(Ahlul Bayt News Agency) - We, the National Democratic Opposition Parties welcome everyone in this press conference on the national dialogue which started on 10th February 2013 with the first preliminary session and has so far held five sessions, the last of which was on Wednesday 27th February.
Yet, we see that from the very beginning the official party seemed to lack seriousness towards the dialogue, as it called for it in the official media without presenting its vision. However, when we then received an invitation we presented a prompt letter to the Minister of Justice and Islamic Affairs, Sheikh Khalid bin Ali al-Khalifa on 28th January 2013, in which we declared our vision for a serious dialogue that can reach a permanent political settlement that enables all Bahrainis to participate in their country's hoped sustainable development on all political, economical, social and cultural levels, and to activate the constitution's principle, "the people are the source of all powers".
Moreover, we stressed that any serious dialogue in the world must stand on a roadmap and a necessarily calm environment. We see that the authority needs to ease the tensioned situation through a real security breakthrough by implementing the recommendations of both the Bahrain Independent Commission of Inquiry (BICI) and the UN Human Rights Council as the regime has promised.
The national democratic opposition parties have taken the issue of dialogue with all seriousness to address the reasons behind the political constitutional crisis as a purely internal affair. The Bahraini crisis has also become a concern to the international community which has called on Bahrain to conduct a serious and genuine dialogue that can provide a permanent solution and achieve the aspirations of the Bahraini people through final agreements.
Our vision, in the opposition, included articulated issues like the concept of dialogue and the necessary representation of the authority as a main party in negotiation, as well as considering negotiation outcomes as decisions and constitutional drafts and not recommendations. We have also declared our dialogue agenda, and they are as follows;
Our letter to the Justice Minister also included our vision on;
Despite attempts to push the dialogue and negotiations in irrelevant issues, we responded with responsibility to pull things back in the right way more than once, and we were able to pull the discussion to the terms of our letter which the Justice Minister refused to discuss before the dialogue and required they be discussed on the dialogue table.
However, we were surprised to find the Royal Court Minister make an official statement declaring,"no party represents HM the King against the remaining parties" and that the Justice Minister will "submit the visions on which the participants reach consensus to him (the king) in order to implement them through the existing constitutional establishments".
We have studied this official position's development regarding the dialogue and found it is necessary to respond in a letter submitted to the king on Tuesday morning 5th March 2013, and in which we stressed that the king must be represented and the authority must be a main party in the dialogue and "the dialogue cannot be serious if the national democratic opposition parties are to demand authorities from the partakers, and who do not have these authorities in the first place."
We have also expressed to the king that we believe the dialogue is a strategic choice that can end the deep crisis, while at the same time, see the statements made by the Royal Court Minister to the media contradicting with our vision.
We also stressed that some dialogue outcomes are to be defined as constitutional drafts or laws or procedures that first undergo a referendum to provide the people's guarantee and make the people the source of all powers.
We find the statements of the Royal Court Minister an overcrossing of the dialogue table by imposing visions on the debaters who are supposed to be the ones who define the dialogue's mechanism, principles, agenda and goals, and this is what was agreed on in the last session.
The National Democratic Opposition Parties affirm that the dialogue is a strategic choice, and it has taken a decision to actively engage in it in order to find permanent solutions for the political constitutional crisis, and we refuse the attempts to take the dialogue towards agendas outside the radical-solution-framework.
Tuesday 5th March 2013
The National Democratic Opposition Parties
Al-Wefaq National Islamic Society
National Democratic Gathering Society
National Democratic Action Society
Unitary National Democratic Assemblage
Ekhaa National Society
Democratic Progressive Tribune
/129
Yet, we see that from the very beginning the official party seemed to lack seriousness towards the dialogue, as it called for it in the official media without presenting its vision. However, when we then received an invitation we presented a prompt letter to the Minister of Justice and Islamic Affairs, Sheikh Khalid bin Ali al-Khalifa on 28th January 2013, in which we declared our vision for a serious dialogue that can reach a permanent political settlement that enables all Bahrainis to participate in their country's hoped sustainable development on all political, economical, social and cultural levels, and to activate the constitution's principle, "the people are the source of all powers".
Moreover, we stressed that any serious dialogue in the world must stand on a roadmap and a necessarily calm environment. We see that the authority needs to ease the tensioned situation through a real security breakthrough by implementing the recommendations of both the Bahrain Independent Commission of Inquiry (BICI) and the UN Human Rights Council as the regime has promised.
The national democratic opposition parties have taken the issue of dialogue with all seriousness to address the reasons behind the political constitutional crisis as a purely internal affair. The Bahraini crisis has also become a concern to the international community which has called on Bahrain to conduct a serious and genuine dialogue that can provide a permanent solution and achieve the aspirations of the Bahraini people through final agreements.
Our vision, in the opposition, included articulated issues like the concept of dialogue and the necessary representation of the authority as a main party in negotiation, as well as considering negotiation outcomes as decisions and constitutional drafts and not recommendations. We have also declared our dialogue agenda, and they are as follows;
- The founding of an elected executive authority which expresses the popular will
- Defining the authorities of the legislative authority
- Fair electoral system
- Independence of the judicial authority
- The integration of all in the security services
- Political naturalization
- Discrimination
- Corruption
- Transitional justice
- Implementing the recommendations of both the (BICI) and the UN Human Rights Council, including the release of all prisoners of conscience, allowing fundamental freedoms and rationalizing government and quasi-government media.
Our letter to the Justice Minister also included our vision on;
- Negotiation mechanism
- Fair representation of all parties
- Negotiation timeline
- Execution mechanism of final agreement
- Guaranties of execution
Despite attempts to push the dialogue and negotiations in irrelevant issues, we responded with responsibility to pull things back in the right way more than once, and we were able to pull the discussion to the terms of our letter which the Justice Minister refused to discuss before the dialogue and required they be discussed on the dialogue table.
However, we were surprised to find the Royal Court Minister make an official statement declaring,"no party represents HM the King against the remaining parties" and that the Justice Minister will "submit the visions on which the participants reach consensus to him (the king) in order to implement them through the existing constitutional establishments".
We have studied this official position's development regarding the dialogue and found it is necessary to respond in a letter submitted to the king on Tuesday morning 5th March 2013, and in which we stressed that the king must be represented and the authority must be a main party in the dialogue and "the dialogue cannot be serious if the national democratic opposition parties are to demand authorities from the partakers, and who do not have these authorities in the first place."
We have also expressed to the king that we believe the dialogue is a strategic choice that can end the deep crisis, while at the same time, see the statements made by the Royal Court Minister to the media contradicting with our vision.
We also stressed that some dialogue outcomes are to be defined as constitutional drafts or laws or procedures that first undergo a referendum to provide the people's guarantee and make the people the source of all powers.
We find the statements of the Royal Court Minister an overcrossing of the dialogue table by imposing visions on the debaters who are supposed to be the ones who define the dialogue's mechanism, principles, agenda and goals, and this is what was agreed on in the last session.
The National Democratic Opposition Parties affirm that the dialogue is a strategic choice, and it has taken a decision to actively engage in it in order to find permanent solutions for the political constitutional crisis, and we refuse the attempts to take the dialogue towards agendas outside the radical-solution-framework.
Tuesday 5th March 2013
The National Democratic Opposition Parties
Al-Wefaq National Islamic Society
National Democratic Gathering Society
National Democratic Action Society
Unitary National Democratic Assemblage
Ekhaa National Society
Democratic Progressive Tribune
/129