Divorced from democracy (1)

What the current debate on the divorce referendum has brought to light is the absence of a proper democratic framework in our country.

Parliament debated the wording of the divorce referendum, a consultative one. What does a consultative referendum mean? It is when Parliament chooses to ask us (common mortals) for our opinion. It does not mean they have to or will abide by our opinion. In fact the absence of a proper legislative framework in this respect means that Parliament is not obliged to abide by a majority decision!

In light of the current debate one can postulate a situation in which a majority of members of Parliament are in favour of divorce. Thus it is possible to see a situation developing in which the majority of people vote against divorce yet Parliament legislates in favour. The reality of this anomaly shows the fragility and infancy of our so-called democracy.

This situation actually underlines the parliamentary arrogance that exists in our country. The political parties have agreed that since there is no electoral mandate on this issue they should and will ask for the people’s opinion. Why a referendum on this issue and not all the other issues where there is no clear electoral mandate, is a valid question one should ask (with not much hope of an answer)! The inherent arrogance here stems from the fact that Parliament actually words a referendum question without committing itself to executing that decision. In doing so it is sending a message that Parliament is above the people and has the power to overrule a decision taken by the majority.

I should not be interpreted as stating that just because people vote in a particular manner our legislators are then obliged to vote accordingly. I fully respect the rights and opinions of those that would want to vote against that public decision. No individual should vote or feel coerced to vote against their values. I fully support those who choose to vote in Parliament in line with the opinion of a minority and also act as a voice for the opinion and concerns of the minority. This though cannot come at the detriment of the majority’s decision.

Thus what the divorce issue has clearly highlighted is the need to strengthen our democratic structures. For starters, any decision taken by the majority of people is above that of Parliament. The principle here is that the decision of the majority wins over that of the minority… let alone a handful of MPs.

One of the best things about the divorce referendum is that people will be making a decision while divorcing themselves from their political party. That is why political parties are intrinsically against referenda. Every Nationalist that votes in favour and every Labourite who votes against is actually taking a decision that is opposite to that held by the respective party leader. The more often this happens the greater the chance that people reason in the same manner during general elections. Is it a surprise that referenda as so scare and rare! What has always surprised me is why the social partners have never taken the route of referenda to inspire and instigate change. Possibly some might have seen the choice of abrogative referendum as being too confrontational. Thus the need for the Referendum Act to be amended to enable the right for prepositive referendum.

On another note I hope the discussion leading to this referendum will be handled better than the last one we had. The media and especially the public media should help fuel a balanced discussion.

We are witnessing a climate for change and democracy within the Mediterranean. A large turnout for the referendum will be a clear message for change that even the deaf will find it hard not to hear!