Saeb A. K. El Zein

The problem in Lebanon is not the Lebanese citizen, who is not empowered to exercise his democratic right of choice, but the political sectarian system governing us. The system cannot be changed for the time being, nevertheless it can be improved and changed slowly from within without fundamentally impacting on the country’s National Pact between Christians and Muslims.

Allowing the election of a president directly by citizens and having a single constituency parliamentary electoral law (one parliamentarian per constituency) are the two catalysts for positive change that will empower citizens to influence the president and parliament. This should positively evolve our system from within and enhance democracy.

These two changes would allow the Lebanese to have a direct impact on political life. In both cases, politicians would be held directly accountable to voters. Accountability improves performance and allows for the emergence of a new generation of politicians, while also improving the performance of current politicians. Perhaps then in the long term civil society will be able to gain the upper hand, allowing it to further ameliorate Lebanon’s obsolete and obstructed sectarian operating system.

Since we live in a sectarian system, the direct election of the president by citizens will have to reflect Parliament’s sectarian representation as per the post-Taif constitution. That is why the Christian vote must carry disproportionately higher weight than the Muslim vote in order to replicate the current 50-50 split.

For example if 1.5 million citizen voted on election day, 800,000 Muslims and 700,000 Christians, then each Christian vote would be adjusted by a factor of 1.143 compared to the Muslim vote to result in the 50-50 breakdown as required. The same process of weighting will apply to sects’ votes to achieve the exact weight of the religions and sects in Parliament.

Many countries in the region have already allowed citizens to elect their leaders, such as Tunisia, Iraq, Egypt and Iran. The Lebanese citizen should not be any different, especially as the current election process has failed us many times over the years. The recent failure of electing a president after almost a year is proof of this shortcoming.

The benefits of directly electing the president are many. It will enhance a feeling of nationhood, consolidating citizenship. It will limit the influence of regional and international powers in the election process. It will force the election of a president within constitutional deadlines. And it will reduce the Christians’ fears that their powers have been reduced, solidifying their long-term presence in Lebanon by virtue of having a Maronite president empowered by the entire Lebanese population.

A direct election of the president would allow a new breed of politicians to surface. Such candidates would better reflect the dreams and aspirations of the Lebanese, especially the young, who form a substantial share of the population. Direct elections would also impose competition among candidates. This would force them to work for all Lebanese, not for a specific sect or foreign power, and to campaign on the basis of, and implement, new economic and social programs.

The current presidential election process subcontracts voting rights to parliamentarians to elect the head of state, undermining our basic right to choose. Four million Lebanese who have been able to shoulder the burdens, and curses, of the Lebanese political system for years can exercise their choice of a president more freely than the 128 parliamentarians influenced by their leaders or outside powers and restricted from acting independently. The indirect system of having Parliament elect presidents was put in place during the French Mandate to control the outcomes. This has evolved over the years into a system allowing local, regional and international actors to control the election, in such a way as to preserve their political interests.

As for a parliamentary election law, the benefits of having one parliamentarian per small constituency are also many. A law implementing such a system would be simple and easy. It would enhance accountability and transparency; citizens would more readily influence election results than in a list system; and sectarian leaders, to succeed, would have to consider citizens’ choices on who best represents them. This will also give an advantage to younger candidates, allowing new blood to emerge.

History will judge who among our leaders has the courage to strive for change and empower the Lebanese. This would enhance and solidify our democracy and preserve the multiconfessional identity of our small country. It’s important for them to cease pursuing their selfish and mediocre interests and wake up. Lebanon’s young need to be offered some hope for change, even if it is within the confines of the sectarian system.