Still on the review of the Explanatory Notes to the Barrow Papers 2024…
In Section 81(3) of the 2020 Draft, before the President appoints IBEC commissioners they are first subjected to National Assembly confirmation. But the Barrow Papers have deleted this requirement claiming that it will lead to “bureaucracy” and “undue bottlenecks”, and delays hence affect “prompt and quality electoral administration.” They want the President to just appoint and remove electoral commissioners just like it is in the 1997 Constitution.
The argument in the Explanatory Notes is meaningless as it ignores the fundamental principles and standards of good governance and transparent, free and fair elections. Contrary to their misguided view, having parliamentary confirmation only ensures that electoral commissioners are men and women of character and competence.
This process also makes electoral stakeholders such as political parties, candidates, and society in general have trust and confidence in the electoral commission. This is necessary to ensure credible elections, popular participation in elections and prevent the rejection of election results and electoral violence because people trust the institution and the process.
It must be emphasized that parliamentary confirmation does not interfere, delay or create bottlenecks in decision making processes, nor do they take away power from the president. Rather parliamentary confirmation helps the president to identify qualified and competent men and women of integrity to serve in public office.
Therefore, it is in the interest of any president to have the parliament vet your nominees because they help you identify fit and proper individuals who, when they perform well in public office, the credit goes to the president because he appointed them in the first place. Those who object to parliamentary confirmation have other not so good intentions.
Therefore, the only reason the Barrow Papers do not wish to have parliamentary confirmation is that they want to create an electoral commission under the firm control of the president and his party, hence undermining free and fair elections in the Gambia. Many countries are plunged into turmoil after elections because of the control and interference the incumbent has over the election body. After having our own experiences in this regard, one wonders who would not want to have an independent IBEC free from Executive control?
Check out for Part 4