|
One
might expect the Kurdistan region to be leading the
way in the development of Iraq's civil society and
infrastructure after more than a dozen years of
self-rule. While Kurdistan has flourished on many
levels, it lags behind in many areas that are
essential for democratic development. In addition,
corruption and government control are pervasive,
leaving many Kurds feeling helpless, apathetic, and
in disbelief that they are living in a "new" Iraq.
At the root of the problem in the Kurdistan region
is the absence of the rule of law. Generally
speaking, rule of law means that governments act
according to written laws and regulations. Rules are
applied consistently, whether to citizens or elected
officials. Rights are upheld and protected through a
functioning judicial system. Government authority is
limited, and private property is protected. In the
absence of the rule of law, arbitrary practices by
the government discourage personal initiative, breed
apathy, cynicism, and distrust.
It is easy to lose focus on the need to develop the
rule of law when the rest of the country is wrapped
up in an insurgency and is struggling with more
critical infrastructure issues such as electricity
and clean water. In the absence of international aid
agencies, civil society development in Kurdistan is
stagnant, leaving the regional governments to fund
projects they deem worthy. Party membership is a
requirement for anyone wanting to advance his or her
cause.
Nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) must be free of
party and governmental control if they are to
flourish. Unfortunately, the climate in Kurdistan is
not conducive to such development. Kurds say the
desire is there, but many outside the parties lack
the wherewithal to navigate the halls of bureaucracy
in order to establish an NGO. Many say the
impression is that no organization can get off the
ground without the support of the Kurdistan
administrations. Kurds not affiliated with either of
the two dominant parties, the Patriotic Union of
Kurdistan (PUK) or the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP),
see little hope of achieving such goals.
Another marker of a developing civil society is
independent, functioning trade unions. A 22 April
article on ft.com highlights the struggling trade
union movement in Kurdistan. "Kurdish [union]
leaders are clearly also officials of, or closely
linked to, the two main parties," the reporter
observed. "In a session with Imad Ahmed, the PUK
leader in the region, he gives the game away by
saying, 'the unions are weak: they are dominated by
the parties. They need to become stronger and more
independent.'" A visiting British trade union
delegation wondered "why a union movement that is
poor and needs funds as well as training is able to
drive [the guests around] in big Toyota Land
Cruisers and BMWs," the article noted.
There are signs everywhere of the same government
control that was practiced by the regime of Saddam
Hussein. Residents in KDP-controlled territory say
it is impossible to voice dissent against KDP
leaders or their relatives, who are said to have
profited immensely from lucrative business deals.
Enterprising Kurds say that in order to open a
company or secure a permit, a cut, in the form of a
payoff or a stake in the business must be paid.
Perhaps the most lucrative practice allegedly
employed by some government insiders is the revenue
gained from taxes on oil tankers and other importers
upon entering and leaving the KDP controlled areas
of Turkey.
Kurds say that a different set of standards exists
for foreign investors and expatriate Kurdish
investors. Nowhere in KDP-controlled areas can the
Iraqi national flag be found -- only the KDP and the
Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) flags fly
outside government buildings and military
installations.
A 27 April report by the Institute for War and Peace
Reporting (http://www.iwpr.net) claims that the
investment climate in the eastern part of Kurdistan
controlled by PUK leader and new Iraqi President
Jalal Talabani is the best in Iraq, but Talabani's
administration has also been accused of corrupt
practices. Some critics say that left unchecked,
party members and parliamentarians from both the KDP
and PUK have usurped land and taken control of
natural resources for their own personal use,
growing wealthy off of smuggling and shady business
ventures. Meanwhile, the parties maintain budgetary
control over their administrations, and many report
that economic data is a closely held secret.
The newly elected parliament resembles the last one,
with its members split evenly between the two major
Kurdish parties. The former parliament was known for
the corrupt practices of its members, who often
showed more interest in profit than in knowing the
concerns of their constituency. The parliament
functions in much of the same fashion as the rest of
Kurdish administration.
Fereydun Hilmi wrote in a December 2004 article
published on kurdishmedia.com that the problem stems
from a lack of accountability and control. "The
executive administration, which is owned by the
party, is appointed one by one by direct order from
the men at the very top or via party recommendations
and not as a result of the qualifications or
suitability or experiences of those holding office.
Their allegiance is therefore to the people above
them while the people below them [the major part of
the masses] do not get any attention. Because of the
lack of planning and the prevalent corruption, no
department is required to prepare any job
descriptions for their staff."
Party control over the media helps perpetuate the
abuse. Kurdish peshmerga forces, also tied to the
parties, operate with impunity as well. Kurds
quietly speak about peshmerga forces seizing goods
imported by the few humanitarian organizations
operating in Kurdistan for their own personal use.
As the peshmerga cruise across Kurdistan in new
pickup trucks and land cruisers -- all sans license
plates -- their authority is not questioned. The
political and security apparatuses are further
complicated by tribal loyalties that impede the
establishment of the rule of law.
Kamal Berzenji wrote in an article published by
kurdishmedia.com in December 2002: "The members of
the [Kurdish] security services...try to make a
business out of their powers by accusing and
arresting anybody whom they think they could
blackmail and extract money from." He says the
practice has its roots in Hussein's Ba'athist
regime, but was also practiced during the Kurdish
civil war in the 1990s. "One of the reasons [for
that war is] business -- and profit making by some
Kurdish warlords on both sides. Some of them grew
[into] millionaires by confiscating and stealing the
property of his fellow Kurdish brothers."
With no functioning judicial system in place, party
members and representatives go about their business
free from prosecution. In a conference paper
republished this month on kurdishmedia.com, Rebwar
Fatah identified three systems that can loosely
describe the judicial system in Kurdistan: the
civil, security, and tribal systems. "The judicial
system needs to be independent and free from any
external interference," he wrote. "The concept of
'rule of law' must be implemented."
U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld addressed the
issue of corruption during his visit to Baghdad this
month, telling newly elected officials that it must
be rooted out. And there have been reports of
across-the-board corruption within the interim
administration of Prime Minister Iyad Allawi. While
Baghdad remains the focus, Kurdistan runs the risk
of falling behind rather than leading the way in the
new Iraq.
www.rferl.org
Top |
® 