right to recall solidarity of democracy

7/28/2019 Right to Recall Solidarity of Democracy

1/3

Should we have the right to 'recall' MPs? It can be

done in America, why not here? Few of us hadheard of recall until 2003 when California Gover-nor Gray Davis lost the recall ballot to the'governator', Arnold Swarzenegger. The idea issimple, as a Civitas online briefing proposed yes-terday. Sometimes voters regret the choice theymade at the last general election and do not wantto wait until the next time. If a proportion of theelectorate (say 20%) can be persuaded to sign apetition to recall the elected office holder, then an

immediate by-election must be held.

There is cross-party support. Back in February 2008a group of 27 Tory MPs wrote to The Daily Tele-graph calling for local voters to be allowed to 're-call' their MP and at the weekend Lib-Dem leaderNick Clegg came out in favour.

How common is it? In America 18 states allowelected officials to be recalled from their posts by apetition of between 12 and 40 per cent of voters.

In 1903 the city of Los Angeles was the first largearea to introduce recall, followed in 1908 by Or-egon and in 1911 by California. Then Arizona,Colorado, Nevada and Washington all adopted re-call in 1912. In addition eleven more states, whilenot permitting recall of state-level officials, do al-low the recall of local officials.

Recall ballots are useful in precisely the sort of situ-ation that has now arisen in the UK. We are toldthat MPs have acted within the rules, but few vot-ers think they have behaved ethically. Some mayhave to face criminal charges but it is likely to bedifficult to reach the high standard of proof re-quired in a criminal trial, as disgraced MP DerekConway found. Some will face the wrath of theirlocal constituency party, but as Luton MP Marga-ret Moran discovered, that may not mean verymuch. If a significant number of voters think theirMP is not fit to hold public office, then it shouldbe possible to require them to stand for re-elec-

tion immediately.

Right to RecallSolidarity of Democracy

The process should not be too easy to prevent con-

stant harassment by disgruntled rivals but, if a sig-nificant proportion of the electorate wants a bal-lot, it should be held. How many signatures shouldbe required? In ten of the 18 American states 25per cent of the electorate is needed, while Louisi-ana requires 33.3 per cent and Kansas 40 per cent.At 12 per cent, California has the lowest require-ment. A recall ballot is a costly procedure and hasbeen used sparingly. Only two state governors haveever been recalled: North Dakota Governor Lynn

Frazier in 1921 and California's Gray Davis in 2003.

However, it was not for lack of trying: one studyestimated that there had been around 40 failed at-tempts to recall state officials in California.

If the policy were introduced in the UK, how manysignatures should be required? There should be asignificant hurdle, perhaps about 20 per cent ofregistered voters in a constituency. The averageconstituency size in England is about 75,000 vot-

ers and so a petition of 15,000 would be needed.The number is achievable without being too easy.In practice the procedure would probably not beused very often, but the fact that it was availablewould have a salutary effect on MPs and the 'gravytrain' mentality that can only flourish amidst se-crecy would be no more.

If MPs would like to prove themselves deservingof respect, voting for recall ballots would go a longway to restoring public confidence.

Electorate has no Role in the

Selection of Candidates

The Common Wealth Parliament Association de-bated the matter and considered the right to recallas a strategy for enforcing greater accountabilityof Parliament to the people. People are disillusionedwith the conduct of Parliamentary business.

,

wnloaded from: http://www.upscportal.com

www.upscportal.com


2/3

The very process of legislative functioning is sub-verted, leading to incalculable harm to the repre-sentation of democratic institutions.

The National Commission to Review the Workingof the Constitution has pointed out in its reporthow a Parliamentary system, unlike the Presiden-tial system, lays emphasis on accountability.

Half a centurys experience of the working of theConstitution has brought to the fore several inad-equacies, failures and distortions. The NationalCommission referred in particular to the emergenceof the unhealthy role of money and mafia powerand to criminalisation, corruption, communalismand casteism.

The Electorate has no role in the selection of can-didates for election and the majority of the candi-dates are elected by minority of votes under thefirst-past-the-post system.

Referendum and Recall

Democracies can be of several types : Parliamen-tary, Presidential and Direct. In a direct democ-racy, sovereignty is lodged in the assembly of all

citizens who choose to participate.

Such an assembly may pass executive motions (de-crease), make law, elect and dismiss officials andconduct trials. In a representative democracy, sov-ereignty is exercised by a subset of the people,elected periodically, but otherwise free to advancetheir own agendas. Direct democracy deals withhow citizens are directly involved with votingfor various laws, instead of voting for representa-tives to decide for them. Referendum and recall

are pillars of direct democracy.

People at large are conferred the power in a refer-endum to decide whether a given law should bescrapped. They have a veto on government legis-lation.

Recall is a procedure by which voters can removean elected representative from office. It was oneof the major electoral reforms advocated by lead-

ers of the Progressive moment in the US duringthe twentieth century.

This movement was less than successful becausein the US recall elections are prohibited in the fed-eral system. Recall is a political device designed toenable voters dissatisfied with an elected officialto replace him before the expiry of his term of of-fice. The concept originated in Switzerland butbecame operative in several American States since1903.

American Experience

Eighteen States in the American Federation per-mit recall elections to remove their State Officers.In 1921, North Dakotas Governor Lin Frazier wasrecalled over a dispute about state-owned indus-tries. In 2003, the Californian Governor, GrayDavis, was recalled over mismanagement of theStage budget. In many of these States, the petitionfor recall must identify some form of malfeasanceor misconduct while in office. The minimum num-ber of signatures of voters and time limit to qualifya recall varies between States.

Quite often, a recall triggers a simultaneous spe-

cial election, where the vote on the recall and thereplacement recall succeed are on the sameballet. In 1988, there was a successful petition-driveto recall the Arizona Governor. But before thecompletion of the process, he was impeached andremoved from the Office by the Senate.

Recall in Canada

Canadian provinces have been effective using the

device of recall to infuse discipline in the repre-sentatives. The Canadian province of British Co-lumbia enacted representative recall in 1995. Thevoters in that province can petition the Govern-ment to have a sitting representative removed fromoffice.

Even a Premier presently leading a Governmentcan be removed from office if enough registeredvoters signed the petition.

,


www.upscportal.com


3/3

A by-election will follow. In January 2003, a record 22 recall efforts were launched.

Venezuelan Constitution

The 1999 Constitution of Venezuela enables a recall of any elected representative including the President.Article 72 of the Constitution declares that all offices filled by popular vote are subject to revocation.When half the term of the office has elapsed, voters representing at least 20 per cent of the registeredvoters in the constituency may petition for the calling of a referendum to revoke the mandate of theofficial.

When the number of voters equals to or is greater than the number of those who elected the representa-tive vote in favour of the recall, the representatives mandate shall be deemed to have been revoked.Action will be taken to fill the permanent vacancy as per the Constitution. The provision for recall wassuccessfully utilised in 2004.

Switzerland model

Switzerland is often cited as the strongest example of modern direct democracy. It has put to use theinitiative and the referendum at both local and federal levels. Initiatives are proposals, drafted by a citizenor group of citizens that by virtue of attaining a requisite member of signatures on a petition, are put to theelectorate for acceptance or rejection. However, the populace showed its conservative nature, approvingonly about 10 per cent of the initiatives put before them. Recall is not much in use in Switzerland.

Flawed system

The National Commission correctly identified the main cause and source of political decay in India as the

ineptness of the electoral process, which has not been able to keep out criminal, anti-social and undesir-able elements from participating in and even dominating the political scene and polluting the electoral andparliamentary processes.

A Constitution, however lofty its exhortations and sentiments, is not a self-executing document. Thepresent system by which the voters are allowed to assert their sovereignty only once in five years iswoefully flawed.

Advertise yourCoaching Center Online

for FREE

Contact Us Online:

http://upscportal.com/civilservices/contact

,


www.upscportal.com
http://upscportal.com/civilservices/contacthttp://upscportal.com/civilservices/contact

right to recall solidarity of democracy

Documents