Iraq forms election commission

[CADsortaGUY]

Iraq has moved a step closer to holding its first democratic elections with the naming of an independent commission

Iraq forms election commission
Fri 4 June, 2004 12:49

By Luke Baker

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Iraq has moved a step closer to holding its first democratic elections with the naming of an independent commission to organise the poll, due to take place by January 31 next year if security permits.

Carina Perelli, a United Nations elections expert sent to Iraq to oversee the process, named a seven-member Independent Electoral Commission and a chief elections officer who will lay the groundwork for the ballot over the coming seven months.

Perelli called the non-political appointments, made after a weeks-long process of consultation and interviews, "one step further in the right direction along the road towards a democratic, sovereign, free and peaceful Iraq".

The commission was named three days after the appointment of an interim Iraqi government, drawn up in collaboration with the United Nations and Washington, which will take back sovereignty from U.S.-led authorities on June 30.

Perelli said the time available, though short, is enough to organise the polls and said bigger concerns were security and ensuring that Iraqis ultimately regard the elections as valid.

"From a technical point of view, the time is sufficient to have credible and genuine elections," said Perelli, the director of the U.N. electoral assistance division, who also helped prepare polls in East Timor.

U.S. authorities have assigned $260 million (142 million pounds) to organise the elections, a sum Perelli hoped would match costs, though she said several nations, some members of the U.S.-led coalition and others not, had said they would be pleased to offer support.

FREE AND FAIR POLL

Following a popular European model, Iraq's elections will be held on the basis of proportional representation, a method that favours small parties and should make the ballot more inclusive.

Parties will be able to present a list of candidates, as few as 12 or as many as 275 -- the number of national assembly seats to be filled via the poll -- and seats will be assigned on the basis of the number of votes received, going down the list.

Perelli said that looking at Iraq's population of around 26 million and normal voter participation, a party or person would have to win some 26-27,000 votes to earn a seat in the assembly.

As well as political parties, special interest groups will be allowed to present lists, or candidates can run on an individual ticket. To stand for election, a candidate must file a 500-signature petition with the electoral commission.

On any list, every third name must be a woman to ensure that at least 25 percent of seats in the assembly go to women, a stipulation made in Iraq's interim constitution, agreed earlier this year.

Voter rolls have yet to be drawn up, but Perelli said the commission would build them by auditing Iraq's ration-card system, a comprehensive database used to distribute food while Iraq was under sanctions.

Troops from the 150,000-strong U.S.-led coalition and Iraqi security forces will provide security for the poll, a huge task as up to 30,000 voting stations will have to be set up to enable everyone to vote.

Perelli said the United Nations would encourage the electoral commission to ask for international observers for the election, though the U.N., having helped organise the poll, would not be involved in observing it.

The U.N. has named Carlos Valenzuela, a former U.N. chief elections officer in East Timor, as its adviser to Iraq's electoral commission over the coming seven months, Perelli said.

Moving right along....

CkG

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Nice to see. Ironically I would not be surprised if their actual elections system ends up being more modern and seamless than our own, which is still shockingly third-world in its implementation.

 

[Perknose]

Proportional representation is a good move, as winner take all politics would quickly be a death knell to any fledgling Iraqi democracy.

With PR, they will be forced to practice coalition politics, which will hopefully be an on the job learning experience in life outside your sect, let alone your tribe.

All that said, I am not rabidly optimistic about their prospects.

As Edmund Burke so sagely noted some centuries before, a polity is an organic being. One cannot just transplant an outside idea and have it instantly flourish. A polity has roots, which are rooted in the culture, in it's most mundane of mores --they go back perforce for centuries. Rip them out, and you dare the Gods.

It was the descendants of Englishmen whose ideas of rights went right back to the Magna Charta which portended so well for our own particular revolution. Another key point: It was our revolution.

If there's one thing any serious student of the political process learns it's that there are no shortcuts. The process of political maturation is generational. This is what doomed the original Russian revolution and led inevitably to a Stalin. There are no shortcuts.

 

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: Don_Vito
Nice to see. Ironically I would not be surprised if their actual elections system ends up being more modern and seamless than our own, which is still shockingly third-world in its implementation.

Don_Vito, I also welcome the good news from Iraq. I am however, taken aback by your criticism of our election system.

What is wrong with our election system, and what would you propose to fix it?

 

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: Don_Vito
Nice to see. Ironically I would not be surprised if their actual elections system ends up being more modern and seamless than our own, which is still shockingly third-world in its implementation.

Don_Vito, I also welcome the good news from Iraq. I am however, taken aback by your criticism of our election system.

What is wrong with our election system, and what would you propose to fix it?

Bump for the doctor.



??

 

[TheBDB]

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: Don_Vito
Nice to see. Ironically I would not be surprised if their actual elections system ends up being more modern and seamless than our own, which is still shockingly third-world in its implementation.

Don_Vito, I also welcome the good news from Iraq. I am however, taken aback by your criticism of our election system.

What is wrong with our election system, and what would you propose to fix it?

Remove the electoral college.

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: TheBDB

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: Don_Vito
Nice to see. Ironically I would not be surprised if their actual elections system ends up being more modern and seamless than our own, which is still shockingly third-world in its implementation.

Don_Vito, I also welcome the good news from Iraq. I am however, taken aback by your criticism of our election system.

What is wrong with our election system, and what would you propose to fix it?

Remove the electoral college.

Never going to happen.

 

[TheBDB]

Originally posted by: Tabb

Originally posted by: TheBDB

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: Don_Vito
Nice to see. Ironically I would not be surprised if their actual elections system ends up being more modern and seamless than our own, which is still shockingly third-world in its implementation.

Don_Vito, I also welcome the good news from Iraq. I am however, taken aback by your criticism of our election system.

What is wrong with our election system, and what would you propose to fix it?

Remove the electoral college.

Never going to happen.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: Don_Vito
Nice to see. Ironically I would not be surprised if their actual elections system ends up being more modern and seamless than our own, which is still shockingly third-world in its implementation.

Don_Vito, I also welcome the good news from Iraq. I am however, taken aback by your criticism of our election system.

What is wrong with our election system, and what would you propose to fix it?

To be clear, I am talking about implementation, not the electoral college itself.

As we learned in the 2000 election, each state has its own polling methodology. Some states use ballots that are hard to read and use, and others use voting machines that incorporate ancient technology, and rely on local volunteers to relay the results. There is not much in the way of auditing of the polling process. Our actual elections process is markedly less sophisticated and tamper-proof than those used in many much poorer nations. Our own system does not meet the standards established by the Carter Foundation for free and fair elections in emerging nations. It's also hardly encouraging that the CEO of Diebold, a major manufacturer of voting machines, donated $100K to President Bush, and says he wants to help deliver him electoral votes.

Since the debacle that was the 2000 election (and I am talking about the process, not the outcome), I would like to have seen the federal government implement, at a minimum, a more stringent standard for states to use in collecting and tabulating votes. Instead, nothing happened that might help improve the process.

 

[Infohawk]

I agree with others that the electoral college is problematic. Also, our first-past the post system is primitive and not the most democratic form of elections.

And just because something is not likely to happen (and you haven't offered any evidence that it isn't) doesn't mean it's not something that needs to be fixed.

 

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: Don_Vito


Since the debacle that was the 2000 election (and I am talking about the process, not the outcome)

I fail to see the need to require states to spend more money on a process where the outcome would not be different.

It does not impress me that Mr. Carter thinks our election system is antiquated.

It does not impress me that you post a link to an article about a private company donation to Bush
where there is clearly no merit that Bush can leverage this for votes.

I am very interested in this part though, if you could clarify please.

Our actual elections process is markedly less sophisticated and tamper-proof than those used in many much poorer nations.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Ozoned

It does not impress me that you post a link to an article about a private company donation to Bush
where there is clearly no merit that Bush can leverage this for votes.

So if your state was using George Soros Brand voting machines, you wouldn't mind?