Elections in 2013: the rest of the process is up to a new electoral court, yet already challenged

A very politically motivated reshuffle
The word reshuffle happens to be a mere diplomatic cover up in this particular case. The Special Electoral Court will indeed get dissolved, and all of its judges, replaced by a new staff made of lawyers and politicians. The law draft got passed without major problems, for the Rajoelina sphere enjoys an unfair advantage into the transitional parliament. A simple order from its leader would have had the same effect, only not the same legality color. The number of professional judges in this special court is reduced from 8 to 6. A senior adviser from the Constitutional Court, a civil servant, a law professor and 10 envoys from the political groups which signed the crisis settlement roadmap, will serve as electoral judges.
Controversy emerges from the appointment of 10 politically  biased lawyers in an institution expected to judge the elections and issue the official results. The Rajoelina sphere might well have splitted up, its common interest remains the quest for the majority. Norbert LalaRatsirahonana, the « transition`s mastermind », had  already been able to influence the former special electoral court. He had publicly conceded that he was aware of the court’s intention to accept applications from Lalao Ravalomanana and Didier Ratsiraka, then he played magic off against all odds enter Andry Rajoelina’s application as well, though beyond legal deadline.

Look back on the late Special Electoral Court
The Special Electoral Court’s judges conceded a political move of theirs, actually an unforgivable crime against their oath. Were they really reliable and neutral? The Union of Magistrates raised the issue when claiming loud its lack of confidence into the Transitional Justice Department and the  Magistracy’s Superior Council.The very election of the Special Electoral Court’s judges would have been but a mere masquerade. The result of the vote together with the list of elected magistrates was known with the first three days following the vote.
The official results published 30 days later would have been a very much different list according to the Union of Magistrates. What a start for an institution expected to issue presidential and legislative electoral results. In fact, the Union did not challenge the election of the Court’s judges at first either. At the time was rather focusing with indignation on the issue of a 41 names stong starting presidential line out of 40 legal applications.

Any new SEC does not automatically force the three targeted candidates out
The Interior Minister is a Rajoelina supportive judge credited for doing what it takes to allow his boss to retain power through the development of the electoral process. Florent Rakotoarisoa warned though, that a reshuffled Special Electoral Court in itself does not automatically lead to cast of the odd ones out. In the end, any withdrawal will have to be reached off the concerned figure’s own bat. The reshuffle will ultimately not help much, for the three concerned figures are not remotely interested in withdrawing.
Even the new SEC will have to wait for the targeted candidates’ steps to move forward and eventually issue any new list of candidates. The new Court may actually not make any new judgement, since the first one may not be appealed against. The whole application process would eventually have to be restarted from scratch. Yet, the ICG-M’s patience does not seem to bear any other legal reenactment. The next parameter in the game is the High Constitutional Court’s verdict: does this new Special Electoral Court comply with the Constitution at all?