Political parties’ influence and impact on political life in Libya
Overview:
In contemporary political life, parties are considered the backbone of the democratic political process. Just as contemporary democracy is the rule of the people through elected representatives of the people, political parties are the means to frame these elected representatives and bring them together in political and ideological currents that represent the groups of the people who elected them.
According to the definition provided by Wikipedia, a political party is an organization that coordinates candidates to compete in the elections of a specific country. Party members often share similar ideas about policy, and parties can promote specific ideological or political goals.
To talk about political parties in Libya, there is no escape from talking about political life in the first place, and to talk about political life in Libya, we must delve into the dialectic of the establishment of the modern state in Libya. When did that happen? Or rather, did it even happen?
Since its establishment on December 24, 1951, the Libyan state has not witnessed any healthy and mature political life in the proper sense. The political life organized by parties as associations and organizations to coordinate political and ideological positions was not created in the country at all, as Libya witnessed before the February 17 revolution two completely different regimes of government. They both agreed to ban political parties.
During the era of the Kingdom of Libya , the late King Idris Asnusi called in 1952 for the dissolution of all parties Political, against the backdrop of the unrest that occurred on February 19th of the same year between the police and citizens, after the National Congress Party questioned the integrity of the elections at that time, the ban on political parties continued from then on until September 1, 1969, when a group of military officers led by First Lieutenant Muammar Gaddafi turned against the monarchy. This coup paved the way for a totalitarian, dictatorial rule that would take a more violent turn with political parties and with political life in general, as the Gaddafi regime issued Act No. 17 of 1972 criminalizing partisanship; This Act stipulated that the establishment of political parties was strictly prohibited, questioned their intentions, and the new regime declared its complete hostility to such parties, reaching the point of criminalization and accusation of treason to the homeland. An article of said Act included that practicing party life is treason against the homeland, and this was clearly crystallized in the sayings “Partisanship is an abortion of democracy” and “The partisan is a traitor” which Gaddafi mentioned in his Green Book, which continued for decades as the country’s sole constitution until the overthrow of the Jamahiriya regime in 2011.
After the overthrow of Gaddafi, the country began to witness the beginnings of a political awakening, especially after the National Transitional Council - which was established to unify popular efforts to overthrow the previous regime - decriminalized political partisanship, and began to codify the work of these parties to create a legislative framework for them, as stated in Article Four of the Constitutional Declaration. The provisional stipulation issued by National Transitional Council in 2011 provided “political life in Libya be based on political and party pluralism” and it guaranteed Freedom to form political parties.
Indeed, since 2012, the country has witnessed a boom in the formation of political parties. This boom suggests enthusiasm and eagerness among the political elites to practice organized political work, but at the same time it indicates an ill-considered rush that resulted in the formation of dozens of parties that are assumed to compete with each other to reach power, even though many of them carry the same political ideology, and logic assumes that these parties should unite their efforts to reach power, not compete and weaken each other, thus weakening their chances of leading state institutions according to the ideology they follow.
Despite the partisan boom that inspired signs of hope for a healthy political life and a modern, democratic state, that hope was soon dashed, as the parties themselves competed to gain power by seeking the support of armed militias and the military. Some ideological groups that owned party institutions established Military arms representing them in the armed conflict in light of the lack of any control of the state apparatus over the security and military institutions. These military arms began to sabotage political life without realizing it, and after applying pressure - sometimes politically and sometimes militia - to create laws and legislation to exclude persons and entities from the political scene because they see that the latter represent a threat to their project of establishing a state the struggle for power began to take a dangerous turn and the parties that were to be excluded began to use the same means - militia pressure and raids - to push for the exclusion of General National Congress, removing it from the scene, and holding new elections to result in a new House of Representatives, but the final blow was to the project of the emerging modern state, which these parties directed it to themselves without realizing it. Each of the competitors in the corridors of General National Congress thought that he was able to mobilize the street towards supporting him without the need for a partisan framework, so it was agreed that the parties would be excluded from the elections for the House of Representatives and that candidacy for membership in the House would through lists of individuals only.
The House of Representatives, which was intended to remain on the scene for only a year and a half, during which it would establish a permanent constitution and hold legislative elections for a body emerging from the constitution, has continued with us until today, and is still resisting any tendency to hold elections that would remove his individual members from the scene, and it will continue to resist until the end, because its members know that their exit from the corridors of the Council means removing the vast majority of them from the political or interest scene, perhaps forever, and with the absence of party work regulating political work from the corridors of the House of Representatives, the country returned to square one, the regional, tribal and regional blocs, and the members of the House of Representatives themselves became enemies of the party project because it is an ideological intellectual project that crosses colors, races and tribes and brings together people who adopt the same thought regardless of their tribes and regions. As if this was not enough in itself to nip the modern state project in its bud, in 2014 the authoritarian military state project appeared which is supported - surprisingly enough - by political parties!!
Having said that, we are inclined to the opinion that says that the modern state in Libya was not established at all, and that all projects for establishing this state died in infancy, or stillborn.
The political ideology of the Libyan parties:-
We mentioned previously that parties are organizations that coordinate candidates to compete in elections, that party members have similar ideas about politics, and that the party promotes specific ideological or political goals.
Political parties globally and historically have many different ideologies and approaches, from a call for equality in opposition to the call for class hierarchy, to communist Marxism versus capitalism, to ethno-nationalism versus inclusive patriotism, to religious fundamentalism versus secularism and libertarianism, and others, but all of this is united by a framework that has been known since the eighteenth century. During the French Revolution, political trends and beliefs were divided into right and left, the right usually being nationalist, fascist, or religious, and the left usually being secular, liberal, capitalist.
The terms “right” and “left” appeared during the French Revolution in 1789when the members of the National Assembly were divided into supporters of the king and were (coincidentally) sitting to the right of the president of the session, and supporters of the revolution were to his left. Although it was pure coincidence that led to this division; however, it has since been used to classify political parties around the world.
Over the years, implicit classifications have been added to it within the same classification: the extremist racist is called the extreme rightist, the one who calls for a civil state with a religious background is called the moderate rightist, the one who calls for the establishment of a secular state that prohibits religious practices is the extreme leftist, and the moderate leftist is the one who calls for keeping religion out of politics. While accepting its influence on private and public life, the centrist reformer also appeared, whose followers tend to combine right-wing and left-wing ideologies and call themselves “moderates.”
The previous introduction is necessary to delve into the ideologies of the Libyan political parties. In the Libyan arena today there are dozens of political parties. (We were not able to obtain the real number because the state agencies treat this public information as state secrets and thus hinder the citizen’s right to access information, which is an inherent right that the state should presumably protect it, not hinder it. These dozens of parties, some of which bear names that are almost repeated, without having a specific ideology, and most of these parties do not publish their literature or clear definitions of them, their orientations, policies, and members. Most parties create pages on social networking sites to spread their news, activities and statements (congratulations on religious and national occasions, condolences, and prayers for party members or their relatives) with links to websites on the information network, but these links usually do not work, which makes it extremely difficult to study most Libyan parties, determine their ideologies and orientations, and thus choose whether to vote for them or not.
By tracking what members of some parties publish and what they say in press and television interviews about their political orientations and inclinations, you will find - what a paradox - that the vast majority of parties - if not all of them - claim moderate centrist political and ideological tendencies; the right-wing parties - the parties emerging from religious currents - will say that they are moderate centrist parties that fight extremism, and the left-wing parties - although few - will not declare their liberalism, and if they do, they will also claim centrism, and the question here is if all of our parties are moderate national centrists; then why compete? Why not merge into one party that reflects the reality of the authoritarian projects that most of these parties represent?
The remarkable abstention of most Libyan political parties from displaying and publishing their literature and orientations actually indicates two things that are no less dangerous than each other: The first is the absence of a true vision and ideology for most of these entities called parties, and the second is the idea that most of our parties are in fact just grocery stores from which the party owners and founders make a living by marketing principles and ideas that bring them greater benefit and higher positions.
Party financing:
The previous part of our research leads us to a very important topic, which is the financing of political parties.
Article No. 40 of the draft constitution drafted by the constitution drafting body in 2017 which has not yet been published by popular referendum to date! stipulates that, “every citizen has the right to choose his political orientation, and the state guarantees the freedom to form political parties based on national unity, transparency of funding, and non-violence and hate speech, and every citizen has the right to join or withdraw from such parties without any discrimination.”
Act No. 29 of 2012 on the organization of political parties also stipulated in its eighth article, related to authorizing the party to carry out its activities (the publicizing of its principles, goals, means, and sources of funding).
Despite the great importance of the issue of transparency of funding sources, it has not received sufficient attention in Libyan political circles. You can hardly hear a speaker asking about the sources of funding for Libyan political parties, where do they cover their expenses from, the rents for their buildings and headquarters, the expenses of their seminars and conferences, and later their electoral campaigns?
It is known that political parties are non-profit organizations that do not engage in any activity that generates money, and that their sources of funding are usually the contributions paid by party members in exchange for their memberships, popular donations through citizens who support the party’s thought, vision and ideology, and through donations and aid received from wealthy people, businessmen and companies, which are usually linked to the interests that they seek to achieve through their support for the party.
By analyzing the aforementioned well-known sources; you will find that contributions and subscriptions are a far-fetched matter in Libya, because the culture of belonging to parties does not exist in Libyan society. Most Libyans were born and raised in a system of the partisan is traitor, and most of them will not belong to a party at all, let alone pay money for this affiliation.
The idea of popular donations does not exist at all in Libya, as it requires a society in which democracy is firmly established and has practiced the electoral process for many years, not a society that has held elections only twice, one of which did not witness the presence of parties at all.
The idea of gifts and aid from the wealthy and companies remains, although it is difficult to negate this idea as we negated the previous ones. It will also require a well-established democratic electoral process that encourages the businessman to support a party that will support his approach. As for the Libyan case, we find it difficult to accept the idea that a person with his wealth would support a political entity to enter into elections that may not be held at all!
Here we return to the question with which we began our research: where do Libyan parties finance their activities from, and later their electoral campaigns?
Political organizations or utilitarian groceries:-
Dr. Al Mahdi Ashaibani Daughman says: “ In order to distinguish between political parties and the rest of the other organizations that overlap with them, two American politicians, Joseph La Palombara and Myron Weiner put four criteria in this regard; namely :
1. Permanent organization: Political parties are characterized by an organization that has the ability to survive and continue with its leaders even after the disappearance of its founders.
2. The organization must be spread at the national level through linked local centers with a close relationship with the national center, this national spread requires the establishment of basic units throughout the country.
3. The explicit willingness to reach political power is often translated as advancing to elections. Through this criterion, we can distinguish political parties from interest groups.
4. The fourth and final criterion is obtaining popular support based on supporters, activists, and voters.”
End of quote adapted from the research (Political Parties... A Sociological Deviation) by Dr. Al Mahdi Ashaybani Dughman.
In his research, Dr. Dugman believes that what distinguishes political parties from the interest groups that we previously called grocery stores are four main criteria, the first of which is the permanent organization and the party ability to continue even after the disappearance of its leaders, founders, and theoreticians.
There are entities that call themselves parties, and they do not have this characteristic. Rather, they have completely lost their luster with the loss of their founder and their theorist, and have become equal to nothingness. A large number of people voted in the 2012 National Congress elections for a specific party because of its president. This particular party will enter the next elections if they are held. It has lost its founder and its first theorist, and with it its name and its will. Will it able to continue and gain people’s trust without the brilliant name for which people inked ballot papers in 2012?
There is a party based on the name of a military campaign led by a military adventurer who dreamed of the return of tyranny. This party will derive its electoral momentum from the name of the military campaign and its leader, but does this party have a project that will guarantee its continuity after the absence of the campaign leader and after the campaign loses its luster and nothing remains of its name but people talk, some praising and some criticizing?
Back to Dr. Dugman’s criteria and him considering that the organization spreading at the national level through local centers linked to a close relationship with the national center, is another criterion for distinguishing between parties and stores.
In 2012, some parties established branches in most Libyan cities, including but not limited to, The National Forces Alliance Party, the Justice and Construction Party, the National Front Party and the Change Party, but as the country entered the tunnel of armed conflict and civil war since 2014, and with the growing state of political polarization, these parties lost the flexibility they had enjoyed earlier, and were forced to close their headquarters. In the areas controlled by its opponents, even a number of headquarters were attacked and burned, and the mere mention of them in those areas became a betrayal of (the blood of the martyrs), which brings even these large parties back to the status of stores in this aspect at least. In the event of elections being held, can these parties nominate candidates in their opponents’ areas? If they did, would they be able to conduct propaganda and election campaigns for them?
We come to the latest criteria of Dr. Dugman; (securing popular support based on supporters, activists, and voters). Let us go out of context a little and go to another field, even if it is far from political parties but upon which the elections depend on a principle that is not very far from what we are trying to clarify here that explains the last criterion.
For many years, the term (bag clubs) has spread in Libya to describe sports clubs that exist on paper only, that is, they do not exist in reality, and if they do exist, they have no effect at all, and their existence depends entirely on their registration papers found in the club president’s bag (bag), and this latter trades these papers to vote for the president of the Sports Federation in the elections in exchange for the support that real clubs receive.
Whereas most of the political parties in our country do not exist in reality, and if they do exist, they have no influence at all. By this standard, they have become (bag parties), created for the founder of the party to trade with in order to secure the greatest amount of benefits and gains for himself and his acquaintances. There is no popular support for this party at all, there are no supporters and activists who believed in his idea and decided to fight for it. Rather, he does not have an idea at all that would depend on activists and voters to spread it.
Parties and elections:-
What chance do political parties have in the upcoming elections?
In October of 2023, the House of Representatives issued the new election Act on the basis of which elections are supposed to be held mid 2024 (Act No.27 of 2023 regarding the election of the National Assembly). The National Assembly - according to this Act - is (the legislative authority of the state and consists of two chambers: the House of Representatives and the Senate, and they exercise their powers in accordance with the Constitutional Declaration as amended.
Article 13 of the aforementioned Act stipulates that: (Under the provisions of this Act, two hundred and ninety-seven (297) members of the House of Representatives will be elected by direct secret general ballot, so that one hundred and fifty-two (152) will be elected by closed lists submitted by the parties under the proportional representation system in the districts. The number allocated for this purpose is one hundred and forty-five (145) on the basis of individual nomination according to the first-past-the-post system. Ninety (90) members of the Senate are elected on the basis of individual candidacy with a first-past-the-post system.
In all of this, the system of one non-transferable vote is adopted.
That is, according to the Act that was approved by the House of Representatives unilaterally, as the Supreme Council of State still has reservations about it - the National Assembly will be divided into two chambers - a House of Representatives and a Senate - and political parties will be able to run in the elections for the House of Representatives only, while running for the Senate will be limited to the individual system only.
The House of Representatives will consist of 297 members; According to the Act, 152 of them will be candidates from party lists, while the rest - 145 - will be allocated to lists of individuals.
According to this Act, party list candidates are approximately equal to individual list candidates, and therefore a party or group of parties will not be able to control the House of Representatives and direct its policy towards their ideological vision, except by making as many alliances as possible with the individuals who will constitute approximately half of the members of the House, thus The House of Representatives will be a slightly less bleak picture than the current House of Representatives, which is completely dominated by expediency and pragmatism based on tribal, regional, and regional foundations.
Most political parties will not be able to participate in the electoral process in all constituencies throughout the country. Rather, their participation will be limited to areas where there is a popular incubator for them, or areas that are not under the direct control of their political or ideological opponents taking all these factors into account. In addition, dozens of parties are carbon copies of each other, and most of them carry almost identical names, and claim to have the same vision and direction. Some of them are known for the activities of their founders in some regions, but they do not represent any value in other regions, and some of them will derive qualitative momentum from the figures who support him in some regions, but the support of these same figures for the party will be a factor of alienation in other regions. We will find ourselves facing an almost inevitable outcome of the election result: scattered and fragmented seats for large parties in large districts, and seats scattered here and there in small districts for small parties whose leaders will engage in political trading to secure the greatest amount of benefits by entering into specific coalitions or supporting specific trends within the corridors of the Council. In any case, we will find ourselves facing a new political experience, but it is as distorted as its predecessors, and it will not lead to the establishment of the modern state that we dream of. However, we can only dream that the next experience, and perhaps even the one thereafter, will be merely steps that we take on the path to political practice that corrects itself through its mistakes until we reach the modern state of Libya, which generations have fought for.
Sources:
Wikipedia encyclopedia
The Official Gazette
Act No.17 of 1972 criminalizing partisanship
The Constitutional Declaration issued by National Transitional Council in 2011
Act No. 29 of 2012 regulating political parties
Act No. 27 of 2023 regarding the election of the National Assembly
Research (Political Parties... A Sociological Deviation) by Dr. Al Mahdi Ashaibani Dughman