Libyan Vote for Constitutional Panel

On Thursday, February 20, Libya held nationwide elections to elect a 60 member committee that was meant to draft the new Libyan constitution.  These elections, however, were marred by several major issues.  The first of these was violence, as Islamist extremist groups shut down several voting centers through violence, and dissuaded voters from going to the polls in other locations.  Perhaps even more distressing, however, was the incredibly low turnout of voters, as less than 50% of registered voters voted in the elections, which actually accounts for less than one fifth of the entire eligible voting population.  Many commentators see this low turnout as being due to a growing disillusionment in the political process, which has stalled so badly that in recent weeks local militias have actually given the ruling body in Libya, the General National Congress (GNC), a deadline by which to step down

This widespread disillusionment stems from several sources, most importantly the inability of governing structures to provide security, economic growth or political progress. Certainly, in a nation that is marked by ethnic, geographic and economic cleavages, it would be a challenge for any political body to create a stable and functioning state.  This is further exacerbated by the reality that Qaddafi’s regime sought to eliminate any forms of opposition of civil society.  For observers, it was clear that Libya’s path to a democratic system faced very real challenges.

Even when considering these challenges, however, this feeling of disillusionment in the political process is concerning for those seeking the growth of democracy in Libya.  One of the challenges of consolidating democratic systems is that when certain administrations or government institutions fail, the populations may not lose faith only in the political elites of the moment, but also in the actual democratic political system.  In essence, ineffective or corrupt elites can damage the prospects of democratization.  It seems that there is some possibility of this happening in Libya if this new assembly proves ineffective in forging a national constitution within its allotted time limit.  As public apathy grows in the face of ineffective democratic institutions, other non-democratic forces such as Islamist extremist groups and other militias will be encouraged to seek to further consolidate their power.  In turn, residents may grow increasingly likely to look to these forces for governance and stability.

In conclusion, the low turnout for this last election demonstrates a growing trend of disappointment with the institutions involved in the democratic transition.  Unless some effective governance comes out of this constitutional process, there is a chance that the population may seek other alternative forms of governance that could bring security and stability at the expense of democracy.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Libyan Vote for Constitutional Panel

  1. etomatore says:

    I completely agree with your analysis as to citizens turning towards extremist parties and away from democracy. This is a huge concern in Sub-Saharan Africa and even I would say in Eastern Europe with the former Soviet-bloc states. We should also consider that maybe the novelty of elections will resonate with them for a few elections, but citizens could also become more apathetic as has been the case in most consolidated and older Democracies such as the U.S. and U.K. It will be interesting to see what future elections in Libya will reveal or if there will be back sliding and what this could do to surrounding states. If Libya does go the route of choosing more extremist parties for stability, maybe we’ll have a reverse Arab Spring where more countries look towards Libya as an example.

  2. mattryanshade says:

    As student’s of democratization it is very interesting to watch the process of writing a new constitution in a country that so dramatically overthrew its authoritarian government. The nature of Qaddafi’s Libya, unfortunately, made the issues you cite almost inevitable. He controlled the country’s institutions to a degree rare even among authoritarian states (his regime was a great example of a personalistic regime) so when he was killed the country was left with much less of an institutional structure to work with/adapt as they transition to democracy than states like Tunisia and Egypt.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s