The Institute for Democratic Governance (IDEG) has issued a formal statement expressing opposition to the government’s proposal to nominate five individuals, two of whom would be women, from whom three would contest District Chief Executive (DCE) elections within the constitutional review committee’s report. This opposition stems from a fundamental belief in the principle of direct democracy and the role of political parties in local governance, a position IDEG has consistently advocated for over a decade.
The government’s proposed arrangement, detailed in the report, centers around a nomination process involving a committee comprised of representatives from the Ministry of Local Government, the Public Services Commission, and the Local Government Service. The proposal stipulates that the President would nominate five individuals, two of whom must be women. Following this, the committee would then shortlist three candidates, including at least one woman, and subsequently contest the election for District Chief Executive.
Mr. Kwesi Jonah, Senior Research Fellow at IDEG, explained that DCE elections should be conducted directly by the people, a concept the Institute has championed for over ten years. He stated that the current proposal, he argued, appears designed to prevent political parties from participating in DCE elections, effectively limiting the scope of democratic choice.
Mr. Jonah further elaborated that the proposal’s intent is to prevent the President from selecting candidates, a practice he views as a violation of the democratic principle of direct accountability to the people. He emphasized that allowing political parties to determine candidate selection through a presidential nomination process would undermine the fundamental right of the people to choose their own leaders.
According to the government’s position paper, which forms the basis of the CRC report, the President will nominate five individuals, two of whom must be women. The committee will then vet these candidates through a process that includes primaries, ensuring a degree of community input in the selection process. The three shortlisted individuals would subsequently compete for the District Chief Executive position.
Mr. Jonah asserted that the proposal is intended to prevent political parties from contesting DCE elections on the grounds that candidates who were not members of the governing party might not be able to work with the President. He further stated that the President’s selection of candidates does not uphold the democratic principle of free choice.
He contended that allowing the President to nominate candidates and effectively guide voters on who they could choose does not align with the democratic principle of free choice. The directive to allow the President to choose the candidates does not provide any accountability to the people at the local level.
“We fully support the direct election of DCEs for the purpose of accountability… But this whole idea of the President selecting five people, what kind of democracy is this?” he questioned. He argued that individuals nominated by the President to contest DCE elections should feel primarily accountable to the appointing authority, not the local community.
The IDEG’s opposition is rooted in a belief that the President’s role in selecting DCE candidates undermines the democratic process. They see the current arrangement as a significant step backward, potentially diminishing the power of the local electorate and eroding the foundation of free and fair elections. The Institute’s stance underscores a deep concern about the potential for unchecked presidential influence within the DCE electoral system, raising questions about the long-term stability and legitimacy of the governance structure.
Watch Related Video
Source: Graphic Online
