Alia Ibrahim
Daily Star staff

Looking back at the three parliamentary elections that have taken place in Lebanon since the end of the civil war, one may be surprised by the extent of similarities ­ both in form and in results ­ between the three rounds.
Since 1992, the overwhelmingly pro-Syrian ruling political class has to a large extent, and with the exception of very limited cases, been able to regenerate itself every time, very much by adopting a convenient electoral law each time.
Other factors, such as Syrian direct and indirect intervention, undefeatable alliances and the boycott mostly of Christian figures in the 1992 and 1996 elections have also contributed to the crippling of Parliament.
Since the 1992 elections Parliament ­ supposed to be, like in any other parliamentary democratic system, the main channel of contact between the citizens and their representatives, the main guarantee for accountability and the main generator of political elites ­ has become more of an exclusive club that would not take a chance on new members and whose current ones realize that the terms of their membership depend on much more than the opinion and the preferences of their constituents.

What Taif says:

The electoral law called for by the Taif Accord is first mentioned in the Chapter of Political Reforms, under the section entitled Parliament.
The accord first stipulates that the electoral district be the governorate, and that parliamentary seats be divided equally between Muslims and Christians, proportionally between the denominations of each sect and proportionally between the districts themselves, until Parliament passes an election law free of sectarian restrictions.
According to Taif, the number of members of Parliament must be increased to 108, shared equally between Christians and Muslims, (54 Christians and 54 Muslims, compared to five Muslim deputies for each six Christian deputies in pre-Taif parliaments).
Another section, entitled The Parliamentary Election Law, is also included in the chapter called Other Reforms. In this section, Taif stipulates that parliamentary elections be held in accordance “with a new law on the basis of governorates and in the light of rules that guarantee common coexistence between the Lebanese and ensure sound and efficient political representation of all factions and generations of the people. This shall be done after reviewing the administrative division within the context of unity of the people, the land and the institutions.”

What has been accomplished:

Assessing the implementation of the Taif Accord when it comes to parliamentary elections, former secretary-general of the Lebanese Association for Democratic Elections Hassan Krayyem sees a “very obvious gap between the philosophy of the text and its implementation.”
Krayyem, also a political science professor at the American University of Beirut, said that in Taif, legislators have decided to opt for the bigger electoral district, based on previous experience and on the belief that smaller districts would generate “narrow sectarian and regional allegiances.”
Krayyem, however, said that the adoption of the governorate as the electoral district was paralleled by a close revision of administrative distribution and the creation of governorates of equal size and representation.
Krayyem’s personal view is that the idea was probably to divide each governorate into two, hence increasing the number of pre-Taif governorates to 12.
He said the absence of an agreement on that matter, in addition to the regional political changes between 1990 and 1992, including the US green light for Syria to run the affairs of Lebanon, have led to distorted implementation.
According to Krayyem, violations related to elections started even before the law was adopted, with the raising of the number of MPs from 108, as stipulated by the Taif Accord, to 128 members.
He said this was mostly due to political reasons since this addition would allow access to Parliament for people “who wouldn’t otherwise stand a chance.”
“For example, this addition gave a seat for a Maronite in Tripoli and another one in the Bekaa,” he said, adding that this would help the generation of a political class that “cooperates” with the system.
Even if justified, Krayyem said that such an amendment of the accord should have been discussed by all parties who took part in it, something that did not happen.
As for the three post-Taif electoral laws, Krayyem said they were mostly “tailored” to bring back the same people.
Speaking about the 1992 law, he said it was “very unjust” since it adopted the governorate as the electoral district across the country, and even joined the South and Nabatieh governorates in one district but divided Mount Lebanon into six districts, thus making each qada in the governorate an electoral district.
“Accordingly, a voter in the South and the North could elect 28 representatives and in Jbeil could elect only three MPs and this is very unjust,” he said.
Such injustices were repeated, according to him, in 1996 and 2000.
Krayyem also complained about extensive interventions in the elections to ensure the generation of a parliament that would be reflective of the “matter-of-fact authority, whose head is in Damascus and whose arms are in Lebanon.”
He criticized what he called a “consistent pattern” of elections in Lebanon, namely the simple pluralist voting system based on a “winner-takes-all principle.”
He said that in terms of political science, such a voting system could work only in small districts, where competition involves a maximum of three to four seats.
“It just doesn’t make any sense that a list that wins 30 percent of votes, for example, wins 100 percent of the seats, because that would leave 70 percent of voters unrepresented,” he said.
Krayyem said that if the large district is to be adopted in Lebanon, than it should be paralleled by a proportional representation voting system.
“So a list that wins 60 percent of votes would get 60 percent of the seats,” he said. As for the coming elections supposed to take place in 2005, Krayyem said he is not very hopeful.
He said that seeing a real change in the ruling political class would require the adoption of the proportional representation voting system, something that couldn’t happen without the consent of the authorities here and in Damascus.
“At the present time, I don’t see a chance that they would allow this to happen,” he said, adding that if adopted, this system would have detrimental consequences for the current political powers.
Krayyem said that forcing the authorities to accept such a system would require a strong pressure group, which has started to develop but is not yet strong enough.
“I think that by 2009 this could be achieved, and it would be opening a window for forces that don’t stand a chance under the current system, such as marginalized political groups, as well as women and youth groups,” he said.
While admitting that very little could be done to control electoral spending, due to banking secrecy in Lebanon, Krayyem said that there is a need for a plan that would guarantee equal access to the media for all candidates.