Municipal
elections in Cuba
René Gómez
Manzano.
Elections for delegates of the municipal
assemblies of People's Power have begun
in Cuba. These elections are of considerable
importance for two reasons: they determine
who these local authorities will be and
it serves as the first step towards re-electing
provincial assemblies and the National Assembly
of People's Power. The replacement of provincial
and national representatives takes place
soon after the Municipal Assemblies are
constituted. a
By lawb, municipalities are divided into
constituencies which are required to elect
one delegate to their assembly. Individual
areas meet to propose their candidates from
up to eight subdivided constituencies within
each municipality. Participants can put
forward their suggestion and explain briefly
their reasons, or they can express their
opinions in favour or against a candidate
proposed by others. The delegates are chosen
by "direct and public" voting
in which each area chooses its candidate
by majority. However, in exceptional cases,
when a constituency is not subdivided into
areas and there is only one nomination assembly,
two candidates may be presented. The person
who holds this position plays a primary
role in the municipal and district electoral
commissions.
Communist propaganda never tires of praising
the alleged virtues of this system by extolling
its non-party character and stressing that
the nomination process is done by the people
and not by a political party.
In reality, this system for all its 'virtues'
offers extremely limited opportunities for
opposition candidates, though some believe
it should still be explored as an option.
However, I do not believe that any change
can be achieved in this way given the current
conditions. I am convinced that in a country
without freedom nothing can be free. However,
a more detailed analysis of the whole issue
is needed to explain why I think that this
is so.
Cuban people tend to perceive all types
of public meetings organized by the government
as device that the regime uses to manipulate
its subjects. In certain ways this makes
complete sense. Since Castro and the Cuban
Communist Party came to power almost fifty
years ago, they have used only one language
to "communicate" with its opponents:
force, by means of firing squads, dirty
prisons, expulsions, acts of repudiation,
etc. As a result, those who openly disagree
with the ruling regime, abstain from participating
in public meetings. The consequence of this
is that meetings are only attended by the
silent majority who support the regime out
of fear, a small number of neutral citizens
and by the absolute minority who still show
their support to the regime. Furthermore,
it is no secret that these meetings, like
all meetings that are held in Cuba, are
attended by militant communists, by leaders
of mass organizations and by informers of
the political police. It is hard expect
that this type of public would be willing
to vote for an independent candidate.
Under these circumstances, who would propose
a well known opponent, for instance a former
prisoner of conscience as a candidate? Would
such a person be ready to face the inevitable
reprisals of the police state? Even if we
imagine an exceptional and courageous citizen
like this appears and that the formal nomination
takes place. What then? The representatives
of Castro-ism will undoubtedly use this
brave person's "right to freedom of
expression" against the proposed candidate
and the person who was brave enough to suggest
such a person.
Even so, if the voting were to take place,
it would be done very publicly, by a simple
raising of hands. We cannot presume that
our fellow citizens, who have been threatened
by a ruthless totalitarian regime for half
a century, would express in their vote openly
for an opposition candidate. Furthermore,
to achieve the nomination of an independent
candidate, the dissenting voters would have
to represent a majority - not 30% or even
40%, in one of the nomination areas. It
would only be after this process that an
opposition candidate might appear on ballot-papers
of the constituency in question. However,
this is still only just the beginning of
this extremely hypothetical scenario.
The various election commissions play an
essential on their different levels within
these elections. According to law, these
commissions have, apart from other powers,
the right to dictate complementary rules
to the amended 1992 Elections Act, to establish
the number and the limits of the municipal
constituencies and nomination areas, to
organize and control the assemblies which
propose the candidates, they have the right
to deal with and to resolve any complaints
that may appear, and they can also annul
the elections in one or more constituencies
of a municipality. c Therefore, given the
wide array of the commissions' powers, which
help them administer and control the whole
process of municipal elections, could be
used to throw out such an electoral result.
Lastly, we have to remember that these election
commissions are part of a pyramidal structure:
the members of the National Commission are
appointed by the State Council d and the
commissions on the lower levels are always
designated by the commission next above.
e
Despite all of this, some people may still
believe that if there really is a majority
that opposes the regime, nothing can stop
the electors from voting in favour of a
dissenting candidate. In a purely abstract
sense this is true, but we also need to
consider the existing laws governing elections
and campaigning. It has been expressly stipulated
that in making their decision, voters shall
only consider the personal virtues of the
candidates, their prestige and their ability
to serve the nation. The constituency commissions
are responsible for the distribution of
photos and biographies of the candidates
and with their display on walls and public
places. f The National Election Commission
stipulates ethical principles and norms
which govern the electoral process, and
that provides for the rules which have to
be obeyed in the campaign. g The propaganda
may only consist in distributing biographies
and photos of the candidates, h which therefore
gives state-back candidates an overwhelming
advantage.
Moreover, even if the laws were broken
and an electoral campaign was launched,
a genuine campaign couldn't possibly happen.
The nature of any totalitarian system is
that does not permit any form of local authority
to challenge its power, no matter how minor
it might be. An opposition candidate couldn't
promise to fund anything, since the entire
budget is under the single party's control.
As a delegate for a particular constituency
the people above him would be the ones to
decide whether anything would be built in
his or her district even if they were to
win. This doesn't even get into the fact
that his opponent under such circumstances
might be given a greater amount of state
funds to defeat his opponent in an actual
election.
To monitor the results of the elections
would be quite difficult, too. The existing
law explicitly allows the citizens interested
to be present during the scrutiny in the
electoral schools. i Nevertheless, there
is no such stipulation regarding electoral
commissions in the constituencies, which
are responsible for the final count-up of
the ballots always when there is more than
one electoral school. j
On top of the general considerations I
have mentioned so far, I could add one particular
memory of mine from the late eighties, when
I was defending Javier Roberto Bahamonde
Masot. This dissident focused his anti-establishment
activities on an attempt to be proposed
as a candidate to the Municipal Assembly
of People's Power in his hometown San Miguel
del Padrón. Although he was known
as an opponent of the regime, I cannot say
his name would then be linked with any particular
opposition group. He had never been a political
prisoner. His neighbours proposed him, yet
he was not nominated by his area as he was
finally defeated in the public voting. Ultimately,
the regime used the penal code against him.
Bahamonde Masot was imprisoned for two reasons.
First, he was accused of offences regarding
illegal associations, gatherings and demonstrations,
and second, he was accused of illegal economic
activities.
However, let's imagine that unlike this
defendant of mine, there is wan an opponent
(or perhaps even more of them) who actually
succeeded in being proposed as a candidate
and elected by his fellow citizens to a
municipal assembly of the People's Power.
Although this would be an absolutely exceptional
situation, since to my knowledge, this has
never happened in the previous municipal
elections. I think one of my own personal
experiences might shed some light on what
might happen.
In 1990, before I was excluded from the
National Organization of Lawyers, there
were elections to the General Assembly,
which is the supreme body of this formally
autonomous organization. In an open voting,
my colleagues from the group specialized
in appeals for annulment gave me their votes
and I was unanimously elected to be a member
of the Assembly for five years. Nevertheless,
I stayed there only until 1992 and I could
participate at no more than two and a half
meetings, because that year, I was subject
to an "act of repudiation"- to
a kind of verbal lynching - that, as I knew
later, had been prepared during a whole
week in the seat of the National Board of
Lawyers. When I was excluded from the third
meeting, an agreement has been reached to
dismiss me. Is there anyone who would doubt
that the same would probably happen to our
hypothetical opponent in the municipal assembly?
Now, let's suppose that this phantasmagoric
personality was actually elected. What chances
would this person really have to carry out
opposition activities? Our candidate would
still have to abide by Article 5 of the
current Constitution, which defines the
Cuban Communist Party as the supreme authority
of society and State. The implication being
that in his administration activities, our
hypothetical independent delegate would
have to comply with the philosophy of Cuban
single party.
Even if a miracle occurred and the opposition
obtained majority in one of the municipal
assemblies, the opposition would not be
free to choose their president or vice-president,
and neither could they propose candidates
to Provincial Assemblies or to the National
Assembly. These candidates are proposed
by the Municipal Candidacy Commission, and
these commissions are always formed by the
representatives of "mass organizations".
k
And finally, let's imagine that under these
extremely unfavourable conditions, some
opposition organizations made an attempt
to nominate independent candidates, and
did not succeed (which is more than probable).
Obviously, in this case nothing could be
done. They entered the game, they accepted
its unjust rules defined according to the
will of the totalitarian regime, and therefore,
they could not really protest against the
negative results they would obtain.
The current system of electing representatives
to the National Assembly of People's Power
and to Provincial Assemblies only dates
back to 1992, when the regime brought about
a general reform of the Constitution. However,
municipal elections follow the same rules
that were established when the great charter
came into force, that is to say more than
thirty years ago. This Machiavellian system
simply proved to be the most suitable way
for the regime to maintain itself perpetually
at power. In the immediate future, we cannot
expect the system to change, but while it
remains the same and while we are left without
freedom to propose our candidates and without
other similar rights that are enjoyed by
voters in free countries, no democratization
is actually possible. And that is why Cuban
opposition will go on with their peaceful
struggle.
|