Primary elections
Michael Dingake | Tuesday April 19, 2016 16:17
Physical stamina enables the aspirant to run the race across all the 51 States without falling behind. Mentally, a candidate needs the proverbial thick skin to withstand the verbal slings that accompany one to the finishing line. The race is a test of endurance to prove one’s mettle. The test is worth the trouble because uneasy lies the head that wears the crown.
This year’s US primaries are breathtaking. One of the candidates on the Republican leg of the race, is a maverick, a veritable embarrassment to his own party and prickly to his opponents. Donald Trump has dollars to spare and an ascetic tongue to torment his opponents. He has even managed to provoke the ire of the UN. He seems to have antagonised anybody who pretends to know what the party of Abe Lincoln wishes to do for the Americans. Not that Abe’s party is the same party that fought a civil war to abolish slavery in the 18th century. None of its members seem to remember the stuff their illustrious president was made of, and what he did for the descendants of the poor creatures who were captured in the African forests and brought to America in leg-irons and handcuffs to lay the foundation for US current enormous wealth.
In Botswana primaries are relatively new. They were introduced by the opposition in the general elections for constituency and ward to make the process more participatory. In the BDP, constituency and ward candidates were selected by the committee of 18. The system created a lot of disgruntlement because it favoured the hierarchy and the chosen few. Candidates weren’t chosen on the basis of their popularity. Domkrag, the ruling party has since adopted the primary electoral system dubbed Bulela-Ditswe to stem the discontent arising from the method of handpicking candidates by the Committee of 18.
Bulela-Ditswe, it has become evident, tends to produce Mekoko/independent candidates who split the votes and render the party vulnerable to factionalism. We learn the system may soon be discarded for a better system, expected to be fairer and creditable. One can’t visualise a better system than primaries at this stage. Fairly administered, it guarantees that voters’ participate in the selection of party election candidates. With a fair and efficient compilation of voters rolls, the system is unbeatable.
Talk of substituting this method of candidate selection is unwise. Abandoning the primaries doesn’t appear to be the solution. Rather the ruling party should devise something concrete to improve the efficiency of compiling voters rolls. In an attempt to make democracy more democratic, leadership of political parties has to battle against the corruption of its members, who often try to win by hook or by crook. Within Domkrag’s primaries, another problem cropped up recently to demonstrate democracy hangs by a thread. In the 2014 general elections public servants were struck off voters rolls, occasioned by some prominent candidates – Ministers and MPs who lost to lesser members, before public servants were removed from the primaries voters rolls. The losers were quick to blame the public servants for their loss. Before the primaries, noises from the Federation of Public Servants Union (BOFEPUSU) were heard targeting Ministers/MPs who were ‘anti-worker.’ It’s a wrong attitude to disqualify eligible voters from democratically electing their representative candidates. I was surprised BOFEPUSU, usually quick to challenge decisions that affect their interests, didn’t protest their disqualification at the primaries! It seemed odd, that public servants who in any case would have another bite at the ‘protected species’ at the polls if those unwanted filtered through, at the primaries.
Obviously if an eligible voter, votes against one in the primaries he/she won’t stop from voting against the person in the general elections contest! Disenfranchising public servants at the primaries is an infringement of the right of eligible citizens to participate in the electoral process. It screams loudly for redress against the immoral process!
A question was asked in Parliament some years back to explain government policy on public servants’ participation in politics. The answer: “According to General Order 208, although officers (public) are entitled to their own political views, they are nevertheless, expected to serve all government in power with equal loyalty irrespective of whatever party may be elected and whatever officers’ political affiliations are.”
That’s what is supposed to prevail in any multiparty democracy. It’s consistent with the fact that in multiparty democracy, no party administration is expected to stay put forever; It’s the reason why public servants must be elected on merit, contrary to recent alarming utterances by the president to appoint only Domkrag members to top offices.
The answer from the responsible Minister continued: “Officers may vote at an election if they are eligible to vote and they may attend elections meetings if they so wish.
However (i) no officer may publicly speak or demonstrate for or against any political person or party; (ii) be an active member of any political party or hold office in such party, speak in public on any political matter, except in the course of his official duties, …..”
From the answer above and other instances not cited, there is no suggestion whatsoever that public servants may be banned from voting in primary elections.