MP
and Civil Will leader S.Oyun talks to our journalist.          

Tell us about the progress of talks to
bring together Civil Will and the Green Party? How have party members received
the proposal?

The
Green Party made the offer in the spring and our National Committee will discuss
it next month. Members are still divided and want to be cautious in their
approach. An alliance is basically an election strategy as neither party
benefits if there is a division in the votes for what they stand for. I favor
an alliance but only because I am the party head does not mean the party has to
agree with me. Our experience with such alliances has not been very
encouraging. After initial euphoria, disputes and differences keep cropping up
and our reputation for principles and integrity takes a beating. That is why our
members prefer to be wary.   

How will CWP and GP reconcile their
ideologies?  

A working group has been set up to see how we can reach an agreement on ideology
and on national development issues. We have similar views on how to ensure good
governance and curb corruption. The CWP has a right-of-center ideology,
supporting the private sector in business, and less Government control and
intervention though not leaving everything to be decided by the market. The GP is
more leftist. However, these are not irreconciliable differences and we can
certainly work together if we agree on the development platform.

Are you delaying a decision
until passage of the new election law?     

In
a way, yes. New electoral practices will determine not just alliances but also
every party’s own strategy at the time of elections. The present first-past-the-post
rule does not benefit smaller parties and favors large parties
disproportionately. For example, in the 2000 election the MPRP won 53% of the
popular vote but 95% of the seats. 

The CWP won 12% of the total votes in the last election, but just one seat. So
our strategy will have to be adapted to whatever election system is chosen.   

What about the gender law?      
I
was a member of the working group that worked on the gender law. We have prepared
a sensible draft and it should be passed. Unfortunately there are political compulsions
and so there has been no progress on the law for a year. It seems we do not
accept what is self-evident, that men and women should have equal participation
in society, and so there is resistance to fixing a minimum quota for women
candidates to be nominated. 

Is the quota issue holding
back the whole gender law?    

It seems so, and, therefore, I have suggested to the working group that the
quota issue could be kept in abeyance and to proceed with the gender law without
it. The Standing Committee has for some reason put off discussion of the matter.
This is unfortunate. The gender law is not only related to women in politics
and election, but wants more for men in the education and health fields.    

What is your stand on
dismissing the Anti-Corruption Authority (ACA) chief?           

The ACA must receive all support to work independently, fearlessly, and without
political interference. Politicians should certainly be free to criticize its
mistakes but they should not try to make the ACA subservient to any outside
interest. By definition, the ACA has to be free enough and strong enough to
investigate charges against high officials.         
The Standing Committee on Justice discussed the issue in camera so I have no
official information on what happened there. We shall know more when Parliament
takes up the issue. I am surprised that an organization charged with upholding
public probity should itself be accused of ethical and financial wrongdoing.