Invitation
Armanshahr Foundation, is pleased to invite you to its 53rd (year IV) public Seminar GOFTEGU, a bridge between the elite and the citizens, to be held in cooperation with the Foundation for Culture and Civil Society.
In the run-up to the parliamentary elections, Armanshahr Foundation is organising a series of Goftegu debates under the heading of “Face to Face”, as in the period prior to the presidential election, with the aim of establishing direct dialogue between the citizens on the one hand and the candidates and the officials on the other.
Face to Face: From First Parliament to Second Parliament:
Parliamentarian candidates and the citizens
Parliamentarian candidates: Ms. Anarkali Honaryar, Khalil Roman, Nasir Fayaz, Ahmad Behzad, Abdolmanan Shiwa Shargh
Moderator: Rooholamin Amini
Date & Time: Thursday, 8th July 2010, 14 hours
American prisons in Afghanistan, a clear violation of national sovereignty and judicial independence
Several general election candidates took part in the 54th Goftegou – parliamentary “Face to Face” – public debate at the Culture and Civil Society Foundation on 8 July 2010. Messrs Ahmad Behzad, Mohammad Nasir Fayyaz, Khalil Roman and Shivaye Sharq were present. Ms. Anarkeli Honaryar who had been invited was absent.
The first question was: Why are you standing for election?
Stating his motive to be representation of the demands of the society, Mr. Behzad said: Unfortunately, the absence of parties causes confusion among the voters and candidates as well as doubts about the priorities and demands among the people and lack of a clear understanding of those demands among the candidates and political activists.
Mr. Roman said his aim was to make a real change and realise the rule of the people. He argued that specialised legislative and monitoring committees should be established to advise the parliament, because there is a lack of specialists in those two areas. Representing the people in the parliament does not mean social work, but identification of problems, analysing and formulating them in laws. According to Mr. Roman, one positive aspect of the present parliament is its positive discrimination in favour of women and that should be extended to all social and cultural areas.
Criticising the superficial process of democracy in Afghanistan, Mr. Fayyaz said ethnic-centred moves were influential in the elections. Referring to the events of 1992-96, he said: We should not allow Afghanistan to return to those years. Citing the British policy of “divide and rule,” he said: They are trying to divide us again under the pretext of transitional justice. Emphasising the influence of people’s vote on their future, he said breaching of the Constitution in favour of an ethnic group, party, ethnic orientation and language were not in the interests of all the people.
Pointing out that elections are the fundamental pillars of democracy and reconstruction of civil power, Mr. Shivaye Sharq, the youngest candidate among the speakers, criticised the present parliament for failing to define the basic national policy lines regarding the presence of foreign forces, the economic system, transitional justice, political relations with the outside world among others, and said the women’s presence was symbolic in the parliament. He emphasised that if candidates had clear programmes, their ethnic origin would not play a decisive role.
Then, the moderator asked the candidates to provide clear answers to two related questions: What is your programme for realising transitional justice and what mechanisms should the next parliament follow for that purpose?
Mr. Behzad said: The main problem of politicians is being in the minority. All efforts in the House of Representatives are directed at getting closer to the winning tendency and that leads to trampling upon all the values in favour of transient interests. That is also the case with transitional justice. People’s demand is a clear investigation of all criminals, but that is not possible today. Crimes are committed even today. That would not have been the case, if past crimes had been investigated. Most ardent democrats do not support the process for fear of being in the minority. On the other hand, the prevailing political culture promotes impunity for criminals. When the leadership of the system says he is searching for the address of somebody’s brother to kiss his footprints that gives the criminals a favourable condition.
As to his plans for changing that political culture, he said: Every political activist should represent people’s demands. That is also a solution to the problem of violation of human rights. I am an idealist: justice and freedom. To achieve those ideals however, we should be realists and accept the ugly realities. Ethnic questions are sensitive. If we were to deny them outright and call for nationalism without pondering the ethnic demands, we would fail. The Communists and the mujahedin emerged as a result of an enduring 250-year political culture. We must recognise the ethnic demands. Human rights cases are not investigated, because they represent demands of one group of people. Investigating human rights abuses requires fulfilment of ethnic demands.
Answering the first question, Mr. Fayyaz said: The passage of Amnesty Law by the powerful MPs illustrates the people’s wrong choices who elected a criminal majority and MPs who follow others to raise their ballot cards. The conditions are not ripe for investigating those crimes and many other crimes still occur. People should elect MPs whose hands are not stained with the blood of the people.
The next question was put to Mr. Roman: Horrendous prisons nobody knows about, civilian casualties, lack of definition of presence of foreign forces; what is your programme in this respect?
He replied: We have to answer another question first and that is, ‘Who are we asking to fulfil transitional justice?’ We have no minimum or maximum programme in this respect. We must create a sound, popular leadership faithful to people’s ideals. Attending to the conditions of prisons and civilian casualties is a difficult task, but there are mechanisms to reduce them. Causing civilian casualties is not a strategy of foreign forces. The government must ask foreign forces to establish coordination within their own ranks and with our armed forces. American prisons on Afghanistan’s soil are a clear violation of the national sovereignty and independence of the judiciary.
Mr. Shivaye Sharq said: Transitional justice is an issue for post-war countries, but we are still at war. It is not a question of only three decades, but 300 years. Fulfilment of Justice depends on national, civil, popular, indigenous power and political will. That requires reform of the power structure and that necessitates a popular movement to win people’s trust in power. The Independent Human Rights Commission is not independent. Its president must be elected by a vote of confidence and its work should be monitored. I do not believe in the ‘30 years’ that the Commission has determined; I have been deprived of my right to sovereignty for 300 years.
Questioned about his plans for the young people, he replied: They are victims of the present abnormal conditions and suffer from many social wrongs. I shall promote low-cost marriages, scholarships, appointment of young people to political management positions, a labour code, allowing free political activities in the universities, attention to their family’s economic conditions and their civil activities.
On monitoring, Shivaye Sharq said: If we determine the basic lines, to define the presence of foreign forces etc, we could monitor the government.
Mr. Roman said: Monitoring should be accompanied with solutions. Representing the people should be based on social pathology not on one’s own wishes. Mr. Fayyaz added: Parliament does not have the jurisdiction to amend the Constitution. That is only within the power of the Loya Jirga (the Grand Council). We have lost our political independence and national sovereignty. Afghans are not in control of their political will. Therefore, we cannot achieve full political sovereignty and end foreign interference.
Replying to a question from the audience about his remarks concerning decentralisation of power and relationship of the provinces with the capital, Mr. Behzad said: I believe many problems are rooted in ethnic issues. There is not a nation in Afghanistan. That is only a slogan. We must build a nation and pass through the crisis. Integration accompanied with violence and genocide is not a solution; neither is armed separatism. The principal issue is to recognise the crisis.
On minorities and the Hindus, Mr. Behzad said: Ethnicity is an unavoidable reality in our society. We must all assume our responsibility in t his area. The Hindus issue is a victim of the majority-minority discussion. We don’t even know their real figures and there is no will within the establishment to conduct a population census.
In conclusion, Mr. Shivaye Sharq reported the creation of a network of 44 young candidates extending from west to the east of Afghanistan who are operating in a network and hope to win seats in the new parliament.
