An astonishing day - Do we have anything to say?
Posted by: 7V on 30 January 2005
Posted on: 30 January 2005 by ejl
Indeed. After 18+ months of inadequate planning, failed agendas, and near-disaster, it's wonderful to see something positive finally happen.
Kudos to the Iraqi people for braving the dismal security situation and collapsed infrastructure to vote. Incredible -- and they're braver than I, I might add.
Kudos to the Iraqi people for braving the dismal security situation and collapsed infrastructure to vote. Incredible -- and they're braver than I, I might add.
Posted on: 30 January 2005 by Deane F
Surely there's nothing to celebrate yet? The good things about democracy are not found in elections but in what follows the elections.
I'm sceptical about democratising Iraq - but I'd love to be wrong on this one.
Deane
I'm sceptical about democratising Iraq - but I'd love to be wrong on this one.
Deane
Posted on: 30 January 2005 by Earwicker
Clearly it's very positive, however I think it'll take more than counting a few votes to sort that place out.
EW
EW
Posted on: 31 January 2005 by Rasher
Big changes can come in small steps, and this was a big step even though the outcome may be compromised. It is a significant landmark in history that can be built upon in the future; a successful attempt at a democratic election has been made which would have been unthinkable 5 years ago. A bit like the USA now I suppose. I wish Americans understood irony. 
(only joking 
).
Whether democracy is wanted there is another matter of course (Iraq I mean - not the USA). It reminds me of the crusades in the middle-ages.
(only joking ).Whether democracy is wanted there is another matter of course (Iraq I mean - not the USA). It reminds me of the crusades in the middle-ages.
Posted on: 31 January 2005 by 7V
quote:
Originally posted by Rasher:
Whether democracy is wanted there is another matter of course
Yesterday has shown that democracy is very much wanted there. Can there be any doubt?
Regards
Steve M
Posted on: 31 January 2005 by Earwicker
quote:
Originally posted by 7V:quote:
Originally posted by Rasher:
Whether democracy is wanted there is another matter of course
Yesterday has shown that democracy is very much wanted there. Can there be any doubt?
Regards
Steve M
There's more to democracy than just turning out to vote. If the party you support doesn't win, you have to submit to the will of the majority - peacefully and gracefully. We shall see, but I have my doubts...
Earwicker
Posted on: 31 January 2005 by Basil
I'm sure all those slaughtered in the bombardment of Iraq are all much happier now!
This had nothing to do with democracy and everything to do with Oil and Money.
This had nothing to do with democracy and everything to do with Oil and Money.
Posted on: 31 January 2005 by HTK
You could say it's a start. You could also say it's a start from the wrong direction. I just can't help thinking that this is all a circus with the Iraquis performing to the whip crack of the white protestant western ring master.
Puting that all to one side, I'm struck by people's willingness to get on their feet and take risks to vote. Half the people I meet here can't be arsed. Even less if it's raining. They have my respect - although I don't agree with how it's come about.
Cheers
Harry
Puting that all to one side, I'm struck by people's willingness to get on their feet and take risks to vote. Half the people I meet here can't be arsed. Even less if it's raining. They have my respect - although I don't agree with how it's come about.
Cheers
Harry
Posted on: 31 January 2005 by Earwicker
quote:
Originally posted by HTK:
although I don't agree with how it's come about.
Cheers
Harry
It is the ONLY way it could EVER come about. Sad but true.
EW
Posted on: 31 January 2005 by 7V
quote:
Originally posted by Earwicker:
If the party you support doesn't win, you have to submit to the will of the majority - peacefully and gracefully.
Does this apply to the Americans?
Posted on: 31 January 2005 by HTK
I acknowledge where you are coming from EW. Further than that I have no wish to turn this thread into another boxing match. Like it or not and agree with it or not, this is where we are now with Iraq. Let's see where it goes from here.
Cheers
Harry
Cheers
Harry
Posted on: 31 January 2005 by Earwicker
quote:
Originally posted by 7V:
Does this apply to the Americans?
Not sure what you're getting at, Steve?
Posted on: 31 January 2005 by 7V
quote:
Originally posted by Earwicker:
Not sure what you're getting at, Steve?
Just that I wouldn't describe the Democratic response to the Bush's 2004 election victory as 'graceful submission to the will of the majority', nor the Republican villification of Clinton.
Regards
Steve
Posted on: 31 January 2005 by Deane F
quote:
Originally posted by Basil:
This had nothing to do with democracy and everything to do with Oil and Money.
The same comment could be made of the US elections.
Posted on: 31 January 2005 by Earwicker
quote:
Originally posted by 7V:quote:
Originally posted by Earwicker:
Not sure what you're getting at, Steve?
Just that I wouldn't describe the Democratic response to the Bush's 2004 election victory as 'graceful submission to the will of the majority', nor the Republican villification of Clinton.
Regards
Steve
Golly! I'm sorry to say that I think the parallel Iraqi response to not getting their political way will open your eyes somewhat! Pray that I may be wrong...
EW
Posted on: 31 January 2005 by 7V
quote:
Originally posted by Earwicker:
Golly! I'm sorry to say that I think the parallel Iraqi response to not getting their political way will open your eyes somewhat! Pray that I may be wrong...
Sadly EW, I think that you're right. The Sunni and Islamic insurgents are likely to be rather more 'active' in their expression of disapproval than even the Democrats have been.
However, as far as the Sunnis are concerned, they will have an opportunity to reject the constitution that will be drawn up by the newly elected assembly. If three regions veto the constitution in the October referendum, it will be rejected and final voting for the 'actual' Iraqi government will not proceed in December. My guess (FWIW) is that the Sunnis will join the process before then - their other options are not too attractive.
The Islamicists are likely to have a harder time. It will be more difficult for them to continue their operations against the Iraqi people now that elections have taken place which will be widely seen as the will of the people (although imperfect). They could of course maintain military operations against the coalition forces.
Regards
Steve M
Posted on: 31 January 2005 by MichaelC
Irrespective of the rights and wrongs of the Iraqi invasion that was a momentous day for the Iraqi people. The numbers turning out to vote sum it up despite the threat and actuality of killings.
It will be a painful process but the alternatives do not appear pleasant.
Good luck to the Iraqi people.
Mike
It will be a painful process but the alternatives do not appear pleasant.
Good luck to the Iraqi people.
Mike
Posted on: 31 January 2005 by Justin
quote:
Originally posted by 7V:quote:
Originally posted by Earwicker:
Not sure what you're getting at, Steve?
Just that I wouldn't describe the Democratic response to the Bush's 2004 election victory as 'graceful submission to the will of the majority', nor the Republican villification of Clinton.
Regards
Steve
That's not true at all. We continue to follow the laws while working against the administration through legitimate channels. Dissent is also part of democracy. Or, did you really expect "submission".
Judd
Posted on: 31 January 2005 by Deane F
Does anybody know what kind of legal system was extant in Iraq before the US occupation? Specifically, was it a common law system or a civil code?
And I wonder whether the bones of the judiciary will form the foundation of that branch of government in the "new" Iraq? Will the same judges that served Saddam Hussein serve the people? Has this even been considered? A credible, well-supported and independant judiciary MUST be part of the democracy and if it does not exist now how can such a thing be emplaced with the speed with which a general election was organised?
Deane
And I wonder whether the bones of the judiciary will form the foundation of that branch of government in the "new" Iraq? Will the same judges that served Saddam Hussein serve the people? Has this even been considered? A credible, well-supported and independant judiciary MUST be part of the democracy and if it does not exist now how can such a thing be emplaced with the speed with which a general election was organised?
Deane
Posted on: 31 January 2005 by long-time-dead
Is there a just legal system in a dictatorship ?
Posted on: 31 January 2005 by 7V
quote:
Originally posted by Deane F:
Will the same judges that served Saddam Hussein serve the people? Has this even been considered? A credible, well-supported and independant judiciary MUST be part of the democracy and if it does not exist now how can such a thing be emplaced with the speed with which a general election was organised?
Deane,
As one of the first tasks of the new Iraqi legal system may well be the trial of Saddam Hussein himself, I doubt whether Saddam's judges will be the best suited for the purpose.
I think that you have highlighted (again) one of the crucial issues in the successful running of a future democratic Iraq.
Yesterday's vote was to elect a 'transitional national assembly' who will select a president and two deputies who will then choose a prime minister - the man with the real power - and nominate a Cabinet.
The main function of this assembly will be to write Iraq's new constitution.
I know very little about constitutional law but I suspect you know far more than I do. To what extent does a country's judiciary and legal system derive directly from its constitution?
Regards
Steve M
Posted on: 31 January 2005 by Deane F
Long-time-dead
I wasn't meaning to suggest that there was a just legal system - jsut enquiring about what type of legal system there was when Saddam Hussein was in power, ie: common law or civil code.
Steve
My country has an unwritten constitution - or rather, a constitution that is not written in any one document but is composed of various laws, conventions and judgments of the courts.
I have a rudimentary understanding of the US Constitution, which, I strongly suspect, will be the template for the Iraqi Constitution. The US Costitution is entrenched in their law and courts can rule that laws passed by the government are unconstitutional and therefore ultra vires or "outside of their power" (excuse my latin translation skills). The idea is that power is balanced between three branches of government (Legislature, Executive, and Judiciary) and each branch places checks on the other to prevent excesses in the exercise of power.
I'm wondering whether a functional judiciary is as easy to set up in Iraq as a new Legislature and Executive.
As I understand it, the US Constitution empowers the Judiciary. Whether or not the constitution being proposed for Iraq will do this is not known to me. The reason I think it will not be easy to institute is that, unlike politicians, judges are drawn from members of a profession (lawyers). Lawyers are technicians and must be trained. Both a profession and a means of training people to practice within a profession exist within an infrastructure. A stable infrastructure is one thing that's been missing from Iraq for quite a while.
Another question that comes to mind is whether the Iraq legal system will be or is secular or Islamic?
Deane
I wasn't meaning to suggest that there was a just legal system - jsut enquiring about what type of legal system there was when Saddam Hussein was in power, ie: common law or civil code.
Steve
My country has an unwritten constitution - or rather, a constitution that is not written in any one document but is composed of various laws, conventions and judgments of the courts.
I have a rudimentary understanding of the US Constitution, which, I strongly suspect, will be the template for the Iraqi Constitution. The US Costitution is entrenched in their law and courts can rule that laws passed by the government are unconstitutional and therefore ultra vires or "outside of their power" (excuse my latin translation skills). The idea is that power is balanced between three branches of government (Legislature, Executive, and Judiciary) and each branch places checks on the other to prevent excesses in the exercise of power.
I'm wondering whether a functional judiciary is as easy to set up in Iraq as a new Legislature and Executive.
As I understand it, the US Constitution empowers the Judiciary. Whether or not the constitution being proposed for Iraq will do this is not known to me. The reason I think it will not be easy to institute is that, unlike politicians, judges are drawn from members of a profession (lawyers). Lawyers are technicians and must be trained. Both a profession and a means of training people to practice within a profession exist within an infrastructure. A stable infrastructure is one thing that's been missing from Iraq for quite a while.
Another question that comes to mind is whether the Iraq legal system will be or is secular or Islamic?
Deane
Posted on: 31 January 2005 by Steve Toy
Under Saddam it was secular. (Thick-Bush didn't take this part into account...)
Turkey is a secular state (within the Europan bit and a bit beyond at least) but how will the West cope if Iraq elects a largely non-secular shi'ite Muslim (posibly coalition?) government that may well chuck out democracy just as Hitler did once he was democratically elected.
Then we have to worry about the Shi'ite Iraqis joining with Iran if they gain dominance in the new assembly.
In addition we have the Sunni Muslums who will continue to do what they've been doing already, i.e: killing...
Turkey is a secular state (within the Europan bit and a bit beyond at least) but how will the West cope if Iraq elects a largely non-secular shi'ite Muslim (posibly coalition?) government that may well chuck out democracy just as Hitler did once he was democratically elected.
Then we have to worry about the Shi'ite Iraqis joining with Iran if they gain dominance in the new assembly.
In addition we have the Sunni Muslums who will continue to do what they've been doing already, i.e: killing...
Posted on: 01 February 2005 by Rasher
quote:
Originally posted by long-time-dead:
Is there a just legal system in a dictatorship ?
I suppose there can be if the dictator chooses it, but someone motivated to gain that position is an unlikely candidate to be worried about justice. Maybe Jesus Christ would be an exception. Is the church a dictatorship?
Don't answer that...irrelevant diversion....sorry.
Posted on: 01 February 2005 by 7V
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Toy:
...but how will the West cope if Iraq elects a largely non-secular shi'ite Muslim (posibly coalition?) government that may well chuck out democracy just as Hitler did once he was democratically elected.
The West wouldn't like that at all but I doubt that the Iraqis would either.
quote:
Originally posted by Deane F:
...The reason I think it will not be easy to institute is that, unlike politicians, judges are drawn from members of a profession (lawyers).
I can see that this may be a major problem. I wonder how many lawyers and judges are amongst the Iraqis living in exile and whether some of these would return to Iraq.
Regards
Steve M