In democratic countries, a multiparty system is an important device used to preserve a people's rights and freedom. However things are different in Yemen, here a multi party system becomes a tool in the authority's hand, used to accuse any civil society calling for rightful and constitutional demands. This could lead to a "formal" cancellation of a multi-party system while keeping the façade of its form to beautify the regimes image abroad.There are many instances in which civil societies face abuse for standing by their membership. The pretext is often that they are politically motivated to do so. Lack of political vision in both the opposition and the government, leads each side to prove and disprove these accusations. The ensuing arguments often detract both sides from the basic rights for which the protests themselves were originally held.
All this happens in a country described as the only democratic entity in the region, with parties running local and presidential elections under alleged agendas serving the people's rights.
The multi- party system is summarized as a number of parties competing to provide agendas that serve the objectives of the public. The voter chooses the party's candidate with the agenda that suits their interests. Yet in Yemen, out of political ignorance, the parties, with the ruling one on top tend to promote persons instead of principles. Such practices spread the cultural belief in individual power not in programs.
Authorities attack parties whose agendas call for promoting general improvement on peoples' status. This occurred during the 2003 electoral campaign when the Islah party promised to raise the army's salaries 200 percent. The ruling party's press attacked and mocked Islah saying the party had discovered oil fields in the Al-Eman University (which is run by the Islah leader Al-Zandani) when Islah asserted it was going to fulfill it's promises with their revenues. Yet in an ideal democracy, it is the favorite party that instigates a certain social class into obtaining their rights. Such a party is one which is considered "in tune to the pulse" of the group and the constituents in turn believe their rights are being looked after by the party.
The "political scene" can be expressed as protests of civil society organizations and their issues, such as that of the journalists, the doctors, the teachers, students and motor bikes' syndicates. They all ask the government to carry out its promises, which is supposedly on the agenda of the ruling party, and not on that of the opposition. They have also called for implementation of the laws issued by the ruling party's government, that has had dominate power for 16 years, nine of those consecutive.
Despite the difference in demands the accusations are the same: that they are politically motivated by the opposition, and that they distort the image of the ruling regime. Protestors are compelled to defend themselves instead of attacking to achieve their rights. The opposition chooses to stay aloof, giving the government the chance to liquidate these rights.
The motorbike drivers, in their condemnation of the multiparty system, made a mock funeral for the opposition in spite of their limited political awareness and their lack of an organized syndicate. They had been told not to work in the Capital. The government's reasons are based on claims that did not look into rising unemployment rates, or at the pervasive levels of corruption dominating the country.
The regime's answer is to resort to the creation of parallel syndicates that legalize infringements and oppress our basic rights. These clones do not recognize legalized organizations and appoint their leadership from within the bodies that they are supposed to watch (the education manager is appointed Head of the teachers' syndicate). The leadership is given to "pro-government" personnel who receive privileges for accepting these infringements on their membership's rights. Other rival syndicates are made to appear to be "partisan mad". The most striking of these clones is the Teachers' syndicate an affiliate of the ruling party. The leadership of this syndicate is appointed by party officials. They agree with government procedures and condemn other syndicates which stand on the side of their members' demands. The same criterion is true of the doctors' syndicate.
Democracy in Yemen is only a décor. To receive more donations the government's face is brightened and white-washed, while rights are infringed to maintain the décor. Our situation requires serious reconsideration. However there are two options, either to undertake democracy as a method that preserves the right of all, that seems impossible under present conditions; or to go back to a single party system as long as it provides the rights of ideal democracies. This would save us from the illusions of the destructive tendencies of democracy and multiparty systems. The first is the easiest way out as it suits the regime's perspective. As for us, the public, we will miss criminal incentives and hold a certain entity accountable for the loss of our rights, releasing us from the exhausting search for the impossible exchange of power.
Sami Noman is a Yemeni Journalist.
::YEMEN EYE::
