Constitution and crossovers

Many proposals and suggestions are being presented by political parties and other organizations, to the Committee mandated by the government for the submission of draft proposals for the enactment of a new constitution. Basically, all proposals are aimed at preserving the unitary status of the country based on democratic ideals.

One particular and pertinent amendment, in my opinion, which should be of prime importance, is the necessity to focus due attention on upholding the fundamental and democratic rights of the common man – the voter – over and above those of politicians.

It is a known fact that every voter, having taken into consideration many factors, exercises his/her democratic right to elect a person of his/her choice to a relevant political body. Subsequently, the elected member, contrary to and in violation of the trust and belief placed in his/her election, effortlessly crosses over to another party, or alliance, for personal gain. The argument which follows invariably justifies the cross-over as a democratic right of the member concerned. Then what happens to the democratic right of the franchise holder?

Since a new constitution would presumably supercede existing procedures, a pertinent suggestion to be given due consideration, is in such an event, provisions be introduced for the conduct of a by-election covering the entire district, which elected the particular member. This will provide an opportunity for those who elected the member to either justify the cross-over or reject it. On the other hand, supporters of the party/alliance, which the member is aligned to, can democratically agree or dis-agree with its recent entrant.

If democracy is to prevail, such a provision would indubitably deter unworthy and unfaithful politicians from shirking responsibility to those who voted for them.

WILLIAM OPP