We are nearing elections to the Shura (Advisory) Council, which will be held in the second half of 2013, as the Emir H H Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani stated at the opening of the session of the Council.
It is difficult to find someone like the Emir and his royal family among the rulers and regimes of the Arab world.
When he joins our private gatherings, he does not differentiate himself from the rest of us despite being entitled to do so. He sits on the same seat as we do, eats the same food, smokes as we do and speaks to everyone in the same manner.
In our discussions, as we do among ourselves, we may disagree with him and some of us may support his ideas while others may oppose them, but he never minds that, and this is something rare in leaders here. This makes the Emir and his family a unique Qatari family, one that is the main component of the Qatari society and has never been tyrannical or autocratic in its long history.
While orthodox views were deeply rooted in the society in the pre-oil era, this family was sharing opinions with people even at that time. I can even say that there are more opinionated families now than in the past.
Traditionally, almost every Qatari house has a meeting space (majlis) which is like a mini parliament where people of the neighbourhood get together and discuss various issues in a simple and spontaneous manner. This shows that consultation (shura) and open discussion are deeply rooted in Qatari society.
Perhaps the tribal meeting held in Al Wakra in the 19th century to negotiate with the British is best proof of the fact that consultation is an original feature of Qatari society.
Consultation eases one’s burden of responsibility when one shares the burden with others.
“If you agree on an opinion, I will not disagree with that” said the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) to his companions Abu Bakr and Omar, and this showed his respect for the majority’s opinion.
When citizens feel that they are part of the decision-making process in their country, it guarantees proper implementation of decisions. When one is entrusted with executing the decisions, one will know that the majority are behind the decision and monitoring him, and one will be accountable to them.
Let me give an example of this, the Hamad International Airport, which — apart from issues related to its location and cost — was originally expected to be inaugurated on December 12, 2012.
Nobody can dispute the leader’s decision here, and others needed to comply with it. But what happed was that the project was not ready for inauguration.
I think if the project and the date had been discussed with the public, the result would have been different.
There is a simple but logical principle in project management science that explains what happened in the case of the new airport. It says: “If a project is not meeting interim deadlines, it is highly likely not to meet the final deadline (regardless of what your manager tells you)”.
This means that our country and its leadership are negatively affected by the absence of public participation. This lack of participation creates a bad impression about our country abroad.
In the airport project, there was no third party monitoring it. I think the whole thing would have been very different if the public was involved in monitoring the project’s implementation. The list of projects that failed to meet their deadline is endless, and this is negatively affecting the leadership and the nation.
Some people hold the view that public participation trims the power of the authorities and hinders development. By saying this they want to fill our minds with fear about empowerment of the public through participation, and such ideas lead to our projects not being accomplished on time.
Other like-minded people are inimical to another feature of democracy, namely the parliament. Those opposing the idea of having a parliament are harming the stability of our country by wanting to do away with a basic pillar of the constitution approved by the citizens. Showing disrespect to one article of the constitution is disrespect to all the provisions of law, and it is just a matter of time before such people show disrespect to the other articles of the statute and the nation’s will.
The Qatari society in its entirety — the leadership and the people -- is one whole and integrated fabric that is indivisible and inseparable. It is cohesive. But this does not obviate the need for consultation. We only need citizens to be part of the decision-making process. This is what we hope for. I expect this to happen during the second half of this year under the leadership of our Emir, who does not balk at mixing with ordinary Qataris.
