MONGABAY.COM
Mongabay.com seeks to raise interest in and appreciation of wild lands and wildlife, while examining the impact of emerging trends in climate, technology, economics, and finance on conservation and development (more)
WEEKLY NEWSLETTER
|
|
Laos
Index
On August 14, 1991, sixteen years after the
establishment of
the LPDR, the Supreme People's Assembly (SPA), the
country's
highest legislative organ, adopted a constitution.
Although the SPA
had been charged with drafting a constitution in 1975, the
task had
low priority. It was not until the Third Party Congress
that party
Secretary General Kaysone stated that the LPRP should
"urgently
undertake the major task...of preparing a socialist
constitution at
an early date." Laotian press reports subsequently
revealed that a
constitutional drafting committee was working informally
under the
chairmanship of Politburo member Sisomphone Lovansai, a
specialist
in party organization, with the help of East German
advisers.
Despite the proclaimed urgency of the task, only on May
22, 1984,
did the SPA Standing Committee formalize the appointment
of
Sisomphone to head a fifteen-person drafting committee.
Although the political institutions had functioned
without a
written constitution for fifteen years, the lack of a
constitution
created serious drawbacks for the country. International
development agencies were reluctant to invest in Laos
given the
absence of a fixed, knowable law. Amnesty International,
in a 1985
report on Laos, asserted that without a constitution or
published
penal and criminal codes, citizens were "effectively
denied proper
legal guarantees of their internationally recognized human
rights."
Even the party newspaper, Xieng Pasason (Voice of
the
People), commenting in June 1990 on the absence of a
constitution
and a general body of laws, acknowledged that "having no
laws is...
a source of injustice and violation, thus leading to a
breakdown of
social order and peace, the breeding of anarchy, and the
lack of
democracy."
Reasons for the leisurely pace of constitution
drafting,
unusually slow even for the plodding bureaucracy, were not
readily
apparent. Vietnam had adopted a revised constitution in
1980 and
Cambodia in 1981, only two years after the ouster of the
Khmer
Rouge. According to some reports, progress in Laos had
been blocked
by differences within the Politburo over certain
substantive
clauses. Perhaps most important, the party leadership,
accustomed
to rule without question, may have assigned a low priority
to
producing a document that might eventually lead to
challenging
their authority, despite rhetoric to the contrary.
Further, the
public seemed not to care.
After the new SPA was elected in March 1989, it
formally
appointed a seventeen-member constitutional drafting
committee. The
National Radio of Laos reported that the drafting
committee was
working "under the close supervision of the Political
Bureau and
the Secretariat of the Party Central Committee." Six
members of the
drafting committee were members of the Central Committee;
two of
these members also served on the SPA, which also had six
members on
the drafting committee.
In April 1990, after securing approval of its document
from the
LPRP Politburo and the Secretariat, the SPA finally made
public the
draft constitution. With its publication, the party
Central
Committee issued Directive Number 21, on April 30, 1990,
calling
for discussion of the draft, first among party and
government
officials and then among the public. The discussions,
although
orchestrated by party cadres, did not always please party
authorities. An LPRP spokesman released a memo complaining
that
"people in many major towns" had dwelled too much on what
the
constitution had to say about the organization of the
state. In
June a member of the Central Committee cautioned against
demonstrations to "demand a multiparty system" and warned
that
demonstrators would be arrested. Competing parties would
not be
tolerated, he asserted, adding that "our multi-ethnic Lao
people
have remained faithfully under the leadership of the
LPRP." In a
later pronouncement, he said that "the Party has proved to
the
people in the last 35 years that it is the only party that
can take
care of them" and he lectured that "too many parties
invite
division." A Central Committee directive, dated June 14,
1990,
hinted at the quality of the public discussion, noting
that "in
many cases where people were convoked to a meeting, they
were
simply given question and answer sheets to study."
However, not all discussions of the draft constitution
were
perfunctory. Undoubtedly inspired by the examples of
Eastern Europe
and the Soviet Union--where the monopoly of power by
communist
parties had crumbled--a group of some forty government
officials
and intellectuals began criticizing the country's
one-party system
in a series of letters and meetings in April 1990.
Organized in the
unofficial "Social Democratic Club," the group called for
a
multiparty system in Laos. One member of the group, an
assistant to
the minister of science and technology, submitted a letter
of
resignation to Prime Minister Kaysone in which he labeled
Laos a
"communist monarchy" and a "dynasty of the Politburo"
declaring
that the country should "change into a multi-party system
in order
to bring democracy, freedom and prosperity to the people."
Criticism of the draft document gathered strength in
the
succeeding months; Laotian students in Paris, Prague, and
Warsaw
joined in the call for free elections. Criticism broadened
as a
group of young, educated party cadres associated with
nonparty
bureaucrats--many educated in France and Canada--targeted
veteran
party leaders. These groups charged that the new policies
of the
old guard were fostering corruption and increased social
and
economic inequality. It was not until October 1990 that
the
government finally cracked down on these calls for
democratic
reforms, with the arrest of several protesters, including
a former
vice minister in the State Planning Commission and a
director in
the Ministry of Justice who were sentenced to long prison
terms in
Houaphan.
Thus, although the constitution purports to guarantee
freedom
of speech and petition and its framers give lip service to
the
desirability of public discussion, the ruling party sent a
clear
message with these arrests that it will not tolerate
challenges to
its exclusive exercise of power. Veteran party leaders
were clearly
more impressed by the political models of Vietnam and
China than by
the examples of Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union.
Although
willing to experiment with economic liberalization, party
leaders
seemed determined to retain political domination--if they
could--
through a Leninist-style party.
Data as of July 1994
View of the Mekong River from Phousi courtyard, Louangphrabang
Courtesy Gina Merris
Development of the Constitution
On August 14, 1991, sixteen years after the
establishment of
the LPDR, the Supreme People's Assembly (SPA), the
country's
highest legislative organ, adopted a constitution.
Although the SPA
had been charged with drafting a constitution in 1975, the
task had
low priority. It was not until the Third Party Congress
that party
Secretary General Kaysone stated that the LPRP should
"urgently
undertake the major task...of preparing a socialist
constitution at
an early date." Laotian press reports subsequently
revealed that a
constitutional drafting committee was working informally
under the
chairmanship of Politburo member Sisomphone Lovansai, a
specialist
in party organization, with the help of East German
advisers.
Despite the proclaimed urgency of the task, only on May
22, 1984,
did the SPA Standing Committee formalize the appointment
of
Sisomphone to head a fifteen-person drafting committee.
Although the political institutions had functioned
without a
written constitution for fifteen years, the lack of a
constitution
created serious drawbacks for the country. International
development agencies were reluctant to invest in Laos
given the
absence of a fixed, knowable law. Amnesty International,
in a 1985
report on Laos, asserted that without a constitution or
published
penal and criminal codes, citizens were "effectively
denied proper
legal guarantees of their internationally recognized human
rights."
Even the party newspaper, Xieng Pasason (Voice of
the
People), commenting in June 1990 on the absence of a
constitution
and a general body of laws, acknowledged that "having no
laws is...
a source of injustice and violation, thus leading to a
breakdown of
social order and peace, the breeding of anarchy, and the
lack of
democracy."
Reasons for the leisurely pace of constitution
drafting,
unusually slow even for the plodding bureaucracy, were not
readily
apparent. Vietnam had adopted a revised constitution in
1980 and
Cambodia in 1981, only two years after the ouster of the
Khmer
Rouge. According to some reports, progress in Laos had
been blocked
by differences within the Politburo over certain
substantive
clauses. Perhaps most important, the party leadership,
accustomed
to rule without question, may have assigned a low priority
to
producing a document that might eventually lead to
challenging
their authority, despite rhetoric to the contrary.
Further, the
public seemed not to care.
After the new SPA was elected in March 1989, it
formally
appointed a seventeen-member constitutional drafting
committee. The
National Radio of Laos reported that the drafting
committee was
working "under the close supervision of the Political
Bureau and
the Secretariat of the Party Central Committee." Six
members of the
drafting committee were members of the Central Committee;
two of
these members also served on the SPA, which also had six
members on
the drafting committee.
In April 1990, after securing approval of its document
from the
LPRP Politburo and the Secretariat, the SPA finally made
public the
draft constitution. With its publication, the party
Central
Committee issued Directive Number 21, on April 30, 1990,
calling
for discussion of the draft, first among party and
government
officials and then among the public. The discussions,
although
orchestrated by party cadres, did not always please party
authorities. An LPRP spokesman released a memo complaining
that
"people in many major towns" had dwelled too much on what
the
constitution had to say about the organization of the
state. In
June a member of the Central Committee cautioned against
demonstrations to "demand a multiparty system" and warned
that
demonstrators would be arrested. Competing parties would
not be
tolerated, he asserted, adding that "our multi-ethnic Lao
people
have remained faithfully under the leadership of the
LPRP." In a
later pronouncement, he said that "the Party has proved to
the
people in the last 35 years that it is the only party that
can take
care of them" and he lectured that "too many parties
invite
division." A Central Committee directive, dated June 14,
1990,
hinted at the quality of the public discussion, noting
that "in
many cases where people were convoked to a meeting, they
were
simply given question and answer sheets to study."
However, not all discussions of the draft constitution
were
perfunctory. Undoubtedly inspired by the examples of
Eastern Europe
and the Soviet Union--where the monopoly of power by
communist
parties had crumbled--a group of some forty government
officials
and intellectuals began criticizing the country's
one-party system
in a series of letters and meetings in April 1990.
Organized in the
unofficial "Social Democratic Club," the group called for
a
multiparty system in Laos. One member of the group, an
assistant to
the minister of science and technology, submitted a letter
of
resignation to Prime Minister Kaysone in which he labeled
Laos a
"communist monarchy" and a "dynasty of the Politburo"
declaring
that the country should "change into a multi-party system
in order
to bring democracy, freedom and prosperity to the people."
Criticism of the draft document gathered strength in
the
succeeding months; Laotian students in Paris, Prague, and
Warsaw
joined in the call for free elections. Criticism broadened
as a
group of young, educated party cadres associated with
nonparty
bureaucrats--many educated in France and Canada--targeted
veteran
party leaders. These groups charged that the new policies
of the
old guard were fostering corruption and increased social
and
economic inequality. It was not until October 1990 that
the
government finally cracked down on these calls for
democratic
reforms, with the arrest of several protesters, including
a former
vice minister in the State Planning Commission and a
director in
the Ministry of Justice who were sentenced to long prison
terms in
Houaphan.
Thus, although the constitution purports to guarantee
freedom
of speech and petition and its framers give lip service to
the
desirability of public discussion, the ruling party sent a
clear
message with these arrests that it will not tolerate
challenges to
its exclusive exercise of power. Veteran party leaders
were clearly
more impressed by the political models of Vietnam and
China than by
the examples of Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union.
Although
willing to experiment with economic liberalization, party
leaders
seemed determined to retain political domination--if they
could--
through a Leninist-style party.
Data as of July 1994
|
|