ZAGREB, Sept 23 (Hina) - In a less heated debate than was expected, the House of Representatives on Thursday discussed the election bill which was suggested by the Croatian Democratic Union (HDZ) parliamentary bench. Although numerous
objections were presented regarding the bill, the most frequently mentioned issue in today's extensive debate at the Lower House was the question of responsibility for abandoning the May agreement between the majority party and the Opposition Six, which resulted in the lack of consensus on election legislation. "Institutes built into the law are not the result of agreed institutes, since the agreement between the Opposition Six and the Croatian Democratic Union (HDZ) no longer exists because it is what the majority party wanted", said Mato Arlovic of the Social Democratic Party (SDP). The agreement no longer exists because in this debate no alternative opportunity has been of
ZAGREB, Sept 23 (Hina) - In a less heated debate than was expected,
the House of Representatives on Thursday discussed the election
bill which was suggested by the Croatian Democratic Union (HDZ)
parliamentary bench.
Although numerous objections were presented regarding the bill,
the most frequently mentioned issue in today's extensive debate at
the Lower House was the question of responsibility for abandoning
the May agreement between the majority party and the Opposition
Six, which resulted in the lack of consensus on election
legislation.
"Institutes built into the law are not the result of agreed
institutes, since the agreement between the Opposition Six and the
Croatian Democratic Union (HDZ) no longer exists because it is what
the majority party wanted", said Mato Arlovic of the Social
Democratic Party (SDP). The agreement no longer exists because in
this debate no alternative opportunity has been offered for
adopting laws on electoral units, Croatian Radio Television, and
the election law. However, Arlovic believes there is a minimum
possibility that attempts would be made further with the aim of
reaching a consensus, however not only about one but all three laws,
as well as about the implementation of the Law on Voters' Lists.
Since the agreement no longer exists, the SDP cannot accept a
special election mechanism for the Diaspora and the so-called non-
fixed quota for determining the number of Diaspora
representatives. Arlovic therefore demands that they be enabled to
run for candidacy and vote for party lists like other Croatian
citizens.
Vlado Gotovac of the Liberal Party (LS) said the HDZ could vote for
both the election of 12 Diaspora representatives and the postal
ballot, but it should know that it was a blow to democracy in Croatia
and that it would be held responsible for it.
Announcing that the Croatian Peasants' Party (HSS) would not
support the election law, Luka Trconic said the debate on the bill
created an illusion that the principles which had been agreed on
were being perfected.
We are ready today to sign an agreement which is in line with this
law, without changing a comma in it, otherwise it will be decided
through democratic procedure what the election law will look like,
said HDZ's Drago Krpina.
A compromise was not achieved primarily because of political
reasons, because the Opposition Six, Krpina believes, estimated
that reaching a consensus would lessen their election chances.
Opposition representatives believe rotating mandates for minority
representatives should be excluded from the bill. They also believe
the principle of positive discrimination has to be applied in the
election of minority representatives.
Njegovan Starek (minority bench) said he could not support the bill
because the principle of positive discrimination and direct
minority representation was not respected by the bill. Starek said
he wanted minority members to elect eight representatives and added
his bench had not given suggestions regarding the representation of
the Serb minority.
Serb representative Milan Djukic believes the number of minority
representatives should be in proportion to their share in the
overall population (according to the 1991 census). MP Starek
believes other minorities, such as Slovenes, Bosniaks, Gypsies,
and Montenegrins should have representatives in the Sabor as well.
Anto Djapic of the Croatian Party of Rights (HSP) believes the
figure of five minority representatives is sufficient, and that 12
representatives should be elected in the tenth electoral unit as
well as in the nine "in-the-country" units.
Opposition representatives presented a set of suggestions - from
allowing persons whose office is incompatible with that of an MP
(such as ministers) to be on party lists, but in case they are
elected, they must take their seat in the Sabor and leave the office
they had held until their election as MPs; they also suggest that
students be allowed to vote in the place where they are attending
their college, and that the so-called female quota be introduced.
It was also estimated that a possibility of electing more than 12
representatives in each electoral unit should also be considered.
By the second reading of the bill, one should organise units which
would respect the borders of counties and the number of
representatives elected in those units should be established in
accordance with the number of voters, said Ivan Jakovcic of the
Istrian Democratic Assembly (IDS).
It was also proposed that the main candidate on a party list must be
a candidate in an electoral unit; that voters' lists be updated; and
that the voting abroad should be organised in diplomatic offices
exclusively.
(hina) rml