“There are no winners or losers in this election, the only winner is democracy and the biggest victor is Lebanon.”
Those were the words of Saad Hariri, son of former slain Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri, who spoke after the much-anticipated parliamentary elections of June 7 that saw the Western-backed March 14 bloc retain power after facing strong opposition from the Hezbollah-led opposition coalition, March 8. For a country as tiny as Lebanon, the importance of the election is disproportionately large. The country of 4 million desperately needs a batch of elected officials who can inject fresh ideas into a confessional system continually mired in paralyzing stalemates. Under Lebanon’s sectarian national unity system, the parliament is divided equally between Muslims and Christians with a determined number of seats per district reserved for specific sects such as Sunnis, Shias, Druze, Alawites, and the largest bloc, Maronites. Because of Lebanon’s complex division of powers, it’s difficult for any one party to have a monopoly, which often leads to a stalemate since practically every member retains a veto say.
Nevertheless, the election that inspired unprecedented voter turnout has potential to breed new hope for a country whose political system, while no longer under Syrian control, is known for its fragility and sectarian tensions. As the general director of CIPE partner the Lebanese Center for Policy Studies (LCPS) Ousamma Safa alluded in the Economist, the once “shaky equilibrium” seems to now be in a better position to effect change. The election provides an important opportunity to place Lebanon on a positive trajectory toward greater reform as glimmers of a new, pro-reform political culture have started to emerge. The September 2008 electoral law that governed these elections (versus the 2000 electoral law that was passed at the height of Syrian power in Lebanon and that governed the last 2005 elections) contains small but important measures such as the establishment of a Supervisory Commision that could lay the groundwork for more significant reform in the future. However, the lack of preprinted ballots, potential difficulties adjudicating electoral disputes, and sparse political competition underscore critical flaws that exist in the electoral process. Though the electoral law has imparted a degree of transparency and accountability, there is still much work to be done in the area of corruption. The New York Times recently called the elections one of the “most corrupt” in years, where cash spending had an unsettling influence (e.g., high campaign expenditure ceiling) and political media coverage was anything but fairly regulated.
Indeed, it is such unconstructive tendencies that CIPE’s current Anti-Bribery project with Department of Human Rights and Labor (DRL) in Lebanon hopes to resolve. Working with the Lebanese Transparency Association (LTA), the project is significant not only for its intended outcomes, but also for its unprecedented implementation process—the Anti-Bribery Network marks the first time that groups are working together in a multi-stakeholder manner to address the pervasive issue of corruption. This is also the first time that multiple groups are working collectively in a coordinated fashion towards the common goal of a National Anti-Corruption Strategy for Lebanon.
The elections provide an opportunity to build on nascent reforms and to nurture a new political culture that seeks to change politics as usual in Lebanon. If the election now leads to the formation of a consensus government, conditions might be ripe for promoting critical political reforms and advancing consensual politics—two key ingredients for Lebanon’s long-term stability. And hopefully, the momentum will continue for broader change in the wake of upcoming 2010 municipal elections.
Published Date: June 15, 2009