Election Boycotting in Algeria and Another Potential Lifelong President

Three Algerian opposition parties, all of which are Islamist, have called for a boycott of elections in April after it was announced that President Abdelaziz Bouteflika would run for a fourth term. Bouteflika has yet to announce his intentions himself, but he has met all the requirements to register his candidacy with the interior ministry.

This election will be the first since the beginning of multi-party politics in Algeria that no Islamist parties will be represented. However, what is significant about this boycott is that it is the first time the MSP and RCD have joined together in opposition to the ruling government, potentially resulting in a stronger opposition force for Algeria in the future. Cooperation has not been a strong point for the Islamist parties in the past, and their presence on the political scene has been shrinking.

What does this mean for democracy assistance agencies? More specifically, if opposition parties, no matter how large or small their impact, are pulling out of elections because they 1. don’t believe their voice will be heard through elections, 2. they feel that elections are not free and fair in the first place, and 3. believe the country is run ‘behind the scenes’ and reform cannot occur due to this electoral masquerade, how should democracy assistance agencies reform their programming, policies, and funding to specifically address the problems in Algeria?

A few general suggestions I would offer up are:

1. If people do not think there voices are being heard through elections, democracy assistance agencies need to find another intervention other than elections. If citizens aren’t participating in elections because they feel they are ineffective, the approach needs to be revised. A blanket approach to democracy just doesn’t work.

2. If one of the main reasons opposition parties are boycotting elections (in Algeria) is because they don’t believe they are free and fair, democracy assistance agencies, like Transparency International, could have a larger presence in the country during the elections. It would be even better if these election monitoring agencies were invited to participate by the National Liberation Front, the powerful ruling party supporting Bouteflika. Once the elections were conducted, based on the results, if the ruling government made changes to the way elections are conducted and trained their citizens to administer and monitor elections in the future, the opposition may place more trust in the ruling government and consider reentering the political arena, feeling that they will be heard and have a fair chance.

3. When opposition parties or citizens of a country believe that their government is being ruled “behind the scenes,” the lack of transparency creates other issues for the country. I don’t have a solution to this problem, or the other two, but I think more than inviting an organization to determine how transparent your government is needs to done. You can obviously have countries where the ruling party isn’t trusted or doesn’t perform for the people, but you can’t really have a democracy without those things. I think a solution to this problem lies within policies reforms and democracy assistance agencies collaborating with ruling parties to ensure the policies implemented are transparent and supported by the people.

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

2 Responses to Election Boycotting in Algeria and Another Potential Lifelong President

  1. agebremedhin says:

    In regards to the first question you present, do you believe that aid organizations should contribute more directly to opposition groups financially, as opposed to attempting to correct ruling parties? The political democracy assistance approach usually conducted by the United States in democracy aid attempts to promote the mechanisms of political competition like elections and even the playing field. Therefore, perhaps giving more aid to ruling parties would simply entrench their power and legitimize their presence, instead of aiding democratization.

  2. findleyjn says:

    I agree with your last statement. If democracy assistance funding is going to directly I the ruling party, it is simply entrenching their hold on the State. In my personal experience with democracy assistance agencies, funding has gone to the building and strengthening of opposition parties. However, if those parties are just receiving financial support and do not understand the basics of democracy or their rights, the financial assistance will have either the same negative effect it has on funding ruling parties, or it iwould be completely ineffective . In my opinion at least. If people don’t know how to rule once they get elected, countries will see more of the same, even from hopeful opposition parties.

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