At this very moment a heated discussion is being led in the Bulgarian Parliament on changes of the election law. It regulates how the next EP and Bulgarian Parliament elections are going to be done and how the votes will be counted. These attempted changes are just part of the series of moves that the current government (that also has the majority in the Parliament) has undertaken in order to insure its power for the next four years.
The first changes, seemingly unrelated to the elections, were proposed by the Internal Ministry. They allowed the police to track all communications (phone, sms, e-mail, Internet traffic and p2p connections) without a court order or public oversight. That proposal dropped out from an earlier law change. Back then, they decided that the police would have that right only in cases of extreme violence, terrorism and high-risk crimes. Despite a ruling of the supreme court, that unlimited surveillance is unlawful, the Internal Ministry attempted to pass that proposal four times. Luckily, it was finally rejected a few days ago, which came as a wild surprise even to the biggest optimists among the human rights activists. Many saw in that law an effort to legalize the current illegal surveillance over many thousands of people that the government has admitted. We also see a big risk for democracy and fairness of the upcoming elections, as one of the motivations for the surveillance was to supposedly stop the voter trade.
Another change, which is being voted in the Bulgarian Parliament at the moment, is the raise of the voting barrier for coalitions from 4 to 8%. That means that if two parties form a coalition for the elections, they will have to get at least 8% of the votes in order to get any seats in the EP ot in our Parliament. For every other party that joins the coalition, the barrier raises with one percent. Thus we have the paradox that if 95 parties join forces, they would need 101% of the voters in order to get any seats in the European Parliament (we have more than 300 registered parties). Many believe that that measure is designed to lower the chances of the right parties at the elections, which are quite fractured at the moment.
A further measure is partial inclusion of a majority element in the elections. This means that 13% of the MPs are going to be elected by a majority vote as opposed to the proportional vote for the rest. It is however not clear how exactly that will happen. Different text in the law suggest paradoxes and wrongful balance of votes in case an elected official decides to quit or become a minister in the next government. It is also not clear how will that work out in the EP elections. The ruling coalition claims that these changes come as an answer to the public call for majority elections, but the opposition points out that the original idea is transformed into half baked rules that are designed to turn the original votes of the people in favor of the current rulers.
The results of the Bulgarian EP elections
Bulgarian Politics 101
What’s even worse is that almost no one of the votes has a good understanding of that new proposed system and how they should vote. These last minute changes have not been discussed publicly and are being introduced in the legislation process in between voting sessions in the Parliament. I think that this is unacceptable considering the importance of altering the very philosophy of the election process. With only two months to go, the public is confused not only about the way they should go, but how they should support their party. Even if these and other proposals are not passed, the election campaign will inevitability be altered from EP issues and Bulgaria’s place in the EU to such petty scandals as election rules and garbage problems in the capital. This is what we see know - media analysts warn that EP elections news and analysis form only a few percent of the media attention. Those few articles are usually in the context of the above mentioned scandals and law proposals.
(85 votes, average: 4.20 out of 5)
Loading ...
The proposals for 8% barrier for coalitions and 13% majority seats in the next elections were just passed. Most MPs from the opposition agree that this is a direct attack against the right parties.
In other news - the court denied registration of one of the biggest right party - SDS. The reasons include that the internal vote was illegal and not typical to the Bulgarian political traditions. The elected leader of SDS claims that the wording of the court rejection points to political motivations with roots in the left-wing government.
a similar provision exists in the romanian law, for both general and european elections. a threshold of 5% exists is imposed in the case of parties running by themselves in elections. a coalition of 2 parties needs to pass an 8% threshold. 3 parties need to pass a 10% threshold and 1% is added from the 4th party onwards.
i can’t say that such a provision is something dangerous in itself, but i agree that the way they were adopted is quite problematic.
and how did they decide that precisely 13% of the seats should be elected through majority voting? why not 15, 20, 10%?
The number of majority candidates elected in single-member districts is stipulated by the current number of electoral districts - 31. Since the number of MPs is 240, the other 209 will be elected under the current proportional system. 31/240 = 12,91%. Although not even in size and population each district will elect one candidate. That actually violates the Bulgarian constitution which says that the votes of the citizens are equal. Now, a district with population half a million will elect one majority MP and one with just 100,000 - again one MP.
@George - while the law may make sense in the general scheme of things, the way and timing that it was introduces suggests that it is engineered for a specific purpose. The only parties that will suffer from it are SDS and DSB, which just happen for announce their election coalition a few weeks before this law was introduced. Pure coincidence - I don’t think so. I am not in favor of those two parties, but they should be given an even chance. Furthermore, the more popular party - SDS has been denied registration of its now board and head. This creates vacuum and an internal political chaos. Even party members of the rival left party BSP state that the court ruling is most probably dictated by political motives and is immoral.
@Hristo - This is a good explanation. The bigger problem however comes from the fact that the voters will have to get used to that new rule in the following few months, instead of discussing issues. Furthermore it is not quite clear what would happen if a majority candidate decides to become a minister. Some say that the next in line from the proportional lists will take his place, which totally inverts the votes of the people.
You can always introduce an undemocratic measure through law, especially if you have the backing of the judiciary; but that’s another story.
George, you are right - it is not that high thresholds for coalitions are bad themselves; it is the manner and purpose of the introduced measure that is disturbing. This measure has also been accompanied by malevolent changes in media law, dubious media acquisitions, and a court battle for the registration of the leadership of a political party.
This context leads me to believe that an assault on fair election principles: http://aceproject.org/ace-en/topics/ei/ei20
You can always introduce an undemocratic measure through law, especially if you have the backing of the judiciary; but that’s another story.
George, you are right - it is not that high thresholds for coalitions are bad themselves; it is the manner and purpose of the introduced measure that is disturbing. This measure has also been accompanied by malevolent changes in media law, dubious media acquisitions, and a court battle for the registration of the leadership of a political party.
This context leads me to believe that an assault on fair election principles is being made: http://aceproject.org/ace-en/topics/ei/ei20
@Vihar - you are right. It is not about how the elections are led anymore, it’s how the public is manipulated and the hands of the other parties are bent. 15 years ago there used to be a popular phrase “When will we reach them” (regarding to the EU and US in terms of standards, pay, democracy, ets.). I think we already did in the field of politics. The game has been refined to such a level that it’s getting hard to clearly recognize who is honest and who is not. Further more we are beginning to speak more and more about issues and less about accusations of criminal connections and communist past. Still we have a lot of these illegal practices that the court disregards due to political connections. I think that will improve with time. As I always said, it’s hard to accomplish in 20 years what others have done in more than 60.
@Bulgarian bloggers - I see your point(s) and it’s obviously a manipulative measure. But why was it introduced for European elections, when the stakes are not as high as in internal elections? Or are they?
I would say that this kind of arbitrary internal measures could be prevented through the introduction of a single electoral system at the level of the entire EU, which is what I’m proposing in all my posts this month.
Last year similar manipulative measures were introduced through electoral reform. Back then, PD-L (the predident’s party) was the big favorite for the upcoming elections, but PNL and PSD held an underground majority in Parliament. Together with the new electoral law, new single member districts had to be drawn in each county. 4 months after the elections, the PNL and PSD guys who were in charge of electoral reform in their parties recognized that the new districts were drawn in a way that would favor their parties as much as possible and disadvantage PD-L. It didn’t work out as planned though, cause PSD and PD-L are together in government now and PNL is in opposition.
@George - I think that the EU elections are perceived as an exercise before the internal elections as well as a powerful tool in the campaign. The party that manages to gather the most MEPs can later announce itself as the most popular party and will have an easier campaign. This is why all parties are very careful about what predictions they make and when they announce their candidates.
Secondly, the ruling coalition has caused a lot of problems with regard to the EU. Any real dicussion about the EP and the EU issues will go over those failures in the reforms and lost funds. The last thing they want is people focusing on those internal issues and so they distract the public with wild media stunts and laws that could never become active, because of court ruling or a presidents veto.
George, they aim at the National Assembly (Parliament) elections, but I expect a string of irregularities for the EP elections as well.
We will see how this will play out.
@Vihar - like I said the EP elections will be a test. The bulgarian public does not perceve the EP as an important institution or rather they don’t know much about its role. Thus they know even less about their own participation in the process. So the politicians play those elections as if they are a mirror of the internal politics and issue balance. I don’t think it’s much different in other countries.
The parliament has approved new measures for the election procedures. The parties have started registering for the EP elections. The candidates should be known by the middle of May. My hopes are that I will be able to get my hands on some internal info before that.
[...] Опасни промени в последния момент в избирателния зако
[...] Опасни промени в последния момент в избирателния зако
Guys,
I am political science univesity student and very interested in the recent changes in the Bulgarian Election Law. However, I cannot find it in English! Is anyone kind enough to send me a link -if any- with the recently amended law?
I sent you an email just now with some info.