The official launch of the Code of Political Ethics last week represents a new attempt to change the behaviour associated with political campaigning. The traditional character assassination and inflamed vocabulary are now expected to give way to politically-correct policy statements and mild-mannered campaigning techniques.
In a political culture whose electorate has grown accustomed to the invective associated with election campaigning, we are being challenged to "refrain from practices that promote divisiveness in the society and commit to the removal of any structures (behavioural, cultural, social or organisational) which reinforce divisiveness."
This will put tremendous strain upon the organisers to interpret what is considered "divisive" in a multi-cultural, multi-religious society. An appeal to a particular group in society in respect of a public policy initiative may be deemed "divisive" by one side and be considered legitimate campaigning by another.There is a Council for Responsible Political Behaviour whose role is "to monitor and evaluate adherence to this Code of Ethical Political conduct by the Political Parties and their Candidates who are signatories hereto."
The council will consist of one political appointee per political party and an equal number of appointees, plus one from the founding organisations (other than the political parties) who are not "affiliated" with any political parties.One would imagine that the members chosen by these founding organisations will scrupulously avoid making any comments (critical or praiseworthy) on any aspect of public affairs for the rest of the campaign so as to preserve their trustworthiness as arbiters on the council.
After all, in a society such as ours it is difficult to avoid perceptions of individuals being supportive of one party or another whenever public commentary is involved.The Code of Political Ethics implores political parties and candidates to "co-operate with the police in maintaining law and order during election campaigns." After last Monday, that clause could have a completely different meaning.
Perhaps the more potent reference to police management of the roads can be found elsewhere in the code where it is stated that "such steps as the police may direct are carried out so as to minimise obstruction of roads and inconvenience to the general public whenever political activities are held at roadsides."
If a political party felt that roadblocks were being used to create a disadvantage for it in relation to another depending on where the roadblocks were set up either during the campaign or on election day, would the council established by the code be able to adjudicate?
It appears not because the premise of the code is that the police are there to protect and serve as opposed to punishing and stranding. However, if it is that we are expected to prepare ourselves "to eat breakfast, lunch and dinner" in our cars during the election campaign, the council may want to issue a statement to the police to reconsider any such activity that is punitive to innocent citizens.
What the council has to realise is that the police have to regain the trust of the wider population after last Monday, where the ability of people to get to political meetings or being able to go to their polling stations to cast their ballots are concerned.An interesting assertion by the Code of Political Ethics in relation to the media reads as follows:
"Respect the right of the media to fairly present balanced reports and information before, during and after an election."
The presumption of this statement is that there is no media bias one way or the other. This is one of the shortcomings of the code as there is no sanction available to be applied to any media house that engages in divisive broadcasts or publications. By confining the possibility of such behaviour only to political parties and not including the media, it is possible for the media to be abused as an outlet for such activity. This does not even scratch the surface where social media is concerned.
As a consequence, the political parties could behave in a squeaky clean manner and their other activities be carried out by political action groups. The council will have no jurisdiction over these bodies as they are not signatories to the code.
The founding organisations are listed as the Anglican Church, the Methodist Church, the Presbyterian Church, the Sanatan Dharma Maha Sabha of T&T, the T&T Transparency Institute, the T&T Chamber of Commerce, the Network of NGOs, the T&T Publishers' and Broadcasters' Association, the Communication Workers' Union/Fitun, the Inter Religious Organisation of T&T, the ASJA and the RC Archdiocese of Port-of-Spain.
There are some very political entities among the list of founding members whose political bias is already known. In the circumstances, it will be difficult for these members of the council to be as unaffiliated as the code would like.It is more than likely that this council will have its fair share of work cut out for it and the internal wrangling among some of the members of the council, both affiliated and unaffiliated, will be a true test for what is a noble cause.