Kh.Temuujin, a Democratic Party MP not actively or directly connected with the Union of Democratic Forces, answers questions on developments around the new grouping.

The arrival of the Union of Democratic Forces is seen as the beginning of a split in the DP, or at least of serious internal dissension. You spoke at the first general meeting of the UDF. Are you a member?

I have no formal connection with the UDF, but I support their reformist moves. My presentation was on areas where I felt reforms are needed. We certainly need political reforms. Politics has become dirty and has lost its independence. Leaders and officials have allowed Mongolia’s problems to pile up because of their failure to understand or inability to act. Laws are not implemented properly and, in any case, we lack proper laws. We must get out of the present situation. The final decision on how to use our mineral resources will be very important. Only if we follow proper democratic methods shall we be saved from the so-called “Treasure Curse”. I am at one with the UDF on the need for reform but I have not joined it. There are many things about the organization that I do not like and I also think the Democratic Party is capable of ushering in reforms.

But the founders of the UDF are giving broad hints that the DP cannot do so.

So, do they plan to separate from DP? In that event, I shall totally oppose the move. The DP can be changed from the inside. It is a violation of the State Constitution if they are going to reform the way the Government works under the name of an NGO. The coalition agreement is committed to protecting the rights of DP members and DP supporters in government service. The UDF cannot interfere in this. People must not be penalized because of their views. We have to reform the judicial system and then get politics moving in the right direction and in the right way. An NGO cannot be given this twin responsibility of instituting legal and political reforms. I support reforms but doubt if the UDF as an NGO is the right choice for the task.

Some people are crying out that the DP will never change.

I am an optimistic person. We will overcome any obstacles. I personally think that DP cannot survive unless we do things in a new way. I am sure this will be done because DP supporters are still waiting for the good life they dreamed of during the 90s. There are now many young people who believe in the DP and they will work for reforming it.

You said in your presentation that the President is alone in his emphasis on court reforms. Even he has been wavering lately. Why?

I sometimes criticize the President too. I miss his trademark power, energy, clear ideas, and his large vision. The President does not have the authority to solve problems but he can suggest goals. The implementation work is done by the Government which has the human resources and the money. It is hard for the President to stand alone against the present rotten judicial system, especially when vested interests are determined to keep it rotten. That is why I said he is alone. I also feel sad that the judicial organizations, instead of seeking the truth, are united to punish citizens who call for the truth. Do our judges believe in human rights? I feel sorry that these people are still being promoted and the President who was promising reforms is signing the promotion orders. But, since I am an optimistic person, I believe that the President will succeed.

There is no progress in either court reforms or education reforms. Is he serious?

The President has very limited power to do anything concrete and I cannot blame him for the lack of progress. We need to understand that the President can only suggest policy. We do not have a presidential system where he has executive powers. He can only show us the way.

We must ask the Government and Parliament why they do not execute the President’s initiatives. Our three past Presidents fell every time they tried to act like the Prime Minister, but their reputation went up. The President must be the President and remind us of the nation’s goals. The Prime Minister is the person to lead Mongolia to those goals. For this, he must be powerful.

Probably S.Bayar was a powerful PM. But must the power of the PM depend on his personality?

The problem in Mongolia is that the Prime Minister leads an unwieldy Government where members of the dominant group in Parliament pursue their group’s interests. A PM must have his own men in order to execute his policies.  

Then what must be done?

Parliament should not have a say in selecting Ministers. That must be the PM’s prerogative. He will prepare policies and Parliament’s job will be to approve or reject them. Standing committees must be the ones who decide whether the policy is right or not, not party groups. The Government and PM must have full control over the budget, not Parliament. Its role will be to monitor how the budget allocations are spent.

Is this practical?

Maybe not, but ideals will succeed only when they are made into law. Idealism and legitimacy are not mutually exclusive. We must improve this unproductive relationship between Parliament and the Government if we want good administration.

People are waiting for change but a change must not be only in name, just replacing something by what is basically the same. It is pointless if we bring in one oligarch to knock down another. Feudalism must be removed from the party and oligarchs from democracy. On the other hand, citizens must know what to demand from whom. Their knowledge must be improved.

MP E.Bat-Uul said Parliament must have two chambers and proposed a lower chamber of regional representatives. What do you think about this?

That model is the same as in China. Mongolia also had this before 1992. This is no solution. Old people try to solve problems with even older ways when they can’t solve the problems of a new society. If they can’t find new ways, they should leave. This is the problem of a new society, not of the old one. These problems were made by them. Today, we must look at the issues more professionally. Amateur politics has continued for 20 years. Mongolian society is bankrupt. Parliament is the representative organization of the people.  

Will the UDF save the DP?

The founders of the union claim it is an NGO, and not a political organization. That’s exactly what Altan Gadas said. Thus, I am wary. After Altan Gadas was established and promised to lead to development, it started to choose the person who will take the leadership. Internal issues within the DP should not be settled outside the party. The MPRP’s young members are also talking like this. They say if the election system becomes proportional, they will lose the chance of becoming MPs, because the old folks will again be chosen. Thus, they wish to keep the majority system and defeat others in direct fights. Infighting in parties has been the bane of our democracy. Internal problems must not spread outside.

You once said it was not the time for the DP to leave the coalition. Is it time now to do so?

I was against having the coalition, for many reasons. First, DP will have to share the blame for the failures of the majority party. Second, there will no longer be an opposition. And third, what will happen to people’s trust in us? But the party decided to enter the coalition. I stressed the need to change laws and to fight corruption. Political parties are dependent on their leaders but the leaders must listen to the people. The coalition has done nothing to strengthen democracy or to provide a responsible administration.