Colombia peace deal

Duffy the Vampire Slayer

Yesterday the Colombian government and FARC signed a peace agreement to put an end to over 50 years of war that has killed over a quarter of a million people and left 6 million internally displaced.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-37477202

It looks likely that this will pass the plebiscite on Sunday, although a lot of people on the Colombian right (Including the last president) aren't happy about it at all.

Well that didn't last long. Colombians have rejected the outcome by a margin of 54,000 votes out of 13 million votes cast.

The peace agreement was apparently modeled in part on the Good Friday Agreement, and I suspect the outcome of this referendum will trace the model of the Lisbon and Nice referenda in Ireland: wrong answer, vote again.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/02/colombia-referendum-rejects-peace-deal-with-farc

Colombians have rejected a peace deal to end 52 years of war with Farc guerrillas, throwing the country into confusion about its future.

With counting completed from 98.98% of polling stations, the no vote led by 50.2% to 49.8%, a difference of fewer than 54,000 votes out of almost 13 million cast. Turnout was low, with less than 38% of the electorate casting a vote.

Overheal

well thats tight enough to warrant a recount at least

Brian?

Neither FARC nor the Colombian government wish to restart hostilities, which is positive. I imagine there'll be a slight tweak to the agreement and a re run of the referendum.

The low turn out was partly due to the assumption it would pass.

alastair

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Well that didn't last long. Colombians have rejected the outcome by a margin of 54,000 votes out of 13 million votes cast.

The peace agreement was apparently modeled in part on the Good Friday Agreement, and I suspect the outcome of this referendum will trace the model of the Lisbon and Nice referenda in Ireland: wrong answer, vote again.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/02/colombia-referendum-rejects-peace-deal-with-farc

Nothing wrong with reframing the question and re-submitting it to referendum. Would do the UK the power of good too.

Duffy the Vampire Slayer

A hurricane on the coast (A yes stronghold) might be responsible for some of that low turnout. Even in Bogotá the weather was awful on Sunday and we're hundreds of miles from the sea.

Most of the areas actually affected by the war voted 'yes'.

oscarBravo

I saw some reporting that echoed the post-Brexit vote too: "I voted no because I thought yes would win."

Wanderer78

You can't beat another 'democratic' revote!

Wanderer78

Wanderer78 wrote: »

You can't beat another 'democratic' revote!

Aye, divorce should still be illegal in Ireland and there should never been another vote on anything to do with abortion.

Overheal

Wanderer78 wrote: »

You can't beat another 'democratic' revote!

Most software has this basic check. "ya sure you want to close me bud?"

Again, seems like enough extenuating factors to revote or recount.

alastair

alastair wrote: »

Nothing wrong with reframing the question and re-submitting it to referendum. Would do the UK the power of good too.

Overheal wrote: »

Most software has this basic check. "ya sure you want to close me bud?"

Again, seems like enough extenuating factors to revote or recount.

To say there's "nothing wrong" (nothing, really?) with a revote, or to compare repeat votes to software checks is pretty disingenuous.

Repeat votes tend to favour those with the deepest pockets. That means governments, with their huge supply of resources. If you can just repeat a referendum, the volunteers and activists running a 'private sector campaign', so to speak, are eventually going to run out of resources. What's the point of donating money to a dead cert?

Asking for a repeat donation to a repeat referendum is sometimes as futile as taking a cigarette lighter to a twenty-quid note before the donor's eyes, and asking for a new note.

Libertas were finacially decimated after the first Lisbon referendum, they didn't have the resources to participate in the second campaign. You and I might be glad to be rid of Libertas, as a political party, from the Irish political scene, but their absence from the second campaign is an example of what can happen when a Government unilaterally decides to repeat a referendum whose outcome it disapproves of.

I'm not necessarily saying this was the wrong decision. But you cannot say there's absolutely "nothing" wrong with it, or compare to a process that incurs zero cost and effort, like clicking on an icon in front of you.

There are times when a repeat referendum can be justified, maybe a decade on, as new activists and organisations emerge, and the public mood changes; but not within a year or so.

alastair

The Lisbon vote was neither unilaterally decided on by the government, nor was it on the same treaty wording. Big pockets are of little use without a convincing argument to go with them. I fail to see why repeated votes pose no problem for elections, but seemingly are undemocratic when it comes to referenda. They're not. Clearly the electoral mood had changed in the year and a half between the the two a Lisbon votes.

KingBrian2

They made a right mess out of that peace.

micosoft

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

To say there's "nothing wrong" (nothing, really?) with a revote, or to compare repeat votes to software checks is pretty disingenuous.

Repeat votes tend to favour those with the deepest pockets. That means governments, with their huge supply of resources. If you can just repeat a referendum, the volunteers and activists running a 'private sector campaign', so to speak, are eventually going to run out of resources. What's the point of donating money to a dead cert?

It would be better stated that repeat votes favor the large parties. That is a good thing as it means that the discourse is dominated by parties and movements with a democratic mandate. I understand that you would prefer private money to buy referendums much like the Brexit referendum but I quite like knowing that the parties with resources in this country have a democratic backing and not shady funding sources like "Liberatas"

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Asking for a repeat donation to a repeat referendum is sometimes as futile as taking a cigarette lighter to a twenty-quid note before the donor's eyes, and asking for a new note.
Libertas were finacially decimated after the first Lisbon referendum, they didn't have the resources to participate in the second campaign. You and I might be glad to be rid of Libertas, as a political party, from the Irish political scene, but their absence from the second campaign is an example of what can happen when a Government unilaterally decides to repeat a referendum whose outcome it disapproves of.

Good. When the majority of democratically elected parties disagree with a referendum result it usually means the issue was too complex to be put to a referendum and typically the campaigning was hijacked by populists who themselves have no support. Libertas disappeared because they had no electoral support.It's notable that not only did Libertas lose every seat they contested, they also lost Sinnotts seat who transferred to them. An overwhelming rejection of a pretty nasty bunch of people with many ulterior motives (anti immigration, anti womans rights, pro external interests).

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

I'm not necessarily saying this was the wrong decision. But you cannot say there's absolutely "nothing" wrong with it, or compare to a process that incurs zero cost and effort, like clicking on an icon in front of you.

There are times when a repeat referendum can be justified, maybe a decade on, as new activists and organisations emerge, and the public mood changes; but not within a year or so.

There is nothing wrong with it. If the electorate don't want a referendum rerun they should elect a government whose policy supports their preferred position. It's that simple. I for one don't want a country where decisions are made based on money and/or populist slogans like "No to EU Conscription".

micosoft

micosoft wrote: »

It would be better stated that repeat votes favor the large parties.

No. Your statement is true, but if I intended to say that, or if it were better to say that, then I'd have said it.

A repeat referendum favours the Government above all, because the head of Government usually commands the largest political party, and the Government occupies the civil service, with its vast resources for research, communication and, its workers.

It is true that large opposition parties also have a benefit over private organisations, but only insofar as any opposition party opposes the referendum result.

An opposition party receives less state supports almost by definition, and has a much diminished access to the civil service and other machinery of state.

A binding constitutional referendum is a statement of the sovereignty of the People. Abusing that sovereignty by repeating a referendum without justification is an attack on sovereignty.

It is a mistake to assert that the Government's and the largest parties' opinions are necessarily in the interests of the public, or in accordance with the public's preferences. As numerous referenda have shown. There was a time when the Government wanted to remove a real & substantial threat of suicide as a justification for abortion, and was wisely defeated on that point, albeit very narrowly.

I suppose you'd be hear crying that it was a victory for democracy if the women's liberation organisations (as they were then known) couldn't afford to participate in a hypothetical repeat referendum, and the Government won the second time around?

When the majority of democratically elected parties disagree with a referendum result it usually means the issue was too complex to be put to a referendum and typically the campaigning was hijacked by populists who themselves have no support.

The last line is an oxymoron. What were you thinking??

I am not opposed to tyranny per se, as per my username, but that's too ridiculous a statement to go alone with, even for me. Such a destitute attitude, if it were to find any shelter in Irish politics, would set at nought the very concept of democracy and sovereignty, since any undesirable referendum result could be dismissed as the product of ignorance. I suppose you think yourself highly enlightened!

Duffy the Vampire Slayer

Santos won the Nobel Peace Prize, much to the disgust of many in Colombia.