The ruling coalition in Tunisia has suggested a new political system; a mixture between presidential and parliamentary. This was decided upon by the most important blocs in the National Constituent Assembly (NCA) on the controversy concerning the best political system for the post-revolution Tunisia.

The ruling coalition in Tunisia has suggested a new political system; a mixture between presidential and parliamentary. This was decided upon by the most important blocs in the National Constituent Assembly (NCA) on the controversy concerning the best political system for the post-revolution Tunisia.

The statement of the Supreme Coordinating Body of the ruling coalition parties (Ennahda, Democratic Forum for Labor and Liberties (FDTL, or Ettakatol) and Congress for the Republic), issued last Sunday didn’t explain the specific details of this new political system. According to the statement, “selecting a dual political system where the president is directly elected by the people ensures balance among powers and inside the executive power”. However, this suggestion has resolved a controversy, running since the Tunisian revolution, about the nature of the political system in Tunisia, and invoked reactions by political actors and constitutional experts in Tunisia.

Maya Jribi, Secretary General of the Republican Party, expressed her party’s satisfaction about this suggestion, especially the provision about electing the president directly by the people; the Republican Party has always believed that such a system is the best for Tunisia.

Qais Said, professor of constitutional law has shown certain reservations about this system because it distributes the executive power between two “heads” who may dispute when dealing with touchy issues. He warned of the risks of this new system if the powers of the two heads have not been defined precisely.

The debate about this suggestion is expected to increase in the National Constituent Assembly, the legislatively eligible power to determine the new political system for Tunisia. A debate that may highlight the rift among political players about the best system for Tunisians, but it may not change the poll results, because the Troika enjoys the majority in the NCA.

The debate about this suggestion has also touched on other sides related to the motives of the Troika accord about this political system. Ennahda, the most important party in the accord, has always defended the parliamentary system, considering it the most efficient in reversing the tyranny and power monopoly, citing the presidential experience Tunisia has had since independence with president Habib Bourguiba and his successor, Zein el-Abidine Ben Ali.

Ennahda’s platform for the elections of 23 October 2011 affirmed the parliamentary choice and Ennahda members of the NCA Legislation Committee have defended it during the committee deliberations.

Ennahda’s acceptance of the dual system is a clear retreat meant to maintain some accords, especially with the other two Troika partners. The movement is still seeking to maintain the Troika, promoting it as “a Tunisian model for alliance between moderate Islamists and moderate seculars”.

It is obvious that this dual system is the best for the Troika to maintain its unity, but not necessarily the best for the Tunisians, as explained by Sahbi Atig, head of Ennahda bloc.

Dual Solution

Claiming that the dual system is the best for the Tunisians requires at least an NCA accord or a referendum at a later stage, if necessary.

Tunisians have only known the dual system through the experiences of others. Constitutional experts assert that theoretically, there is nothing called a dual system. The dual system means a kind of parliamentary system amended to strengthen the executive power through expanding the powers of the president much more than in the conventional parliamentary system. Hence, it combines both the presidential and parliamentary systems.

Constitutional experts explain that Tunisia had never known the presidential system; it only had a “presidentialist” system, which is a deformed version of the “real” presidential system similar to that in the USA.

In a presidential system, the president should be elected by the people, nominate the prime minister and chair the cabinet meetings, appoint and dismiss ministers upon proposal by the prime minister. The president should also appoint the senior civil and military officials of the state and enjoy organizational powers, especially decision-making.

Tunisia has not known the parliamentary system either, though the current model of government is called “the council system”, meaning that the main power is in NCA’s hands.

Many political analysts look at the current experience as a parliamentary model promoted by Ennahda, where most executive powers lie in the cabinet, whereas the president only has limited powers, which constrains his movement.

Another aspect of the parliamentary system is the duality of the executive power; there is a prime minister and the government is also responsible before the parliament that monitors its performance and may conduct a no-confidence vote. The executive power may dissolve the parliament and take part in the legislative function by proposing laws and discussing them in the parliament.

The Troika’s dual choice that mixes between presidential and parliamentary is still a proposal to be put forward to the NCA for discussion and ratification.

Pending this ratification, the Tunisia politics will see a lot of dynamics and controversy about this proposal, which will determine the features of Tunisia’s political future.