 |
|
A
man passes pictures of Arafat and Fatah’s presidential
candidate Mahmoud Abbas, Gaza (Reuters)
|
Yasser
Arafat’s death on November 11, 2004 symbolizes the end of an era
in Palestine and the beginning of a new phase. Leaving a political
vacuum, his death sent shockwaves across the world over
Palestine’s future.
Being
the founder of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) and the
Palestinian Authority (PA), and the man who raised the Palestinian
cause to the international level, he created a political system
that was based on him rather than institutions. He headed the PA,
the PLO, and Fatah.
Arafat
was accused of weakening the legislative council elected in 1996.
Additionally, in the last few years, there were serious debates over
the extent of corruption in the system. Yet, he was the hero and the
symbol of Palestine.
Fears
of Palestine falling into a civil war were alleviated when
astonishingly the Palestinian Authority was able to take control of
the situation and quickly fill the power vacuum created with
Arafat’s death, making the decision to hold the Presidential
elections on January 9, 2005.
Separation
of Powers
Arafat
was the hero and the symbol of Palestine. |
|
In
a salon titled “Palestinian elections: Is it a transformation
towards the respect of Palestinians’ rights and the rule of
law?,” held on December 28, 2004 in the Cairo Institute for Human
Rights Studies (CIHRS), Dr. Samir Ghattas, Director of the Maqdis
Center for Political Studies, said that the PA was able to employ
the emotional moment and use democratic means for dialogue between
different factions. “Fatah was also successful in uniting its
divisions that were created with the Intifada,” he added.
“Another
important factor was the division of Arafat’s jurisdictions ...
Mahmoud Abbas was elected as the PLO leader, Farouk Kadoumi was
appointed head of Fatah, and Prime Minister Ahmed Qurei was given
the jurisdictions that Arafat possessed, including controlling
security authorities.”
However,
Dr. Ghattas emphasized that there are fears that this separation of
powers will not continue after the presidential election takes
place.
“It
is important to have separate figures in the three positions in
order to ensure a fair representation of the Palestinian
Diaspora,” Fateh Azzam, Forced Migration and Refugee Studies
Director, said in the same gathering.
Having
a clear democratic system as a condition for reaching a peace
settlement has made the upcoming elections more important than
usual. It has attracted international attention and concern. Yet,
there are challenges facing the elections.
Security
Issues
There
are security issues, especially that there was an attempt to
assassinate Mahmoud Abbas, Fatah’s presidential candidate, while
attending a condolence ceremony a few days after the death of
Arafat.
“There
are no extraordinary security measures taken for the elections,”
Tayseer Naserallah, member of the Palestinian National Council
(PNC), said in a phone interview. “We are not expecting anything
similar to what happened in November; however, the international
community should exert pressure on Israel to ensure that it would
provide the suitable environment for fair elections, as—in my
opinion—the real obstacle is Israel.”
Nasrallah
added that they have finally reached an agreement with the Israelis
to withdraw from all election places for three days.
“This
is to ensure that no friction takes place between our citizens and
their forces,” he explained.
Boycotting
the Elections
“The
real obstacle is Israel.” |
|
Another
challenge is the decision made by Hamas and Islamic Jihad to boycott
the presidential election, even though Hamas has entered the local
elections held on December 23.
It
is thought that the reason for Hamas’s stance is that the election
is going to be held within the framework of the Oslo Accords.
However, the group was criticized for participating in the local
elections, which were also framed on the basis of the Accords.
“We
have been entering local elections and participating in
service-providing institutions since our establishment, as these
institutions serve the people,” Dr. Muhammad Ghazal of Hamas’s
Nablus Political Command said. “The Oslo Accords are not the
reason we are boycotting the presidential election. We call for real
democratic elections—not a superficial process to give the image
of setting up a democracy. Arrangements made are one-sided and other
forces were not involved in decision-making,” he added.
On
the other hand, the PNC’s Nasrallah insists that arrangements for
the presidential election were made according to Palestinian laws.
“The Palestinian electoral law states that elections should be
conducted within 60 days of the death or resignation of the
president.”
Nasrallah
remarked that they would have hoped for Hamas and other Islamic
opposition groups to participate in the election and be part of the
democratic process.
“Hamas’s
stance is a voluntary one and we respect their position,” he said.
Demilitarizing
the Intifada
Mahmoud
Abbas, also known as Abu Mazen, is internationally favored for his
policy of demilitarizing the Intifada and controlling the use of
weapons in Palestine. Many question how successful he can be when
militant opposition groups, such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad, are
refusing to recognize the forthcoming election.
“Hamas
has announced that it would support peace if it would ensure the
rights of Palestinians. However, we are convinced that the Israeli
mentality refuses peace,” Dr. Ghazal said. “We have chosen to
use force, as we have no other choice, and this is not the best
solution but it is the solution imposed on us in the current
situation. We will support the PA if it will bring us a peace that
ensures our rights. We are only calling for our rights and this is
what the Palestinian people want.”
Meanwhile,
Nasrallah believes that there is dialogue between the Islamic forces
and Fatah; he did not deny that they disagree regarding the
militarization of the Intifada.
“Abu
Mazen differentiates between the halting of the Intifada and the
halting of its militarization,” he said. “We believe that
resistance and the Intifada are Palestinian rights but we are
discussing the manner in which they should be conducted and the
control of the use of weapons”.
In
the CIHRS salon, Fateh Azzam presented some opinion polls’ results
that show that the Palestinians are for a ceasefire and reaching a
peace settlement with Israel. “According to these opinion polls,
80% of Palestinians prefer a ceasefire and the return to
negotiations,” he pointed out.
At
the end of the gathering, both Dr. Ghatas and Azzam emphasized the
fact that the upcoming elections should not be the only indicator
for the existence of democracy in Palestine. Corruption is yet to be
eliminated, and separation of powers in the Palestinian Authority is
yet to be ensured.
“We
hope that these elections will give the winner the legitimacy to
unite all Palestinian factions and end corruption,” Azzam said.
Sally
Sami is a freelance
writer based in Cairo. Her main fields of interest are human rights,
Arab politics, and democracy. You can reach her at
ssami_79@hotmail.com.
