 |
Isaac Herzog is a Knesset Member from the Labor Party. A lawyer by profession, he previously served as cabinet secretary in the Barak government.
|
|
|
|
By Isaac Herzog
November 11, 2002
Originally published in the Jerusalem Post.
Prime Minister Ariel Sharon pressed the button that started the process of bringing an end to the current Knesset within 90 days. To do this, he took advantage of a clause of the Direct Election Law that had never been implemented in the Israeli constitution. This law, just like the Knesset that repealed it, will disappear with the end of the term. Only in such an Israeli anomaly can the election process be activated by a dormant clause in a law that has been repealed, while the elections themselves will be conducted in accordance with the new (and old) law, using a single voting slip.
I have often wondered what the legislators of the Direct Election Law had in mind: Did they consider to what extent this complex and strange piece of legislation would harm the very foundations of our democratic regime, and repeatedly undermine the stability of government? We have seen many examples of this harm, but in recent weeks new records have been broken.
The latest example is the forcing of the electoral process into a tight, three-month time-frame. On the surface, this might appear to be a refreshing innovation. In practice, however, it illustrates the unreasonableness of this law and its provisions. Perhaps the legislators had the British elections model in mind. It is possible that they only took into account the technical aspects of the minimum time actually required to organize an election in this country.
A major factor they did not consider was the democratic process within the parties that forms an integral part of what is required and appropriate for elections.
From my experience as chairman of the elections committee during the 1996 Labor primaries the largest ever held in the country, with 300,000 voters, I can determine that the intention to organize primaries (in the Likud for the chairman of the movement and its candidate for prime minister; in Labor for its list for the Knesset) within three weeks constitutes the total castration of the parties' internal democratic process.
Such elections are not a trivial matter. They are part of a process that derives some of its provisions from the law of the land and from the regulations of bodies acting according to the law. Among other things, such a process involves: the formulation of regulations; the appointment of election committees and supervisory and appeal bodies; the issue of lists of voters; the mailing of notices to the voters; the preparation of polling equipment; complicated computer processing; approval by party institutions; the counting of votes; the review of appeals; publication of the results; and the taking of security measures.
From a substantive point of view, such a process requires serious party activity, debates, conferences, and meetings between the candidates and their voters over a reasonable period of time.
The secret of party life is the possibility of allowing the voters to get to know the candidates, to get an impression of them, to give a chance to new candidates to participate, listen, and argue. The 90-day countdown imposed on us by Sharon's resignation is therefore clearly unreasonable and undemocratic when it comes to the inner party process.
Those who are concerned about our democracy being made a mockery of should also bear in mind a few other problems: As in every election campaign, the work of the legislator will inevitably be hurried and very patchy. For instance, there is no correlation between the provision regarding the short time left until the elections and that specifying the time required to submit lists of candidates to the Knesset, a process that takes up most of this period. Nor is there any correlation between the short time remaining before the elections and the time required to register a party and publicize it. Nor is there any correlation between the rules and regulations applying to the primaries being held at this particular time and those for party financing and propaganda.
Despite the above and other disadvantages, let us hope that a positive result will emerge from these elections, at least regarding one major issue. Let us hope that the return to the single voting slip system will make the voter realize the paramount need for parliamentary stability. Such stability can ensure protection against pressure groups that threaten to harm the delicate democratic fabric of this country, and who lead us to self-destruction and incessant division.
Such stability will only be achieved if the two main parties grow and together form a majority (at least 60 mandates) in the Knesset.
The task of the legislator is to guarantee a suitable framework for the holding of proper democratic elections under all circumstances. The task of the voter, at least on this occasion, is to ensure the stability and future of that framework.
Views expressed by the author do not
necessarily reflect those of israelinsider.
 
|
|
|
|
Click on the blue headline to read a Talkback comment and respond to it. Click on the  icon to send a private email to the talkback writer. The icon appears only if the writer has decided to be contacted. If no popup window appears, please make sure your popup blocker allows israelinsider.com.
|
|
| |
|
|
