Gaza needs democracy without elections - opinion

• Published date: 14 March 2024
• Author: IAIN WALKER
• Publication title: Jerusalem Post, The: Web Edition Articles (Israel)

Israel as an occupying force is undesirable, it would draw global criticism and simply push off the problem to a later date

Equally, traditional electoral democracy is an unworkable option.

With polls reflecting up to 80% support for Hamas among Gaza residents, elections would only allow for some incarnation of Hamas to emerge newly empowered – an untenable situation following its acts of terror targeting civilians.

Such is the nature of elections: a limited menu of choices is put to a population in a contest of slogans rather than long-term solutions. The election process creates very clear incentives for candidate behavior, and in this case those incentives will be incendiary.

Look around the world: elections do not lead to harmony in society. Instead, they are a primary source of much of our division through a tone of debate which also paralyzes our democracies. They give concentrated power to a small group of people who benefit from amplifying division and demonizing rivals in order to win and retain office. In the West it is causing fractures; but in a society crippled by a debilitating war and ongoing heightened regional tension it is unfathomable to suggest that this method of democracy contributes to stability.

The prime minister should be encouraged to consider a third option: democracy without elections. Democracy does not simply equate to holding elections; elections are simply one method of delivering a representative group of people. Yet, surprisingly to many, they were not used in the democracy born in Athens 2,500 years ago. Athenian democracy foresaw this problem, and instead used a simple random draw among citizens (known as "sortition").

Democracy without elections in Gaza

Using this approach in Gaza would see 50 people from all walks of life randomly-selected to form a Council of Citizens to provide governance and government. Unlike elections, it avoids the skew to people with certain narrow backgrounds and brings together a more representative group of people with everyday jobs.

Having a single fixed term after which a new group is selected by lottery allows for decision-making grounded in judgment, rather than concern for the optics of what will earn them re-election.

Election campaigns require money, which never comes without strings attached and frequently from dubious sources. This democratic method removes that compromise entirely.

How would this work in practice? Those 50 people would be tasked with finding a common ground...