Monday, April 4, 2016

Why we need a Referendum to get rid of the Need of a Referendum to make Constitutional Effects.

Why we need a Referendum to get rid of the Need of a Referendum to make Constitutional Effects.

Let me be forthright, I am not in favor of Referendums.

It does not serve any purpose.

There is no scientific basis.

Let me take the New Zealand recent poll to change the National Flag.

After so much time and money wasted there was a no vote for a change.

That example alone is enough to repudiate its validity.

We had our own shameful referendum to to extend the parliament by Old Fox's methodology.

Then we had lady Prime Minister extending the parliament by two years with two third majority.

Both were ugly incidents in our political history.

Just imagine former president comes into power with strange bed fellows like P Vasu.

Then they get together and have a referendum to make it possible for the term of office to be increased to 15 years or no bar in times in office (more than twice as at present).

What they need is 51% to 49% division in the final voting count.

To me that scenario is uglier than the two stated referendums above. 

We are going through the process of formalizing a new constitution.

Suppose at a referendum the constitution is rejected (It is more than likely present rulers will lose).

All the good work that preceded will be down the drain.

The crafty ex-president knows this very well and that is why he is asking the presidency should be abolished in double quick time.

He has two or three strategies.

1. One is to go for the abolition (at referendum) of the presidency and claim a birth for Prime Minister post in five years time.

2. The second strategy is to derail the new constitution by going for the kill at the referendum.
The gray area of not having a president and no effective Prime Minister with power.

That is the worst scenario.

3. The third possibility is to do a President Clinton Method.
Put his lady as the next presidential candidate and win and make a mockery of two terms restriction in office.

He will be running the day to day affairs.

All these are possible scenarios in this blessed country.

That is why I say we should abolish the need for a referendum before we set about making a new constitution.

I am also against (except for some specified reasons) the two third majority for making substantial changes to the present constitution.

It is the lessor of the evils in constitutional making.

I have no interest in politics.

My interests are scientific in nature and my questioning here are based on scientific thinking and not political or bizarre (thinking).

I hope the young and the old should take cognizant of the probable political scenarios in constitutional making.