--On January 21, 1996, the Palestinians of the West Bank (including Jerusalem) and Gaza went to the ballot boxes to elect the President of the Palestinian National Authority and their representatives to the Palestinian Legislative Council.

--Despite the boycott of some opposition factions and some irregularities in ballot counting, these elections were deemed to be fair and representative by both international and local observers.

--Most viewed these unprecedented elections as a vote of confidence in the Palestinian people’s commitment to and drive towards democracy.

--The Palestinian electorate not only felt exhilarated and empowered by the experience, they also shared a sense of hope and feelings of confidence that the Palestinian nation-building process had taken off from a firm foundation of democracy.

--Granted that many of these hopes proved to be unrealistic and the expectations exaggerated; and granted that the PLC faced serious obstacles from the outset—whether in the nature of its composition and thus potential co-option by the Executive, or in the Executive’s resistance to monitoring and accountability, or in the unnecessary delays and non-ratification of draft legislation, mainly the Basic Law—it is unfair to pronounce the experience a failure.

--Among the earliest accomplishments of the PLC was the passing of the Bill on Local Council Elections on December 1, 1996 and its endorsement by the President on the 16th.

--It is unfortunate that these elections have not yet materialized. Instead, the Ministry of Local Government proceeded to appoint municipal and village committees, thus giving rise to several adverse effects, including doubts and misgivings.

--These appointments were made after extensive consultations with local families and political factions. As a result, many Palestinian towns and villages witnessed a regression into tribalism and factionalism, rather than adopting contemporary standards of democratic representation and accountability.

--Often, personal rivalries and score settling, as well as favoritism and patronage, dominated the work of these committees and their relationships with the local populations.

--Most significantly, members of these appointed committees were directly linked to the Ministry and thus felt that their legitimacy derives from the authority that appointed them rather than from the people who elected them.

--The overall result has dealt a severe blow to the budding democracy in Palestine, giving rise to questions about the sincerity of the PNA’s verbal commitments and promises.

--As a justification for the repeated postponements of local council elections, the PNA has offered the excuse that Israeli non-compliance with the signed agreements has created adverse conditions of hardship with a detrimental effect on the mood of the people and support for the mainstream. It also blamed Israel’s refusal to carry out the agreed further redeployments as a major obstacle, in that it maintained its control over most of the territories and connecting roads, thus exerting undue influence on the process and outcome of the elections.

--These arguments, however, are not convincing in light of the earlier PLC elections which took place immediately following Israel’s first redeployment from the cities and prior to any further redeployment. All rural areas participated in these elections and found ways of overcoming Israeli obstacles, particularly in the Jerusalem area.

--Recent, albeit unofficial, statements from PNA sources are hinting at a July 1999 date for these elections. The Elections Law stipulates a 90-day period between the official announcement and the actual holding of these elections.

--It has become imperative, therefore that the PNA make the official announcement immediately, specifying the date of these elections and assuring the Palestinian people of their unequivocal commitment.

--At the same time, it is essential that both presidential and legislative elections take place this year.

--Both these institutions were part of the interim phase agreements, and thus their mandate comes to an end by the end of the transitional period on May 4, 1999, although the PLC timeframe legally ended on March 7—i.e. three years after its inauguration.

--The fact that the Speaker and other officers of the PLC were elected in Gaza on March 7, and the Council was officially declared as entering its fourth term, does not negate the May 4 timeline.

--Any extension of the period of the PLC and other interim phase institutions would signal the extension of the transitional phase. An added risk would be to render the features of the interim phase permanent, thus extending prejudicial realities to permanent status.

--The most negative impact, though, would be on the PLC itself and on its credibility with its constituency. The Palestinian people have the right to evaluate their representatives and to exercise their right to vote for the candidates of their choice. Accountability is the essence of democracy, and if the executive authority has failed to exercise it, this does not exempt the PLC members from being subject to their electorate’s accountability. The integrity of the institution itself and the credibility of the members would be destroyed should elections be postponed or cancelled.

--Miftah urges the Council to adopt the necessary steps to launch the process, beginning with the adoption of the necessary election law. It also urges the PNA executive to undertake its own responsibilities in declaring the process officially under way.

--It is worth noting as well that these coming elections will be undertaken in the context of statehood—or at least of the preparatory steps for statehood. Thus the nature, structure and mandate of these institutions must reflect this qualitative shift and clearly indicate an exercise of sovereignty.

--They must not only encompass the whole demographic scope of the Palestinian national reality, but must also be entirely free and fair elections if they are to be genuine instruments of democracy.

--Palestinian emerging realities require an active commitment to the principles of inclusive participatory governance and democratic practices. All parties concerned are required to discharge their responsibilities in facing these challenges. Elections are the first test and the basic requirement of legitimacy.