Obviously fearing defeat and a loss of power in the upcoming elections, the religious Shiite parties in collaboration with the Kurds made a really dumb move by reinterpreting the electoral law for the October referendum. It has raised a fury with the Sunnis, prompting the UN and U.S. to step up and ask the parties to undo the changes.

BAGHDAD — The United Nations has criticized last-minute changes Iraq’s Shiite-led government made to its electoral laws before the Oct. 15 constitutional referendum, and was trying yesterday to persuade legislators to reverse the amendments.

UN officials warned the Iraqis that the changes, which make it nearly impossible for Sunnis to defeat the constitution at the polls, violate international standards. Sunni leaders have threatened to boycott the vote as a result.

“Ultimately, this will be a sovereign decision by the Iraqis, and it’s up to the Iraqi National Assembly to decide on the appropriate electoral framework,” Stephane Dujarric, a spokesman for Secretary-General Kofi Annan, said at UN headquarters in New York. “That being said, it is our duty in our role in Iraq to point out when the process does not meet international standards.”

Privately, a senior U.S. official said Washington had strong reservations about the change. A Sunni boycott of the referendum would deeply undermine the legitimacy of a constitution the United States had hoped would unite Iraq’s disparate factions and erode support among its Sunni minority for the country’s bloody insurgency.

They reinterpreted the TAL charter with regards to what the term “voter” actually means, crazy as that sounds. In essense, approval of 50% of actual voters in all provinces will be enough to get the draft constitution made permanent. The change occurs in the rejection of it. Instead of it being 2/3 of actual voters for a rejection, it is now 2/3 of all registered voters. Which means it will be nearly impossible to defeat the charter, and it certainly hints at how the parties in power are hellbent on making sure they don’t get undercut. It means that those in power care more about power than allowing the people to decide their own destiny.

Omar has this to say about it:

I wasn’t worried at all when the final draft came with several articles I didn’t agree with since I thought my voice would count and could change things in either direction but now?
Now I feel like I’m facing a challenge of having my voice ignored and hijacked again and that is something I cannot accept.

These parties know that their time is up as soon as the Sunnis, liberals, and secularists get a much stronger hold in the December elections. That is, they will if the October referendum produces a YES vote, which should only happen under the condition that all voters are enfranchised. That’s why this reinterpretation of the law is ridiculous, falls well below international electoral standards, and is an obviously blatant attempt to ensure the constitution passes exactly as the powers-that-be want it to be passed. Which is probably to their advantage, but shows their lack of commitment to democracy over power. I hope it gets changed back, because at this point the Sunnis rightfully see it as an attempt to disenfranchise the NO vote. It certainly puts them on unfair grounds. This is one reason why I’m so delighted with the way the December elections are shaping up. Given a clean election, they’ll be out, and I can’t wait.

UPDATE: They backtracked, good.