Are the Parties Against Bad Constitution, or Good President?
Once again, for gaining some specific political gains and achievement, some political parties have turned the matter of Kurdistan Region President’s re-election into a matter of the day. As Kurds say, they want to define themselves as people’s representatives, and at the same time, accusing people of being stupid.
Those parties want a parliamentary system of ruling, they mean a powerless and honorary president and no matter with or without a reason consult him whenever they want. So they want to manipulate with the constitution and the future of Kurdistan. From the representatives’ remarks, we can perceive that in case of electing the president directly by people, they’re concerned about the structure, awareness level and simplicity of people of Kurdistan, those who’ve also voted for them. Whenever they needed votes of the people, those who are now being accused and degraded, they would instead call them intellectuals and determined people.
Another political party thinks that the presidential system is important this time, so that the president, no matter which political party he belongs to, can have the role and power to practically improve the Kurdistan Region in all aspects. It means that the Kurdistan Region president is important for Kurdistan to be powerful, determined, open and respected by the majority of people, to be able to guarantee the lives of people and coexistence of various components of Christians, Muslims, Kurds, Assyrians, Turkman, and Arabs in Kurdistan.
The main question is: what kind of constitution does Kurdistan need? Of course a constitution that’s modern and democratic, in favor of civil society, coexistence, social stability, peace and development. We can feel that some political parties, instead of defending a democratic, modern and civil constitution, want to express their political intentions through turning on the Kurdistan Region President himself, under the pretext of ‘fears and concerns of arising totalitarianism and dictatorship’. The second party, from the opposition, is saying obviously that we need a good and powerful president at the moment. For what reason should everything be restricted to the issue of Kurdistan presidency? Why aren’t these issues discussed in the constitution as a strategic resolution?
In fact, we’re just chasing a political mirage. The political parties want to turn the strategic matter into a temporary one, not letting a decision to be made about Kurdistan Region Constitution bill. Some parties want to claim in a way or another that President Masoud Barzani and his power will threaten the future of political process in Kurdistan Region, while they are part of the process of defaming democracy, disrespecting the will of people, fear people’s votes, and restricting the power in the parliament. Those parties themselves consider the parliament miserable. In reality, large number of people who comprise the majority think that President Masoud Barzani is still the only powerful, suitable and trusted person for this position. Barzani said in an interview with IMCTV: “Even now I’m saying that I don’t accept my term to be extended, we obey law, now the Parliament and the political parties are conducting negotiations. Any agreement they reach, that will be implemented. I, in no way, will accept anything that’s against law.”
That’s why Kurdistan should stand against a bad constitution. It should draft a constitution that will be beneficial for the coming generations, to stem the fears of self-imposing and unilateralism. But what’s even more serious is looking for an incapable and weak president instead of a powerful, determined and trusted president, and a great diplomat internationally like the incumbent one. They want to draft constitution to solve temporary problems, not the strategic ones.
I have no complaints or critiques about political opinions and difference of thoughts and political interpretation of the developments, but I’m concerned to the bone that some political parties are trying to establish a powerless, weak and worthless presidency and a bad constitution. They maintain that people's votes may result in establishing a dictator and a unilateral president, whilst they claim that electing the president in the parliament will ‘surely’ banish all the fears. They seem to have forgotten that if people are accused of being ignorant and illiterate then the MPs, who are representatives of those people, should be called the ill and deficient minds of those people. It’s just like a blind, in daylight, talking about the risks of dark nights and singing songs to beauty.