| Sports |
 by Dr MICHAEL
UNAGE
Oligarchy
evident in PNG
THE Law on Integrity of Political Parties
and Candidates is for the most part a protection of social justice and
people’s power represented in State institutions.
However, the Organic Law is flawed giving politicians tactical
advantage. An emerging trend in Papua New Guinea is that political
parties are using State wealth and authority to enhance personal or
sectarian interests.
If this trend continues for some time, our democracy would eventually
turn into an oligarchy, a word deriving from the Greek meaning the rule
of the few.
Hence, if few dominant political personalities and parties increasingly
use power and assets of the State to enhance themselves, they convert
democracy into an oligarchy.
Oligarchy comes into play when the major ruling party has absolute
prerogative over other coalition partners in any decision affecting the
State and its people.
Power is only concentrated on the Prime Minister and the inner circle of
the ruling party, shunning others out.
Other coalition partners are made to be content with what they get or
opt to find themselves in the Opposition bench.
Unless, we have strong laws protecting coalition parties in Government,
the State will became oligarchic.
In the last term of Government, many decision made were not reflective
of democracy, but apparently belong to a regime that is oligarchic.
Perhaps, the idea of a dictatorship or military takeover in the country
may not really be a foreseeable threat, the rule of oligarchy has
already infiltrated our democratic institutions of authority.
Perhaps many of our elected representatives may not have realised this
development in our governance institutions and processes.
Once elected, they go seeking political parties and eager to grab what
falls from the master’s table.
The more elected MPs continue doing that, they reinforce the concept and
practice of oligarchy in an apparently weak democratic state.
Oligarchy becomes a reality, when elected MPs are not accountable to the
people whom they are suppose to represent.
They are overwhelmed by power and wealth of the State and are blind to
the needs and aspirations of the people.
Some years ago, a report in a German newspaper revealed that political
parties are the most corrupt entities in any country, because they use
State authority and assets to enrich themselves.
Elections are over, however, governance problems will still remain
because the system we have in place allows political parties in
Government to be corrupt and the law in place is unable to prosecute
them.
We know that many parties have been sponsored by business houses.
The more political parties associate themselves with business houses,
citizens becomes despondent and suffer at the end.
The Government, who is supposed to come to negotiate with the private
sector to enhance service delivery to the people, have accepted bribes
and given into the dictates of the private sector.
They allow the private sector to make money at the expense of people.
When democracy turns oligarchy, the Government shuts up. It ceases to be
the vox populi (the people’s voice).
Parliament ceases to be parliament because it cannot speak. Hence,
Parliament derives from a French word meaning to speak.
Thus, increasingly Parliament has never spoken and has become muted by
the private sector.
In such political praxis, our democracy turns oligarchic while our
Parliamentarians become plutocrats.
A pluto-oligarchic government is in the making when voters are bribed by
cash handouts. And those cash are either sponsored by business houses
with vested interest or politicians using State funds usually in the
form of election budget.
However to put things into perspective, sometime in the history of
representative democracy, the idea of political parties did emerge to
offer people the best governance ideology and praxis.
Ideally, these political parties were formed to offer people the choice
of government.
Political parties have platforms that people are attracted by, even at
time they are mere demagogy.
Essentially, political parties are formed basing on ideologies of how
well they interpret and incorporate into their policies the needs and
aspirations of the people within the limits of the Constitution.
It is of the view that the party whose policy is appealing to the people
would become the most preferred party people would vote for.
However, in real practice, this does not seem to be the case.
Prior to the recent general election, this column called for political
parties to come forward and present their platform in the print media
for people to make informed decisions.
The request was not followed and we assume that people may have voted
their representatives based on factors other than on policy issues.
Furthermore, this column requested Paul Bengo to only register political
parties that possess a constitution basing on the belief that not all
registered political parties do possess one.
The current leadership issue of National Alliance before the courts
renews the calls for registered political parties to have a constitution
and to abide by it.
Without a party’s constitution that is legally binding, the abuse of
people and their resource is quite apparent.
There are many issues the office of the Registrar of Political Parties
should take into account before this country becomes an oligarchic
state.
First, the constitution of the political party must be a requirement
upon registration of a political party and the constitution must be
legally binding.
If there is no constitution, there is no registration. If the party’s
constitution is accepted by the registrar, it must be binding for some
years before being reviewed.
Second, the office of the Registrar of Political Parties must have a law
in place, or insert a section into the Organic Law on Integrity of
Political Parties and Candidates to protect the interest of coalition
partners in Government.
The law will necessarily regulate the intra-party disagreement, where
few bullies in the inner circle of the ruling party decide to impact
decision not in the interest of all partner parties but for personal and
sectarian interest.
Current laws do not give the protection, and thus the Prime Minister has
the sole prerogative to either fire or hire political parties whenever
he wishes.
Thus, the accord signed by coalition partners before the formation of
Government should be legally binding for all contracted partners, such
as the current Warangoi accord.
Thus, if the ruling party deviates from the letter and the spirit of the
accord, justice would be demanded or provision allowed for entering the
polls again.
The law should curb the monopoly of the major ruling party.
Furthermore, it would make the provision on grace period obsolete and
give political stability to government.
It would provide the check and balance within government partners rather
than making individual parties vulnerable to the whims of the Prime
Minister.
 
|
