Despite the many renaissance contents on which the system of the state of the Republic of Yemen was built and upon the declaration of the national unification of the country on May 22nd, 1990 which include: political pluralism, democracy, freedom of the press, expression and belief, freedom of civil society, equal citizenship, the rule of law, and other pillars of the modern state, However, the apparently aligned parties at the moment of the nascent state’s announcement and during its early years, tied it down with burdens produced by selfish spirits, that were too small to rise to the level of the state’s project, its contents, requirements, and responsibilities, as a historic opportunity for a deserved justice for a nation whose generations suffered for decades. The founding fathers and mothers, the pioneers of the national movement, assumed their responsibilities with skill and merit, and made generous sacrifices for its sake and for the sake of that moment of emancipation, represented by the state of citizenship, justice, development, and stability.
It is unfortunate for the emerging state, and its citizens as well, that those who took over the leadership of the country in its early years were a group that had nothing to do with the creative contents of that renaissance project and its promises, nor with what the national movement had accumulated in terms of mature perceptions of the people’s state carriers, stemming from an inspiring civilizational legacy, and the guarantor of the present. A promising and prosperous future. Consequently, the cockpit of the unified state project, its structures and mechanisms were damaged, warning of disruption and undermining, from the moment of its birth, and over the course of thirty-three years of its life.
In spite of the involvement of many external demolition arms, which saw the existence of a modern Yemeni state as an existential threat to it, in undermining the unified state project, it would not have persisted with its strikes, brazenly, had it not been for the presence of structural imbalances in the governance of the foundations of the unified state, and in its structures, mechanisms, and legislation that injected it with the spirit of selfishness of sharing and quota, the grudges of ideologues, and the greed of intruders, which emptied the unified state of its contents and promises, and loaded the state and society with a long series of wars, gambling, grievances, corruption, mismanagement and domination.
By scrutinizing the documents and stages of the declaration of the unified state, starting with the unification declaration agreement which signed in Sana’a in April 22, 1990, the declaration was short and improvised in a disgraceful manner, its preamble, articles, and structure were fragile, despite its importance as a constitutional declaration whose essential function is to set foundational determinants on which the fate of an entire nation depends, which seemed to have been “cooked” apart from the long accumulation of preliminary negotiations over the years, which, if taken into account, the political forces could be able to lay solid foundations for the desired state.
It was clear that the agreement, of which Article 9 states that it represents the establishing framework for the entire transitional period, was prepared according to the mood of politicians who were at the forefront at that time, despite their limited capabilities, knowledge and imagination, and their saturation with greed, grudges, obsessions and delusions. What was even worse is that the document was developed without being presented to constitutional and legal experts to regulate its articles, its contents and structure.
Moreover, the terms of the agreement defined the form of the newly formed state presidency, as a presidential council that includes five members from among whom they choose a president, without an accurate job description which defines the limits of their roles, powers, and accountability mechanisms. The agreement merged the two legislative councils, to form one council, with limited powers. Besides, the agreement was launched on the day of the declaration of unity, and set the transitional period to two years and six months from its date. It also referred in more than one article to the constitution, while a constitutional committee was supposed to be assigned to work on its draft over a period of years and the agreement set the date for the referendum on the constitution before May 30, 1990.
Almost a year after the date specified in the agreement, a constitutional referendum on the constitution of the unified state was held on May 15 and 16, 1991, the result of which expressed the general public attitude at that time, as 98.3% voted for the constitution, while the percentage of votes against the constitution was only 1. 5% of the male and female voters.
Perhaps one of the paradoxes indicating the nature of the ruling elite and its hidden intentions is that, the nascent state governance system with its legislation, structures, formations, slogans, and even future promises, was devoid of any measures or approaches that concern the victims of political conflicts, despite their large number. Instead, the allied parties conspired in the new regime, while preoccupied with sharing the loots, and turning a blind eye to the heavy human rights and humanitarian files inherited from the bloody political conflicts in the north and south. In fact, this was one of the aspects of the new state's abandonment of its accountability towards the victims of its ancient conflicts, against one of the requirements of any creative national transformation, which is represented by courageous handling of past files, by revealing the truth, reparating the victims, lifting grievances, achieving national reconciliation and transitional justice, in order to launch a new era immune from the evils and atrocities of the past.
Although the constitution on which the referendum was held contained many creative contents, as a result of the efforts of years of work of the Joint Constitutional Committee (selected from the two parts of Yemen), such as: emphasis on political pluralism, freedom of expression, equal citizenship, rule of law, freedom of civil society, freedom of thought and belief, and other contents, it did not completely escape the ambushes and traps of the mood of the lurking ruling coalition at the time. In contrast, the constitution placed the five-year Presidency Council at the top of the state hierarchy, while not defining the limits of the council’s powers and duties. Instead, the Council was referred to in broad, open, and interpretable terms, linked to a set of exceptions and exceptions, with the omission of defining accountability mechanisms, with the exception of a shy reference related to the crime of high treason.
Instead of working responsibly after the end of the war, to address many of the imbalances and distortions that led to it, and to tackle all its consequences, the coalition of the victors in the war went, with ecstasy and arrogance, to commit more misdeeds and violations, which affected large groups of citizens in the southern governorates.
In addition to the absence of a clear decision-making mechanism within the Presidency Council, many of the council’s tasks conflicted with the powers of the government, which the constitution defines as the supreme administration of the country and entails all departments, agencies, and executive institutions of the state, without exception. Thus, the executive apparatus of the state has two command cabins with the same powers, without the existence of any regulations that set the limits of roles, responsibilities and powers, in a model characterized by the fragility of the links between the various components of the state apparatus, and the lack of a clear separation between powers and responsibilities. As a result, these imbalances have exacerbated, with the existence of a ruling elite that lacks the minimum level of homogeneity, compliance, and national altruism, whether political, administrative, legal, or behavioral. Regardless the fact that it was a sensitive founding stage, which, in order to pass it safely, necessarily required the availability of mature perceptions, accurate, strict and specific legislation, coherent, efficient and consistent structures, effective and efficient mechanisms, and responsible, compliant and dedicated leaders to achieve the public interest, as necessary conditions, to consolidate the foundational building blocks of the new state in a way that ensures the firmness of institutional structures, traditions, practices and values, as due promises to people.
Despite the relevance of all the arguments that could list the many pros of the constitution of the unified state, and the gains it achieved on more than one aspect, and all the observations that would address the shortcomings as well, the apparently allied ruling parties competed voraciously, seeking to seize the profits of the time. For this purpose, it committed grave breaches of the social contract that was called upon before its ink dried, and its fragile foundations and structures were undermined in its infancy. It also struck with its shovels the walls of social peace, so they scrambled, bearing the legacy of distortions produced by the gambles of the North and South regimes, not with the aim of addressing them, but rather to take refuge in them and devote and exacerbate them for their malicious use, in an absurd scene filled with all the contradictions of the perceptions and aspirations of the national movement.
As an inevitable result of all this, the country was pushed in the end in the midst of the absurd war of the summer of 1994, which added heavy and sinful files to the previous files of the cycles of political conflict in the north and south, which are pending within the responsibility of the country, its leaders, and its elites.
Thus, instead of working responsibly, after the end of the war with the defeat of the other partner in the unification, to address many of the imbalances and distortions that led to it, and to remedy all its sequences, the coalition of the victors in the war went, with ecstasy and arrogance, to commit more evils and violations, which affected large sectors of citizens in the southern governorates, including theft of land and property, layoffs of tens of thousands of employees in various sectors, and the imposition of new names on landmarks and roads, in addition to forms of numerous desecrations so that looting and violations which continued over the years.
In the process of completing the mission of undermining the accumulated political gains, the coalition of victors proceeded with deadly blows in the summer war of 1994, including, but not limited to: the first constitutional amendment that guarantees the acquisition of power, and emptying the frameworks of the unified state of its creative contents, persevering in practices that contradict these contents, such as granting absolute powers to the unelected President of the Republic to consecrate the authority of the individual, not adhering to the independence of the judiciary, and obstructing the conduct of local authority elections, which are constitutional entitlements in the enforceable social contract.
Over the years, the country has been mortgaged to a government characterized by improvisation, moodiness, escape tricks, and abuse of power while ensuring non-accountability and the disruption of laws, amid an environment of financial, administrative, political, and moral corruption in which various problems have exacerbated, and new dilemmas, distortions, and ill-treatments have spawned, with the authority deliberately blocking all channels of political reform, and the erosion of the foundations of legitimacy and constitutional and legal legitimacy. These factors combined to waste all valuable opportunities to guarantee the interests of the general public, so that the task of the actual authority is limited to securing the illegitimate interests of an authoritarian, greedy and blind minority.
While we are in the midst of a flood of catastrophes created by the mentalities of the authoritarian elites that have alternated roles of undermining from the east to the west and from the south and the north, throughout our modern history, we must bear the responsibility for the implementation of modern mechanisms and means, to dissect and approach the various chronic and emerging problems and ailments. It is also imperative for us to refrain from getting involved in limiting our problems to a single actor, and excluding other actors, or yielding to the effects of the variables of power, surrendering to the mood of the loudest voice, and the constraints and temptations of propaganda machines. This approach, regardless of its motives, does not differ in its nature, spirituality, and effects from the behaviors that deviate the mood of the victorious parties in the immoral summer war of 1994, and the powers collaborating with them.
One of the basic duties entrusted to our generation which is devoid of the sins of those involved in national setbacks and their polluted interests and benefits as well as their unpatriotic perceptions and delusions, is to stop the reproduction of the methods, ideas, and approaches of the notables of ruins, chauvinism, and disappointments, and to adopt different paths through: working on impartial scientific and methodological analyzes that approach all the problems and infirmities that have accumulated over the decades of our national history. In addition, embracing enlightened perceptions of treatments that lay solid foundations for a different future, as it is not possible, under any circumstances, to address problems and distortions, with the same determinants, methods, and mentalities, that were involved in creating, producing, and exacerbating those imbalances, which were promoted in earlier stages and presented as magical solutions.
The duty of the moment, and the obligation of every moment, is for intellectuals, men and women, and all civil actors, to confront the task of refining the scene with its inputs, outputs, interactions, and parties, and curbing unbridled instinctive rhetoric, which relies mainly on carefully engineered power variables to ensure the interests of regional and international actors, which necessarily contradict with the interests of all Yemenis without exception.
Therefore, the responsibilities of the civil elites are to represent the stakeholders before the centers of power, old and new, starting with examining the contents of their discourse, behaviors and strategies as well as the civil struggle to correct it and subject it to effective and informed accountability mechanisms, as necessary steps to cross into a state of citizenship, justice, rule of law, stability and development.
