The objectives of dialogue will help in identifying the various points of views, to research and survey the various views and scenarios available, and to find a compromise ground shared by all, according to the official spokesman for the National Dialogue Isa Abdul rahman.
In an exclusive interview with the Bahrain News Agency he said that after the unfortunate incidents, several key objectives of the National Dialogue emerged including the possibility to identify the exchanged views, with more tolerance, giving way to all without any party claiming a monopoly on truth, and create a new circumstance that allows to re-build communication bridges between all parties concerned, and strengthen what exists, and boosting strong of citizenship, and to demonstrate and embody the will to collective action, in order to reach a national consensus, as well as creating a mechanism for intellectual communicating on the dialogue’s issues, on the basis of “good faith” and to move towards the future with confidence and optimism based on a strong position.
Abdulrahman said several initiatives had been put forward for the dialogue among the participants, notably opening up to other points of view without restriction, with full transparency in proposing, and the desire to reach a common ground among everyone, in addition to benefitting from the experiences of the past and looking to the future.
He added that the aim of the National Dialogue is to reach a consensus on a wider range of issues of concern to the Bahraini people, and that the consensus agreement is the strongest possible agreement and has the highest opportunity to obtain the final approval before its implementation.
The spokesman for the National Dialogue, Isa Abdulrahman also spoke about the dialogue and the action mechanism in the National Dialogue during the following comprehensive interview: What are the objectives of the National Dialogue and what is the action mechanism at hand? One of the most important objectives of the National Dialogue is to reach a consensus among the participants in the dialogue on a range of issues of concern to the Bahraini people, and then raise the views to His Majesty King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa, to take the necessary steps, through the appropriate constitutional institutions.
And how will these views be reached? The participants in the National Dialogue will use a process of decision-making by consensus, as this process is effective and internationally recognised and is used parties to reach an agreement without resorting to a vote.
Through the process of building consensus, Bahrainis will identify issues, interests, and basic needs, and find their solutions or reach solutions to address them to the maximum extent possible.
Why consensus and not voting? The decision by consensus is considered as the most powerful form of agreement, even stronger than the vast majority voting; a decision by consensus addresses and meets the fundamental interests of the parties concerned, and achieves the broadest support for the results. Consensus resolution is an agreement that all parties concerned can support or accept or live with, or at the very least, will not oppose.
It meets enough needs and fundamental interests so that an acceptable agreement by the parties can be reached. Consensus does not require unanimity; the decision allows for disparity in opinions between the parties on the issues and in the extent of approval or support of the components of the agreement, however, they agree and move forward.
A consensus agreement is the best agreement between the parties; it is an agreement they can accept and “live with.”
What are the criteria for consensus? For consensus to be real and achieve its goals, several criteria must be met, such as including representatives from all segments and sectors of society in Bahrain, and to adopt a base to build on what has been agreed upon, and dialogue over the differences, and obtain a consensus within the circle of the public interest of the Bahraini people, and not within the narrow interests of interlocutors that takes away its legitimacy.
In addition, a holistic approach must be followed in the dialogue, away from the partial analysis that is based on intolerance of other’s opinions and narrow-mindedness, in order to bridge distances between the interlocutors towards devising an interpretation or a clause that is agreed upon by all parties.
Consensus criteria also includes the aim for a national consensus to achieve peaceful coexistence between the components of the Bahraini people in the long term, and to protect the human rights of its members to and resort to dialogue as a consistent self- mechanism to resolve differences.
What are your expectations for consensus? As I mentioned, the aim of the National Dialogue is to reach a consensus on a wider range of issues of concern to the Bahraini people, and the consensual agreement is the strongest possible agreement and has the highest opportunity to obtain the final approval before its implementation.
But it may not be possible to reach consensus on all issues under discussion, an in light of this possibility, it is proposed that the Committee consider the possibility of accepting more than one level of agreement, with consensus being sought at first.
What are the levels of agreement? There are three anticipated levels which are full consensus, broad support, with some exceptions, and the existence of some variations. What is meant by “full consensus” here is an agreement that all parties concerned can support or accept or live with, or at least do not oppose.
The “broad support, with some exceptions,” in this case would have the general support for the agreement with the existence of differences of opinion among some, and when this happens, those with a dissenting opinion can do the following:
1. Consensus on not blocking the decision reached by the full Committee
2. Consensus on accepting the view of the majority of participants, but they request their reservations and observations be recognized.
3. Consensus on accepting the view of the majority of participants, but demand to have their observations and reservations included in a written report.
In the case of “the existence of some differences,” which means the parties still have to reach an agreement, they can do the following:
1. Refer the matter or issues remaining in dispute to a smaller team, to work on the formulation of solutions that are acceptable to all parties.
2. To identify topics and interests that are not addressed and to find acceptable solutions for them.
3. To identify specific areas of differences and explain the reasons behind this disparity.
4. To continue to put forward possible solutions to address points of contention.
5. To identify possible options for agreement that can meet the different interests, but not fully.