What should be the options for constituting an executive
 organ in the coming conference of the 13 political organizations?

By Fesseha Nair

There are mainly three options for constituting an executive organ: one based a parliamentary system, one based on a presidential system, and one based on some combinations of the two( sometimes called semi-presidentialism). In this article, I would like to deal with the issue of electing of the executive organ in the Eritrean opposition political organizations. In every established democracy countries use either a presidential, parliamentary or semi- presidential system. Parliamentary systems are characterized by the legislature being the chief arena for both lawmaking and ( via majority decisions) for the executive power. Presidential systems are characterized by the separation of the executive and legislative branches, with executive authority residing outside the legislature, with the president and his / her cabinet.

The simplest definition of the differences between the two approaches can thus be summed as follows:

In pure parliamentary system: mutual dependence and intertwining of the legislative and executive capacities.

In pure presidential system: There is executive independence.

For the case of the 13 Eritrean political organizations, which option fits? First and foremost, the opposition is not living in an established democracy but is in the struggle. The debate over electing an executive in this situation  is not which system is best but which is appropriate choice with the situation of the opposition. The preparatory committee of the coming congress of the opposition political organizations must consider specific factors that need to be addressed at this time. This may include issues of building a strong opposition, building trust between the member organizations, putting their differences aside and practising the levels of check and balances that required.

The best option for the coming congress is parliamentary system  because it has a number of moderating and inclusion promoting features that can assist the nascent democracy inside the opposition camp.

The efficacy of parliamentary mechanism is because the 13 political organizations will be represented by equal numbers that is each member organization will be represented by 3 persons. The political organizations are deeply divided by significant ethnic, religious and regional cleavages, therefore inclusion is vital. As experience of democratic transition in South Africa built grand coalitions in which all significant political parties were represented in the executive and take part in decision making. In parliamentary system, the executive can be changed on the floor of the legislative without running new elections. A discredited executive can be dismissed from the office by the legislative. It facilitates flexibility and capacity to adapt to changing circumstances.

Checks and balances: it makes the executive dependent on the confidence of the legislature. It fosters greater accountability on the part of the member organizations and their representatives. There is not only greater public control over policy making process but also greater transparency in the way decisions are made. The previous executive organ of the EDA was not transparent and was not accountable to the member organizations. The legislature should not act like “ rubber stamp” but check upon the power of the executive.

An executive organ without check and balance can lead the system towards dictatorship or to one man rule similar to that of Eritrea today.

I recommend the coming congress of the opposition representatives in Addis that first the legislative body elects its president and later elect among themselves the executive organ. It is the spokesman of the legislative who is responsible to chair the meeting of the election of the executive.