimacy to those who hold powers. And without choices, the claim that a government is governed with the mandate of the people is simply hollow.
Although CPP has proven that it is more than capable of leading the country alone thus far, it would be much better if it could govern democratically – working collaboratively with minority parties, magnanimously allowing opposing opinions to be debated, and even implementing some of the minority parties’ ideas.
Democracy is messy. It is not as smooth or as efficient as authoritarianism. A democracy has to deal with checks and balances, building consensus, requiring and encouraging participation in the democratic process, respecting rights, and abiding by the agreed upon social contract in the form of a constitution and so on and so forth.
As messy and as inefficient as democracy is, it has its beauty. The idea that a political system is capable of creating a social and political environment that allows individuals to grow to their fullest human potential is priceless.
In the 2008 National Assembly General Elections, the Cambodian People’s Party (CPP) captured 90 of 123 seats, the Sam Rainsy Party (SRP) won 26, and the rest was shared by other political parties.
Cambodia is scheduled to hold its fifth General Elections in 2013. Two years in politics is a life time. Anything can happen during this time that could change the political dynamic and hence the political climate. It is this uncertainty that drives all kind of speculations. Until such change occurs, current political reality is the only basis from which political speculations should be derived.
For the purpose of peeking into the next elections, let us look at just a few factors that may give credence to the above assumption.
Currently, Cambodia has but two major political parties – CPP and SRP. Other political parties such as the once dominant and now almost defunct National United Front for an Independent, Neutral, Peaceful, and Cooperative Cambodia (FUNCINPEC) and the newly formed Human Rights Party (HRP) are politically too insignificant. (FUNCIPEC captured 58 seats in the 1993 United Nations sponsored parliamentary election. The last election, it managed to secure only 2 seats.) Under the new constitutional requirement, it is conceivable that only CPP or SRP could easily gain a simple majority in any given election without needing to form coalitions with smaller political parties.
At this juncture, though, it seems safe to infer that it will take the SRP more than a few election cycles to get to the point where they are a serious threat to the CPP.
SRP will surely be participating in the next general elections. However, if nothing changes until the elections, SRP will be a much damaged party with its leader is in exile. Furthermore, political defections usually occur prior to major elections. As some of the SRP members need to survive literally and politically, political defections are expected. If these defections do occur, this would potentially weaken SRP further.
Judging from recent political events, the SRP and its leaders do not seem to understand that they are in a political environment where real politics is at play every breathing moment. In real politics, one should not give his/her opponent endless political ammunition. If one takes actions without thinking things through regarding how to achieve a political objective or how to give oneself an honorable exit strategy, one will be taken advantage of every single time. That is a guarantee.
The SRP and its leaders should always remember that in real politics winning is not everything -- ‘winning is the only thing.’ Those who practice real politics usually, if not always, use every means necessary to achieve their political goal(s) or their desired outcome(s).
Here is an example of how the SRP getting itself bogged down in a new trend:
It is quite obvious that a new trend has started in Cambodian politics. High profile law suits and counter law suits seem to capture the country’s headlines frequently. This could be a healthy new trend if the country does it right. It is a good practice to mediate political disputes in the courts. Thus far, though, the results are lopsided.
The odds seem to work against members of the opposition parties. Ms. Mu Sochua, a high profile SRP member, recently lost her case which resulted in a reduction of her salary. Mr. Sam Rainsy, the leader of the opposition party that bears his name, was convicted and sentenced by a provincial court on charges of racial incitement and destroying demarcation posts on the border with Vietnam in January of this year. Mr. Rainsy is also being sued by the government for allegedly spreading a falsified document and misinformation. The impending lawsuit could decide the fate of his political career. If convicted, Mr. Rainsy could face years in prison. But if he chooses to stay out of Cambodia to avoid the trial and/or the sentence, this could be the end his political career in Cambodia. Getting another royal pardon is plausible, but this scenario is highly likely to occur only after the elections – if it will happen at all. If Mr. Kem Sokha, current president of HRP, were to be involved in a lawsuit, chances are he too would lose.
Sometimes, the SRP puts itself into a hole, too. What seemed to be a natural advantage for the SRP, discussing the corruption issues, turned out to be a loss of opportunity. A political blunder on the part of SRP occurred when all its National Assembly members extricated themselves from voting on the country’s only anti-corruption law in March of this year. SRP’s parliament members walked out in protest for being given too little of time to review the proposed legislation. This action gave CPP full ownership of the anti-corruption law when the law was passed without SRP’s votes.
CPP, on the other hand, has been able to continue pilling up its political scores. This should not surprise anyone. CPP has vast resources and full control of the government. CPP can legitimately claim successes in these major areas: the Preah Vihear issue, economic concerns, and corruption.
As long as the Preah Vihear issue with Thailand does not result in a full scale war between the two nations, the government under CPP is credited for exercising self-restraint. At this juncture, a full scale war between the two nations is highly unlikely.
Juxtaposed to its political success, CPP can also claim success in the economic arena. During this worldwide depression, Cambodia is doing moderately well. In a recent IMF review, Cambodia was credited with growth of 4 to 5% in their GDP for 2010. Cambodian infrastructures also improved significantly during CPP’s tenure. All this contributes significantly to CPP being positioned to do very well heading into the next election.
The implementation of information technology (IT) infrastructure by the National Information Communications Technology Development Authority (NiDA) proved to be another major step forward during CPP’s governance simply allowing government institutions to be connected while providing basic services to the public was an instant improvement. As Cambodia tries to catch up technologically with developed nations, it has only one way to go and that way is up. If Cambodia needs to have functional institutions to become a functional democracy, adopting technologies wisely will be an important part of Cambodia’s success in achieving that goal.
The implementation of the long awaited anti-corruption law was not as clearly a defined step forward as Cambodia’s economic and technological advances. It was welcomed with skepticism by some observers and critics because the government appointed its own man, Mr. Om Yentieng, a senior adviser to the prime minister and chairman of the government-run Cambodian Human Rights Committee, to head the anti corruption unit (ACU). Still, it represents forward movement in the effort to make government more transparent and less vulnerable to those with deep wallets who attempt to sidestep the democratic process to achieve their own goals. Heading to the next elections, the ACU will only need to make a few arrests leading to convictions to give teeth to this new law. The country is desperate for such a law and will welcome any arrest and or conviction of any official. They probably will not care whether the actions were done with political motivation or not. Care will have to be exercised when considering how best to implement this law.
So, what does this mean?
This means Cambodia has come far, but till has a long way to go. Everything is not rosy. The people are watching. For some life is wonderful, for others the struggle continues. Despite noticeable progress, human rights, the border, the economy, environmental issues, and natural resources – just to mention some common concerns– remain important to many voters.
On one hand, in a democracy, despite the maneuvering by politicians, people have the ultimate power to decide and they decide through elections. Although sometimes voters do not seem to be rational in their decisions, ultimately they will get it right.
On the other hand, while one should trust the voters to decide, it is everyone’s responsibility, regardless of the political persuasion each may hold, to make sure that the country’s political system remains vibrant and faithful to its original intent so it at least provides people with choices during the elections.
It is also everyone’s responsibility to find ways to promote healthy competition among political parties. CPP does not have to be bad for SRP to win, for instance, nor does SRP has to be completely destroyed for CPP to look good. There must be a way for both parties to find rooms to compromise. Otherwise, we all lose.
In democratic elections, choice is a fundamental requirement. Without choices, democratic elections have no meaning. Without choices, elections are merely symbolic ceremonies that give false legitimacy to those who hold powers. And without choices, the claim that a government is governed with the mandate of the people is simply hollow.
Although CPP has proven that it is more than capable of leading the country alone thus far, it would be much better if it could govern democratically – working collaboratively with minority parties, magnanimously allowing opposing opinions to be debated, and even implementing some of the minority parties’ ideas.
Democracy is messy. It is not as smooth or as efficient as authoritarianism. A democracy has to deal with checks and balances, building consensus, requiring and encouraging participation in the democratic process, respecting rights, and abiding by the agreed upon social contract in the form of a constitution and so on and so forth.
As messy and as inefficient as democracy is, it has its beauty. The idea that a political system is capable of creating a social and political environment that allows individuals to grow to their fullest human potential is priceless.
No comments:
Post a Comment