Tag: Democracy and Rule of Law
Four more bad reasons to vote Trump
I somehow managed yesterday in citing ten reasons to vote for Trump to skip an obvious one: immigration. It merited mention, not least because it a very bad reason to be voting for Trump.
We need the labor
The United States needs more immigrants, not fewer. The tight labor market is driving up wages and productivity. That is welcome after many years that they lagged the increase in returns to capital. Incomes have been rising faster than prices since the epidemic. But there are limits. The US fertility rate (average number of children per woman over a lifetime) is down to 1.6. This is insufficient to sustain a stable population size. The resulting aging of the population increases the demands on Social Security and Medicare while decreasing their revenue streams.
Immigration can help to alleviate these problems. Immigrants to the US are younger on average and have more children than people born in the US. They help to pay the bills of those reaching retirement age, also relieving labor market pressure.
We need the entrepreneurs and executives
Immigrants are also disproportionately entrepreneurs. They do not on the whole take jobs from native-born Americans but create jobs for everyone:
…immigrants act more as “job creators” than “job takers” and play outsized roles in US high-growth entrepreneurship.
This is important, as US economic growth depends heavily on new, small companies. And small companies grow. Immigrants founded nearly 45% of the Fortune 500.
It is of course also true that immigrants play important roles in managing major corporations. The tech sector is rife with immigrant executives. Eighty per cent of privately held billion dollar companies have immigrants in a senior role. The American economy today depends on immigrant managers.
Getting rid of them isn’t possible
The Obama and Biden Administrations focused deportation on people who posed security risks. The Trump Administration did not have clear priorities. Biden has removed (often by expulsion rather than deportation) many more immigrants than Trump did.
That doesn’t mean Trump isn’t going to try to do what he said he would do. He has pledged to round up and expel millions. Trump’s effort would cost many billions and involve hiring ten thousand new immigration officials.
Even beginning that process will unleash chaos in the American economy, further tighten the labor market. It will also discourage immigration that we need for the purposes cited above. Trump’s election will slam down an economy that is landing softly.
There is a bipartisan solution already drafted that Trump won’t support
Republicans and Democrats have already agreed to a bipartisan immigration bill. Trump blocked its approval in the Congress. But the new Congress can revive the plan and pass it. Harris has pledged to sign it.
If elected, Trump will need to insist on something “better.” He is unlikely to get it if the Democrats control one of the Houses. Only Harris guarantees that immigration will be dealt with quickly on a bipartisan basis in the new Congress.
I could go on. World population growth is also slowing markedly. There soon won’t be as many people wanting to immigrate anywhere than there once were. Trump’s anti-immigrant efforts will encourage people to go elsewhere. That will not be good for a country that depends heavily on immigrant labor, entrepreneurs, and executives. We’d be well-advised to forget Trump’s grandiose plans and grab the bipartisan solution.
Ten reasons to vote for Trump, nine refuted
Meidas+ has saved me the trouble. It lists 200 reasons not to vote for Donald Trump. I suppose it wouldn’t be all that hard to get to 300. It is hard for me to understand why any patriotic American–or even a non-patriotic one–would vote him.
Ten reasons to vote for Trump
So let’s consider the options:
- You are a diehard Republican who has never voted for a Democrat.
- Trump will be better for the economy than Harris.
- Trump will keep the US out of war.
- You want the Federal government cut back.
- You want abortion restricted.
- LGBTQ and trans people are not your thing. Or you don’t want your children learning about such things in school.
- You don’t like what the Israelis are doing in Gaza and Lebanon.
- The US should stop supporting Ukraine and start getting friendly with Putin.
- The US should stand up to China.
- You don’t want a Black, Asian woman as President.
Even diehards are voting for Harris
Harris can’t please diehard Republicans on the policy issues, but they are voting for her anyway. Liz Cheney and her father are not alone. Many Republicans see that Trump is not planning to sustain American democracy but to dismantle it. His former White House chief of staff and his Chair of the Joint Chiefs have both labeled him an autocrat. Actually, they said “fascist.” You don’t have to be a never Trumper to vote against someone who does not accept election results unless he wins.
Pulling the Democratic lever is not all that hard. I pull Republican levers whenever I am unhappy with the Democratic candidate. You can do the right thing too.
It’s the economy, stupid
It is, and America’s economy is bigger and better than ever. The Economist calls it “the envy of the world.” Growth has recovered faster from the epidemic downturn than other developed economies. Manufacturing is up sharply. The Biden Administration has presided over the creation of a record number of jobs. The stock market has continued its rise.
The spoiler is inflation, which peaked in the first two years of the Biden Administration. Since then, it has been declining. It is now approaching the Fed’s 2% goal. No one is happy paying more for food and housing, but wages have more than kept up with inflation. Most people, on average, are not worse off.
Trump’s proposed tariffs will resuscitate inflation and tank growth. They do not need Congressional approval. Affected industries will challenge them in court, but in the meanwhile they will be collected. American consumers will pay for them. Other countries will retaliate. The tariffs spell disaster for the American and world economies.
War no more?
The Trump campaign claims to have suffered no terrorist attacks and kept the US out of war 2016/20. But that isn’t true. Trump ordered strikes in Syria and Iraq, killed Iran’s Qassem Suleimani, and presided during several terrorist attacks inside the US. He also rightly provided lethal assistance to Ukraine that the Obama Administration had denied.
Trump negotiated the withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan but left too few soldiers to cover the evacuation of Afghans. He promised total withdrawal of US troops from Syria, but then he left some there.
Bloated government?
The Federal government grew more under Biden (6%) than under Trump (3.7%). But Trump claims now that he can fire many thousands of Federal employees and increase efficiency. He certainly didn’t prove that in 2016/20. The notion that Elon Musk will help him do it is laughable. Musk eviscerated Twitter and is still losing lots of money. Recovering rocket bodies and improving efficiency are not the same thing.
Trump’s intention is to fire civil servants and replace them with servile Trumpkins who do his will, despite the law. He has made no secret of this. Do you really want decades of experience to be replaced with loyalty to a 79-year-old fascist?
Abortion is the Republicans’ Achilles heel
I am not pro-abortion. I don’t know anyone who is. Nor do you need be if you vote for Harris. But banning abortion, as many Republican states have done, gives government responsibility for a decision that belongs with individual women.
Trump is right that the Supreme Court has sent the issue back to the states. There the Democrats are repeatedly winning the argument whenever it is posed in a referendum. Any Republican who wants to see her/his party in power should be wondering whether the issue is politically toxic.
Dislike of LGBTQ and trans people
You don’t want your kids to learn about these things? Guess what: you won’t be capable of stopping them. There is nothing new under the sun. The Ancient Greeks knew all about non-heterosexual preferences. Sure, you might “protect” your children for a few years. But sooner or later they will know what you know, and maybe more.
Anyway, decisions on what schools teach are mostly made at the local level. Keep it there. Why vote for a candidate who claims kids are getting operated on at school without parental consent? Is that the untruth you want your children learning?
Gaza and Lebanon: blank check for Netanyahu
I don’t like what the Israeli government is doing in Gaza and Lebanon either. This is something on which American Jews, American Arabs, Israeli Jews, Lebanese, and Palestinians all agree. At least two-thirds of all these groups want a ceasefire and exchange of hostages/prisoners in Gaza. That would bring with it a ceasefire on the Israel/Lebanon border.
Things will get much worse in the Middle East if Trump is elected. He gave the Israelis everything they asked for when he was President. He’ll do it again if re-elected. I’m not sure what Harris will do, but it won’t be a blank check.
Ukraine won’t be the end of it
Trump has made it clear he will give Putin whatever he wants in Ukraine. That, he thinks, will end the war. If that is what you want, please do vote Republican.
But it won’t end the war. Putin will go after whatever part of Ukraine he doesn’t get, and then Moldova. Poland and the Baltic states will be at risk. He won’t stop until he is stopped. Trump won’t do it. Harris will.
Xi cleaned Trump’s clock
The same is true for China. Trump doesn’t want to defend American allies in Asia. That’s why he has suggested Japan and South Korea get their own nuclear weapons. Why not Taiwan and Philippines as well? Do you really think the world would be better off with another four nuclear powers? America would be safer?
As for trade, Trump negotiated an agreement with China. Beijing did not implement it. The result has been massive agricultural subsidies to American farmers, to compensate them for lost markets due to Chinese retaliation. The Trump tariffs will bring more retaliation and more subsidies to injured industries.
You don’t want a Black, Asian, woman as President
I’m not going to quarrel with this one. If you don’t want a smart, well-educated Black and Asian woman as President, vote for the crude grifter and felon. You are the company you keep.
Calm in the eye of the storm
I’m in Atlanta, poll-watching for the Georgia Democratic Party. I’ve done it in Egypt, Libya, Albania, and elsewhere, but never before in the US. We own a house in Atlanta down the street from elder son Jared and his family. But no, we are not moving here. We are only trying to view the election from a more interesting angle than DC. There more than 90% of the population will vote Harris.
Roving
I am an “outside” poll watcher for Fulton County (Atlanta) early voting. The county is deep blue, not red. “Inside” poll watchers need to be credentialed for a specific polling place and can do it only there. That means six or seven hours per day for two weeks inside the same place. I don’t envy them. Credentials are not needed for outside poll watchers, who don’t enter the polling place except to visit the toilets.
I’m being used as what the State Department would call a “rover.” I go wherever the county Voter Protection chief, Melissa, sends me. That is mostly to places where the Democrats lack coverage. Fulton County is big–I’ve had to drive as much as 25 miles from my house. Traffic is horrendous, but patience and Googlemaps get me there in my 18-year-old Honda Fit.
What I do
My task is to look for issues and incidents. I do this mainly by approaching voters as they leave the polling place to ask how things went. Did they need to wait in line? For how long? Were things running smoothly?
So far, the answers have all been cheery and positive. People here are really happy after voting. Only one of the six polling places I’ve visited had a line. That one was less than a half hour wait. That line was gone an hour later. Everywhere else, people have been voting in less than five minutes or so.
Near some polling places, police sit discreetly in patrol cars, away from the main entrance. None of those I encountered had seen any problems. The few election workers I’ve run into likewise report no difficulties. I haven’t even had a complaint about a misspelled name or one missing from the voter roll. Georgia allows open carry of long guns. I haven’t seen any.
I also haven’t run into any Republican poll watchers. Maybe some are inside the polling places I’ve visited. It would be interesting to hear their impressions.
Value added
I report my lack of incidents and issues dutifully on an app as well as by text to Melissa. She reminds me that a good day in voter protection is a boring one. My value added is providing notice that things are okay at and near polling places where her coverage is spotty.
I’ll continue my roving for the next two weeks or so. I don’t imagine it will all be as uneventful as the last two days. But there is no way of knowing. The press is reporting record early voting turnout so far. That bodes well for the Democrats, who have encouraged people to vote early. But of course I have no idea how the people I talk to vote. And no real sense of how the rest of Georgia will tilt.
I’m in the eye of the storm. It’s calm here, until it’s not.
A true conservative would vote Harris
I don’t have a lot of Republican friends. That’s true. But for those Republicans I know identity is the reason for their attachment to that party. One was born into a family in Arizona in which no one had ever voted for a Democrat. Another, an otherwise first-rate political analyst, simply believes what Republicans say and doubts what Democrats say. He puts the burden of proof on his opponents.
Neither of these colleagues has ever before supported across-the-board tariffs or deportation of immigrants. They both pride themselves on not being racists. Yet they will vote for a candidate who wants to impose broad tariffs and deport millions. Trump is also a confirmed white supremacist and has promised to restrict minorities from moving to the suburbs. Republican identity trumps [pun intended] their policy preferences. It shifts the burden of proof, so here are some proofs.
The domestic issues
To be fair, traditional Republicans are in a difficult spot. The Republican party they knew and loved favored lower taxes and high defense expenditures. It has evaporated. Trump’s Republican party favors lower taxes only for the truly wealthy and abandonment of defense obligations.
Presidents Reagan and George W. Bush welcomed immigrants. Trump blames them for crimes they haven’t committed, as he did for the Central Park five. He wanted them executed, which is what he wants for immigrants who kill “Americans.” The five, all Black, were innocent.
Traditional Republicans do have reason to dislike Kamala Harris’ policy proposals. They fear extra spending for her housing, healthcare, education, and other “social” programs would explode the deficit. But they should be aware that the data is clear. Trump did that, even before the COVID-19 epidemic. Her spending proposals will have to pass in Congress. Trump’s promise of tariffs he can levy without Congressional approval
There is a decades-long history of lower percentage debt increases under Democratic than Republican presidents:
This is at least in part due to Republican control of one or both Houses of Congress. That’s a good reason for a Republican debt hawk to vote for some down-ballot Republicans. But it is not a good reason to vote for Trump.
Foreign policy
On foreign policy, the situation is even clearer. Both Trump and Harris are hawkish on China and protective of Israel. But Trump reached a trade agreement with China that Beijing didn’t implement. He did nothing to respond. The trade agreement also cost the US budget a great deal due to related agricultural subsidies. They continue. Trump would back Israel to the hilt. Harris wants to rein it in, provide humanitarian assistance to Palestinians, and prevent a wider war.
Trump has threatened to abandon allies in Europe and to end support for Ukraine. Harris backs the NATO allies and Kyiv. Most NATO members are now fulfilling their 2024 NATO commitment to spend 2% of GNP on defense. The big jumps came under Biden, after the Russian expansion of the Ukraine invasion. They did not come under Trump. Allied solidarity in supplying Ukraine has helped to counter Russia’s expansionist impulse and reduce the threat to other “frontline” states.
Putin’s Russia is an expansionist, imperial power trying to correct what it regards as history’s mistakes. If Moscow wins in Ukraine, it will try again in Moldova and eventually Poland and other former Soviet satellites. It is not exaggerating to say Ukrainians are dying to prevent Americans and Europeans from fighting.
Trump has encouraged South Korea and Japan to think about getting their own nuclear weapons. That he thinks would reduce US commitments in Asia. It is a truly bad idea, as it would leave Asian security at risk of a nuclear confrontation. The US would not control the outcome.
Trump has signaled he would not help defend Taiwan. China will take advantage of that signal. Biden’s expressed willingness to support Taiwan has arguably forestalled a Chinese effort to take it over.
If you are a true Republican, vote Harris
Half of Trump’s former cabinet secretaries are not supporting his re-election bid. Nor is his Vice President, about whose safety during the January 6 riot Trump was unconcerned. Former Vice President Cheney, a staunch conservative, and his also conservative daughter Liz are voting for Harris. So too is Mark Milley, Trump’s Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, along with hundreds of other retired generals. Milley regards Trump as “fascist to the core.”
Preventing Trump from doing what he has pledged to do should outweigh any remaining identity issues. A true Republican would vote Harris.
Public servants for now and the future
Here is an interview with Patricia Thomson, former Executive Vice President of the United States Institute of Peace. She has spent most of the last ten years devoted to the School of Public Service in Juba, South Sudan.
You are the founder of the School of Public Service at the University of Juba in South Sudan. You called for its establishment more than ten years ago, and eight years ago you and I discussed its successes and challenges, Since then, South Sudan has experienced continued internal conflicts, as well as a civil war in Sudan, its northern neighbor, that has impacted South Sudan’s oil exports.
Update
Q: Please update us on what the School of Public Service has been able to accomplish. Has it been able to function effectively? How many graduates are there? Where are they working?
A: Thanks, Dan. It’s hard to believe over ten years have passed since we first began lobbying for the school in 2013. We admitted our first class in August 2015, and since then the School has continued to operate without disruption; this despite South Sudan’s ongoing conflicts and widespread economic instability. We have an eight-year track record of success, and hundreds of graduates working across the government of South Sudan, as well as with a wide-variety of international and nongovernmental organizations [IOs and NGOs].
Q: Are your graduates making a difference?
A: Yes. Not only are they leaders, they are change agents – positively impacting their organizations, as well as the thousands of people those organizations serve. In a recent poll of alumni, over 95% of respondents reported that the School gave them valuable skills that have significantly improved their ability to both manage and lead.
Looking forward
Q: Looking forward, what are the main educational priorities of the School?
A: SPS is a graduate school. We’ve designed the core program, a Master in Public Policy (MPP), for people who already have technical skills acquired through their undergraduate education and some real-world experience – teachers, engineers, financial manager, healthcare providers. We help them develop leadership, management, and policy-making skills. This has been our priority to date.
But we are now entering a new period of development (our more technically inclined staff call it SPS 2.0). During this phase our priorities include women and NGOs, two groups vital to the development of the country. We’ve already mobilized two programs. The Leadership Crucible is a year-long program for undergraduate women interested in politics and public service. The NGO Initiative is a center of learning and research that recognizes the vital role NGOs play in developing the country, as well as in providing services to its citizens.
I’m particularly excited about the NGO Initiative’s first program, the NGO Management Certificate. This year-long program for both current and prospective NGO managers enables them to continue to work while studying with us.
We are also developing specialized MPPs. So, in addition to our current degree – an MPP with a Concentration in Leadership and Management – we are mobilizing an MPP with a Concentration in Environmental Policy. We are also considering degrees in Public Finance, Education Policy, and Health Policy. I really hope to foster more cross-disciplinary collaboration at the University – the MPP with a Concentration in Environmental Policy is a collaboration between SPS and the School of Natural Resources and Environmental Studies. So…lot’s going on at SPS…
Challenges
Q: It’s been a tough decade for South Sudan. How are its challenges impacting the School?
A: Yes, it has been a tough decade. Since independence South Sudan has suffered from internal conflicts, natural disasters, and kleptocracy. Patronage systems, facilitated by easy access to oil money, probably limited violent conflict, but also diverted funds from development and camouflaged the country’s deep ethnic and political divides. Now one of the biggest issues is the impact of the war in Sudan, particularly on oil revenue.
To get oil to international markets, South Sudan is completely dependent on two pipelines running through Sudan, and one of these pipelines hasn’t been working for months. The value of the pound has plummeted, the cost-of-living has increased, and the government is struggling to pay its bills. All of this impacts the prospects for long-term peace and development.
So, what does all this mean for SPS? South Sudan has always underfunded public service. Now things are even worse. For example, public servants, including our staff, haven’t been paid for almost a year. Obviously, that impacts our ability to fulfill our mission – although I am constantly amazed by our team, who remain committed to SPS and continue to show up. Since about half of our students work in government, the funding situation also impacts enrollment. When your employer isn’t paying salaries, It’s hard to pay tuition.
Financing
Q: So how are you addressing this lack of funding for staff and for tuition?
A: We highlight the non-financial benefits of working for a university (the gravitas that comes with the position, the ability to do research and to develop emerging leaders). More importantly, we allow staff to consult or to have a second job. We are also working with the university and others to secure outside funding to supplement staff salaries, as well as to fund scholarships. Finally, we are fundraising for an endowment.
Q: An endowment? Talk more about that?
A: We are calling it the Endowment for Public Service Leadership. $2 million will cover the cost of a Professor of Public Leadership and 40 scholarships every year for 25 years. Like all endowments, the original funding will be invested. Each year, returns earned from the endowment will be withdrawn to cover the cost of the scholarships and the endowed professorship. A trust located in the United States or Europe will oversee it.
Funding the program this way has several advantages. First, the programs involved will continue to have access to reliable stable funds for the life of the endowment. Second, the funding will grow without the need for additional contributions. Finally, the endowment can be placed in reserve when necessary. For example, if classes are suspended due to an emergency, the interest that would have been spent to run the program will be left in the endowment. It will continue to grow until classes resume or the money can be re-purposed. Endowments are a well-tested funding model. But they are still unusual in much of Africa. Once proven, I hope the model will be replicated.
Q: Forty scholarships for 25 years for $2M, that’s hard to believe?
A: I know (laughter)! Two million is enough because tuition is so low, currently $1000/year. SPS offers such great value. Exchange rates are a source of much discussion here in Juba. Instead of converting dollars to pounds, I find myself converting to number of scholarships. For example, if the average salary of an expat working for an international NGO or the UN is about $110,000, that’s the equivalent of 110 SPS scholarships. The World Bank recently approved $15M for an institution-building project in South Sudan. That equates to 15,000 scholarships – 400 years worth.
School leadership
Q: You gave up your position as Dean of the School. Why did you do that? Do you still think it was a wise decision?
A: Absolutely. Dr. Anne Itto, a freedom-fighter, political party leader, and former Minister of Agriculture took over from me. When she left to represent South Sudan in the East African Legislative Assembly, Dr. Paul Atem took over. He has experience as a state minister and as an advisor to the national government. He also has a PhD in Planning from the University of South Australia.
Two alumni ably support Dr. Atem: the Deputy Dean, Elia Makur and the Registrar, Michael Nhial Mabil Koak. I continue to believe that the School of Public Service is a national institution of which South Sudan can be proud. It should be led by a South Sudanese. And I like the sound of Dean Emerita (smile).
Values
Q: Do you see South Sudan’s tribal conflicts reflected in the School and its functioning? If so, how has that been handled?
A: It hasn’t been too much of a problem, but when tribal biases do emerge, we see it as a learning opportunity. Better to address them and try to change mindsets than pretend they’re not there. We also try to manage them through the School’s culture, as reflected in our core values. We take these very seriously. They’re not just aspirations. They guide our day-to-day conduct. They are integrated into our training, evaluations, and decision-making.
One of them, teamwork, centers on a shared commitment to build the nation and to not let tribal differences become divisive The actual language of this core value is “We find strength in diversity, and unity in a shared commitment to build the nation; we do not let tribal, regional, or political differences become divisive. We also collaborate and help each other succeed.”
International community contributions
Q: How has the international community helped or hindered development of the School? What could they do to support the School?
A: Historically, we haven’t been aggressive in seeking outside support. International aid isn’t intended to be on-going, and we’ve wanted to ensure the School is self-sustaining. But as we enter this next phase, and given the economic situation, we’ll need partners. So, glad you asked.
Here’s a wish list:
- funding for the Endowment that we discussed earlier;
- scholarships for the NGO Management Certificate program;
- support for women, including funding for the Leadership Crucible;
- funding for a Legislative and Executive Leadership Center – where legislators, legislative staff, Undersecretaries, and Directors General can learn through reliable, recurring, professional training programs;
- funding for a local and state government program- something like the Bloomberg Cities Leadership Initiative; and
- support for a Center for Applied Statistics to address the country’s serious gap in statistical skills.
Support doesn’t always mean funding. Technical expertise can also be really helpful. For example, experts on-loan can help us develop our Masters in Public Finance and our MPP in Environmental Policy. The international community has amazing models that we can leverage. SPS is modeled on some of the world’s best graduate schools, including Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government.
Politics and public service
Q: South Sudan is rated “not free” by Freedom House. How have your educational objectives been affected by politics and less than democratic governance?
A: I believe the School is valued by South Sudan’s leaders across the political spectrum. To my knowledge, they have never interfered with our programs. Our focus is on building “technical” skills – leadership, management, policy-making – not on South Sudan’s current politics.
That being said, students often debate the current situation. During these debates, we try to get them to be forward-thinking, to draw on theory and the experiences of other countries, and to hone their critical thinking skills.
No matter who’s in charge, cadres of skilled public servants are essential to sustained peace and long‐term development. Who will implement all the provisions of the country’s peace agreements, all the initiatives included in the Revised National Development Strategy? Success requires a large number of skilled leaders to plan, budget, and manage all these efforts…for decades. Unfortunately, few leadership programs exist for public servants, and they are fragmented. Even fewer programs exist for NGO and IO staff, although they do much of the country’s development work. SPS’s mission is to fill these gaps, and to develop a strong cadre of public servants for now and the future.
No to boycott, yes to Tunisia
I’m late to publishing this appeal from the Tunisian opposition, as the election is tomorrow. But there is still time to go vote:
After five years of President Kais Saied’s term, including three years of absolute and individual rule, and after an objective assessment of this period in which Tunisia has experienced its worst conditions since independence—marked by the sharp decline in citizens’ purchasing power, the increase in poverty from 23% to 33% according to official figures, the exacerbation of daily hardships in areas such as transportation, healthcare, water and electricity shortages, and the loss of essential goods like food and medicine, and mounting internal and external debt.
After three years of systematic destruction and dismantling of constitutional institutions that protect the state from disintegration and chaos, and safeguard citizens’ rights.
In the face of the current president’s, Kais Saied’s, inability to solve the economic and social problems, his failure in projects such as penal settlements and recovered funds allegedly meant for poor regions, his failed health cities initiative (Kairouan, Kasserine, and Sidi Bouzid), and the failure of his community enterprises to create jobs for the unemployed, which instead became a waste of public funds.
After he has monopolized all powers in the country since July 25, 2021, imprisoning most of his opponents from various political factions, mistreating them and their families, and attempting to impose a policy of silencing dissent by prosecuting all voices calling for freedom, democracy, respect for the constitution, and the law—politicians, judges, lawyers, journalists, unionists, bloggers, and ordinary citizens under the infamous Decree 54.
After the Electoral Commission rejected most candidacy files with unreasonable and arbitrary conditions, and after the Commission refused to comply with decisions of the Administrative Court’s General Assembly, which cannot be appealed, that ordered the acceptance of the appeals from candidates Mondher Zenaidi, Abdellatif Mekki, and Imed Daimi and required the Commission to include them on the list of presidential candidates.
Law professors, civil society components including organizations, associations, parties, and national figures, have unanimously agreed that the stance of the Electoral Commission constitutes a scandal and a reprehensible act punishable by law as it undermines the state of institutions and eliminates the last bastion protecting rights and freedoms, namely the judiciary.
Despite Kais Saied’s insistence on ruling, his pressure, and intimidation of judges to exclude serious competitors from the electoral race, and prosecuting them using a non-independent and non-neutral Electoral Commission fully under his command.
After observing that candidate Ayachi Zammal remains in the race for the October 6 election,
And given the risk that boycotting the elections could lead to the continuation of the current situation, worsening from bad to worse, and the possibility of the state’s collapse by renewing the current president for another five years,
And following in-depth consultations and a realistic assessment of the current situation and available options, we concluded that Ayachi Zammal is the only remaining viable option among the accepted candidates, in the hope of pulling the country out of its current predicament and freeing it from the nightmare of authoritarianism and populism.
In order to save our country before it’s too late, by peaceful means and through the ballot box,
We, the undersigned, declare:
First: We call on all Tunisians to seize the opportunity for peaceful change by participating in the elections in large numbers and not to heed the calls for a boycott, which only serve the current president whose popularity has recently plummeted to such an extent that some polls indicate he may not even pass the first round.
Second: We call for a massive vote in favor of Ayachi Zammal, after his commitment to turn the page on the past, release all political prisoners, restore state institutions, guarantee the independence of the judiciary, and restore Tunisia’s standing in the international community.
Third: We call on all presidential candidates who continue to be excluded from the race to urge their supporters to vote for Ayachi Zammal as a means of saving the country.