Does a dominant party system really mean a dictatorship?

                                                                                                                Dawit Miteku

The answer for this headline is not tough. But some Ethiopian Government oppositions and Neo-liberal institutions purposely mix the dominant party system with ‘dictatorship’. But these two concepts are quite different.

As it is known a Dominant party system ensues in a certain country, when the ruling party holds the power for a long time either solely or with an coalition to other parties that adhere to the same policies. As this political system follow a multi-party system, the opposition parties have the legal right to operate lawfully and compete for power in the election that’s held by the country.

However, if we are to look in to the opposition parties of the country in light with other countries’ experience, we will see that they’re unable to compete with the ruling party due to their own internal issues; their inconsideration to the constitutional order that allowed them to compete for power in the first place, and their effort to instigate riot by mimicking the olden nightmarish days which the country went through. As a result, we can see that they’re chance to seize power is minimal at best.

It is known that dominant party system has democratic principles and has nothing to with dictatorial tendencies. Because they are carrying out democratic and fair election they try to gain the most vote of the public by doing good deeds for the public.

The mystery behind dominant parties’ success in many parts of the world has to do with their ability to fulfill the publics’ wishes, the fact that they operate in line with the constitutional order that’s built within the society and the good things the did for the people while on power.

Most of the dominant party system proponents are known for their effort to bring democracy (to their respective countries) through neutral organs that don’t have any special interest in the country. The wrong policies the oppositions usually demonstrate are usually attributed for dominant party’s success in a certain country, more than the hard works put in by the ruling parties. According to studies made on the issue, as the oppositions tend to promise unrealistic pledges instead of sensible agendas that are in demand by the voting public, they become a reason for ruling parties to continue on dominating on proceedings. With regards to this, the ruling party is leading the country as a dominant party after the four general elections held in our country.

It should be understood that this dominant party system is not a phenomenon that’s strict to only our country. The system, just like every other political system has an international dimension to it. Currently the system is heavily seen in many African, American states, along with many European and Asian countries. Just to name a few African states that adhere to that particular political system, Nigeria, Rwanda, Equatorial Guinea and South African can be mentioned.

Nigeria’s People's Democratic Party (PDP) is in power by changing its leader for various reasons since 2003, after former President Olesegun Obosanjo came to power. The story of Rwanda’s Rwandan Patriotic Front (FRP) is not different from this. This front or party which is led by President Paul Kagame is running the country starting from the 1995 election in which the party got 95.1% of the vote. The Equatorial Guinea Democratic Party (PDGE) has been in power for more than 29 years, in which it got 97% of vote in the election that took place in 2002. And South Africa’s African National congress (ANC) has been leading the country since 1994.

These instances are small portion of African countries’ that are ruled by dominant parties. Also according to information American States have a rich history of dominant party administration. For instance, the state of Chicago is administered by Democrats since 1927.

This implicates that Democrats have been leading the state as the dominant party for more than a half century. Also in New England, except for the time in which the Republican George W. Bush won in New Hampshire (part of New England region) in the 2000 election, the democrats have been winning as a Democratic Party starting from 1988.

The democrats have also been leading the Massachusetts state for over 50 years as a dominant party without letting any other party in. Although at a country level both the Republicans and Democrats have been in power replacing each other, but election at state level have been dominated by dominant parties seizing the mantle of state leadership. The realities in Asia are no different to this. We can mention the dominant party system that reigned supreme in Japan and Malaysia. The Japan’s ruling Liberal Democratic Party (RDP) has led the country for the last 50 years as the dominant party. And a coalition of two parties has leaded the country for more than half of a century as a dominant party.

The Malaysia’s United Malays National Organization (UMNO), a coalition of 14 parties, has been leading the country’s parliamentary system as a dominant party since the country’s independence in 1957, and this dominant party has enabled the country to record huge economic development.

I can also mention parties like the German’s “Christian Social Union”, the Italy’s “Democrazia Cristiana” (Christian Democracy Party/DC) and the Irelands “Fianna Fáil”, if we are to look to the European Union versions of dominant parties. The German’s dominant party has been the main focal point of the country’s polities together with parties it’s similar on ideological level, and still has a major share on the country’s government.

And the Italy’s dominant party “Democrazia Cristiana”, except for the time between 1992 to 1994 where it lost the power due o corruption scandal, has been the country’s leading party for the part 50 years by creating coalition with other parties. The Ireland Republic’s “Fianna Fáil”, except for 30 months, has been leading the country for more than 25 years since it came to power in 1987.

The aforementioned dominant parties have their own nature in relation to their countries realities. This shows us that all the dominant parties don’t operate in the same way. They take the leading role in relation to their countries’ realities on the ground. Thus, one should understand the importance of the ideology these parties adhere to.

A party that adheres to liberalism ideology operates in line with the ideology’s political thinking. And a dominant party that’s operating under a developmental and democratic political system works to solve the main issues of the country by formulating its own agenda. For instance the execution of Malaysia’s United Malays National Organization (UNMO) and the South Africa’s dominant party ‘African National congress” (ANC) cannot be the same. The Malaysia’s Dominant party political system has three basic behaviors. The first is the party emphasizes on bringing dignity to various nation and nationalities, while secondly its party of coalition of various nation and nationalities. And the fact that the party was able to build a strong capable executive organ, as the party’s coalition is amassed from various nation and nationalities is the third peculiar characteristics of the party.

In contrast, the South Africa’s ANC cannot have Malaysia – like dominant party system which is based on nation and nationalities, without taking the country’s part and current realities on the ground into account. As it is known, the black people of South Africa used to suffer under the Apartheid system for its color of skin. After the demise dominant party of the country followed a two way approach by prioritizing national reconciliation.

In one side, the party has done harmonizing work in which it made the previous unfair (unbalanced) approach in sync to its own policy program. One of those works includes affirmative action. In another side, ANC has flaunted its own agenda which is free from color discrimination. (Here it should be noted that this discrimination free policy of ANC was conceived during the Anti – Apartheid struggle).

The other peculiar thing of ANC is the fact that the party was able to win by forming an alliance with the country’s communist party and with Congress of South African Trade and getting 2/3rd of the vote. The reason why the oppositions in South Africa lost out has to do to the fact that the majority are bent on racism thinking and have a nostalgia and desire for the Apartheid system to make a comeback. And this thinking of theirs has enabled ANC to continue as the dominant party, as the thinking did not find acceptance by ANC and by the black people, the majority people.

EPRDF, the dominant party that’s leading Ethiopia, has worked by flaunting its main agenda which is ‘rapid and sustainable development is a must in order to change the country’s stagnating economic development for the better’. It worked tirelessly to make the developmental path it took to be beneficiary to the public. As a result, the party has enabled the country to register more than 11% economic growth annually in average. EPRDF and ANC have made not only developmental, but also democratization part of their body of work. They have chosen the path which theorizes all dominant parties should not be undemocratic; believing development can be gained through democracy and that rooting democracy is possible through rapid developmental process. They have also worked hard to put the democratic order of their respective countries on a firm ground.

With this effort of theirs and the acceptance they garnered from the public, for their commitment to protect their constitution, to execute and to put into effect the principles ideals of their respective constitution; they are able to continue to be the dominant parties in their respective countries. And this is what was seen in the 5th general election that was held in our country. And the public has shown, through its vote, the huge support it has for the constitutional system. With this, the ruling party has gained the consent of the public to continue on to be the dominant party until now.

All in all, it should be know that a dominant party multi party system cannot in any way be a dictatorial regime. The dominant party system that’s founded in this country is democratic. In a dominant party system, everybody can reflect his/her opinion freely in whatever medium he likes. And he has the constitutional right.

There is also the right to operate in line with the legal framework the multiparty system allows and compete in election to seize power this is through the consent of the public not by riot as what the would – be writer’s deluded mind is saying. The multi-party system that’s being built in our country encourages opposition to have their own role in strengthening the democratic order by operating within the legal framework of the constitution.

In addition to this, it shows the desire to execute the constitutional right bestowed up on the opposition without them being brittle. The fact that the ruling party encourages the oppositions to come to power by gaining acceptance; it’s in no way an implication of dictatorial tendencies. The reason why dominant party system is created in various countries has to do with having a policy that can mobilize the public, the ability to make the public beneficiaries, the capability to up held the country’s rule of law by adjusting for the realities of the country and the commitment to operate by respecting the constitution. Thus, it doesn’t change the fact that parties that fulfills the aforementioned criteria’s will continue on to be the dominant party. And I think this made our country’s multi party system to turn into a dominant party system. It has no relation with a dictatorial regime.