The National Constituent Assembly (NCA) General Legislation Committee will vote on a “political immunization of the revolution” bill which collectively excludes vestiges of the old regime for ten years. Expected in the coming days, the requires 109 votes in the NCA.
The bill has raised controversy between those who drafted it in NCA (71 members representing Ennahda Movement and other close parties, such as Congress for the Republic Party and Wafa Movement) and representatives of the opposition parties. Disagreements escalated to verbal assaults on both sides.
The National Constituent Assembly (NCA) General Legislation Committee will vote on a “political immunization of the revolution” bill which collectively excludes vestiges of the old regime for ten years. Expected in the coming days, the requires 109 votes in the NCA.
The bill has raised controversy between those who drafted it in NCA (71 members representing Ennahda Movement and other close parties, such as Congress for the Republic Party and Wafa Movement) and representatives of the opposition parties. Disagreements escalated to verbal assaults on both sides.
Supporters of the bill believe that Tunisians have the right to fortify their revolution against the remnants of the former regime while its opponents call for protecting Tunisians’ right to fair trial through transitional justice rather than collective exclusion.
Officials under Ben Ali
The draft law states: “The Electoral Commission shall determine an initial list of officials who occupied one of the predefined positions, within a maximum period of three months as of the date this bill enters into force.”
Constitutional law experts believe that this clause would delay and disrupt the mission of the Electoral Commission, especially since preparing the list requires great precision and may take a long time.
The draft law also stipulates that “All civil services are obliged to present information required by the Commission and citizens may request the inclusion of a name in the list and identify his/her assumed position.”
Local and international political observers believe that this bill is meant for collective party and political elimination and exclusion for pure electoral purposes that would only serve its presenting parties. This bill will exclude those who assumed a number of political and party positions whether or not they were involved in corruption, bribery or other violations, which means it will also cover those who were dismissed by the former regime for their integrity. There are many examples in this regard.
No prosecution
Observers also suggest that the bill does not provide for prosecuting the corrupt officials but only for penalizing them by politically excluding for ten years after which time they would be able to return to political activities with their same practices.
The opposition parties deem the bill as unjust against a large segment of Tunisians and contradictory of the rights and freedom chapter of the draft constitution, which provides for Tunisians’ right to participate in political life and form political parties, unions and associations.
Political analysts believe that this contradiction between two committees of the NCA reflects Ennahda’s and its allies’ lack of determination in establishing a state of rights, laws and collective and individual freedoms.
Dictatorship return
Constitutional law expert Sadiq Belaid stressed that this contradiction would pave the way for the return of another dictatorship and tyranny under the guise of “revolution immunization” which “only grants immunity for those in power against their arch-opponent, Call for Tunisia Party, which includes a number of former regime’s officials.”
Muhammad Ali Nasri, an MP for Call for Tunisia, believed that that bill included exceptions with regard to the identified figures and specified date. “Why does the period covering the bill start in 1989 rather than 1987?” he wondered. Nasri stressed that in 1988, Ennahda signed the National Charter with Ben Ali and thus, by this procedure, it did not include itself in the exclusion.
Nasri pointed to the letter of the Ennahda leader, Rashid Ghannoushi, to Zine El Abidine Ben Ali in 1988, requesting his permission to participate in politics.
On the other hand, Head of Ennahda block Sahbi Atigue described the bill as a key demand of the revolution, suggesting that it defined the necessary measures to immunize the revolution against remnants of the former regime.
NCA member for Ennahda and the Constitution Constituent Committee Rapporteur Habib Khedher said, “Immunization of the revolution against those who have wasted the Tunisians’ blood, money and dignity is a demand of the people to prevent the return of the corrupt officials to politics.”
He said that required a bold, revolutionary decision similar to that of many countries that experienced democratic transition and succeeded in protecting their revolutions and establishing new regimes fortified against corruption.
“Exclusion of the Ralliers – members of the Rally Party – for a specific period is a right of the revolution. All officials who accepted working with Ben Ali are accomplices since they accepted to cooperate with the corrupt, whose corruption was no secret,” Khedher added.
Between the “revolution’s right” to immunize itself against dictatorial symbols and Tunisians’ efforts to establish the “just revolution” to end injustice and arbitrariness and establish the principle of citizenship, Tunisians stand at a loss.
While some stressed that collective exclusion could cause injustice to a small category, others believed that the revolution protection required fair decision based on “prosecuting the corrupt” and reconciliation with the uncorrupt figures of the former regime.
