The new Special Electoral Court as next step into the crisis settlement process: but a step forward or backward?

In practical terms, the Court expects to receive at least three voluntary withdrawals. In compensation, the so unfairly forced out candidates are allowed to appoint replacement candidates deemed to be gladly approved by the Court.

“We will decide with complete neutrality in accordance with the laws” promised Francois Rakotozafy, the new acting President of the Electoral Court. But what kind of neutrality could ever be expected from an electoral court, in which different political interests happen to be represented? At any rate, the Special Electoral Court is bound to drop no time. The international community wants a list of candidates without a single trace of Andry Rajoelina, Didier Ratsiraka or Lalao Ravalomanana, and the Electoral Commission (CENIT) requires it to be issued no later than this year’s August 20th.

And how is that actually supposed to come true? First, the three aforementioned candidates will have voluntarily withdrawn from the presidential election. The transitional ruling power’s leader would have already promised his withdrawal to the mediation. As the former president and the former first lady (no connection between both of them), pressure and threats of punishment must have prompted them to give in and pull out by then. And now the actual matter of fact: none of them three is remotely interested into withdrawing.

So, the other waiting candidates now be incited to lodge a complain and push the odd ones out. The other heads of state institutions, including the Prime Minister Omer Beriziky, also get entitled to such a prerogative. Beatrice Attalah, the Electoral Commission’s president, would certainly not dare such an action, for her electoral commission as such, absolutely has to remain politically unbiased. Although the Special Electoral Court would build on this legal indictment, it will have to make do with merely a few relevant signatures, namely because most of the transitional institution leaders would rather be willing to let the three big fishes compete against each other.

Reenacting the process with new applications for candidates longing for running the presidential race would have indeed proven to be much easier, but, as said earlier, time is getting scarce… let alone the risk to get an even longer list.

In fact, this new series of electoral laws presents a very big weakness. The sacking process’ starting point will have to be a voluntary withdrawal, in short, not a done deal. “The establishment of a new electoral Court (CES) is indeed an important step towards the elections,” said Andry Rajoelina, and added then, “My withdrawal is off the point.” The Ravalomanana-sphere rather sticks to the basic principle established in the law. “Res judicata” prohibits any alteration to any of the previous Special Electoral Court’s decisions. In this sense, it already rejects whatever responsibility for the unrest eventually caused by the violation of this principle, and thus by the saking of its candidate.

In addition to this, this pull out suggestion seems to target only three figures. Could this law not be the same for each and every candidate, it would turn out to be a serious violation of the election laws. Dolin Rasolosoa, acting President of the CST (Transitional) Council withdrew his candidacy, most likely in order to replace the transitional ruling power’s leader. Many observers, however, doubt that the transitional government leader would ever gladly give up his candidacy to his allies. Andry Rajoelina would  rather prefer to get unceremoniously expelled by the Special Electoral Court. So, no matter what the Court decides, a new storm is already brewing.