Election office: Solid reasons for term limits

The presidential term limits in the Navajo Nation election code are as necessary today as they were when originally drafted in 1989, according to a legal brief filed on behalf of the Navajo Election Administration late Wednesday.

The brief was submitted to the Navajo Nation Supreme Court, and is the NEA's response to President Joe Shirley Jr.'s argument that the term limit should be abolished, allowing him to run for a third term as president.

The court is scheduled to hear oral arguments in the case Friday, June 9, at 10 a.m. in the Navajo Nation Museum auditorium.

The NEA notes that the two-term limit was adopted following the 1989 governmental crisis involving then chairman Peter MacDonald Sr., who was in his third term.

"The reason for the term limit was to address the concentration of power determined to be the central cause of the governmental crisis," states the brief, which was prepared by Scottsdale, Ariz., attorney Michael Upshaw. "As such, it is not arbitrary and is not simply a response to one person."

The limits are actually "reasonable public policy," and based on "strong and substantial public interest to implement checks and balances to avoid a repeat of such concentration of power," the brief states.

The NEA addresses Shirley's argument that the term limit - which only applies to the office of president - violates his civil rights by restricting him to run for public office.

"The reason for the term limit is based on a valid and substantial government interest to implement checks and balances among the branches of government," the NEA states.

Shirley's argument that the term limit was a reaction to the actions of one man do not reflect the entire picture, according to the brief. In a previous ruling, the Supreme Court stated that the tribe's current three-branch government was established to address "serious governmental malfeasance in order to benefit the Navajo people."

"The term limit is aimed at 'serious government malfeasance' and is not simply a response to one man's 'perceived wrongdoing,'" the NEA states.

Overall, there was consensus about the term limits, the agency asserts.

"In fact, the people were adamant that the statute be made more clear," the NEA states.

During deliberation, council minutes report that the public asked to change the language of the statute to state, "the president shall serve no more than two terms," when previously it stated, "the president may serve no more than two terms."

"The public had input in (the election code) amendments specifically including the term limit," the NEA states.

In addition, the election office states that Shirley's argument that Diné Fundamental Law should outweigh statutes overreaches the traditional law's intent.

"Under fundamental law voter's have a right to choose leaders of their choice and candidates have a fundamental law right to participate in the Navajo political system by running for office," the NEA states. "However, these rights are not absolute."

For instance, fundamental rights can be regulated as necessary for the election system to function, the NEA states.

Shirley also argued that the limits actually ensure the concentration of power, but within the council, which has no term limit laws. The NEA calls this argument baseless.

The council has several forms of checks and balances, according to the brief. The council is not one person and while in a group, delegates most often have varying positions on matters before them. Also, delegates do not have individual authority to appoint directors of government divisions or enterprises.

"Governmental power is exercised as a collective body," the NEA says of the council.

Back to top ^