5.c.22 – Is a direct control possible?

Read 905 times.
August 13, 2010 — Riccardo Sabellotti - Giacinto Sabellotti


Is a direct control possible?

Previously we concluded that in the current system, the control of citizens over their own representatives is in fact practically zero, while that on ministers and judges is non-existent, not just in fact but also formally, not having these offices the need for a direct legitimacy from the population. This occurs for several reasons, such as the belief that the parliamentarians are true representatives and that consequently can, indeed should, control on behalf of the people even the executive power, that the parties have the honesty not to exert undue pressure on judiciary etc. .. These problems in the concentric system simply do not exist, but we came to the conclusion that it is not enough to have eliminated the old problem: the people, when they deem it necessary, shall have the right tools to impose their authority, otherwise the democracy ceases to exist. This is a necessary requirement for any system that intends to be democratic.
To this end, in the forms of indirect government based on representatives, it is possible that people operates a “political replacement”, i.e. that replaces a number of important political figures that have disappointed them, having betrayed their expectations or trust. In principle, also with the concentric system a political replacement is possible but, as we know, it is too difficult to achieve and the more something is difficult, the less we are free to do it. We have also seen, in a previous example, as a monarch who could be dismissed by his people is no longer a monarch, being no longer the ultimate authority.
The experience of parliamentary systems teaches us that people have great difficulty in recognizing the valid representatives, but have many less to identify those who betray their trust. With our structure we have solved the problem of selecting good representatives, but not to eliminate any cases of system failure. It therefore seems appropriate to separate the elective activity (made indirectly in the structure) from that concerning the removal of a representative from his office, to be directly entrusted to direct the first ring. Noting that the institutional rings are six at most, we can see that each village must monitor and in case expel from their task at most six people. In fact, the seats of the various rings are not held by individuals but by teams, within which however the protection of the will of the people is entrusted to the representative coordinator; therefore the coordinators are those who should be judged directly because it is to them that the highest responsibility is entrusted. As for the rest of their team, they will be judged by experts within the village by the same procedure or, as accomplices of the coordinator, will automatically follow his destiny. But what destiny? What should happen to those who are removed from their office? If the direct intervention of the first ring has been necessary, it means that our representative has been guilty of a serious fault as having deliberately betrayed the trust of the group that represents or has intentionally acted against the interests of the whole community.
We believe that such conduct is incompatible with the role of representative, then that individual will be removed and declared unfit to this office by the unquestionable will of the people. In other words, he will be cut off forever from politics. In less serious cases, the representative may be removed and disqualified only for that ring and the next ones, or will be suspended for a defined number of years. It is clear that the direct judgment  of the citizens will be required only in particularly serious cases, while to replace those who simply were not good enough, the concentric structure will be used.
The main tool to guarantee democracy, the Validation of fitness of a representative that allows the population to assert its authority when the ring structure is not enough, will be similar to a referendum rather than repeal the law will remove the representatives from their office . We conclude by noting that such a system can be used only if an effective information system and adequate cultural preparation are available, issues that we have already discussed in previous chapters. Experience shows that the direct elections are not democratic when applied to large masses: it follows that the proposing or repealing referendums and the verifications should not be considered as means for achieving democracy but as instruments to defend it when the indirect process is not working well. These are protection systems to be used in case of emergency and, when their intervention is needed, the fault that has occurred in the indirect system should  be immediately fixed with appropriate reforms.



MARSILIO DA PADOVA stella4stella4stella4stella4

lampadina HOW TO REGISTER?

iperindice HIPERINDEX

previous                                          next >


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Ofelon project utilizes a Creative Common license
Creative Commons License