The topic of how to vote - electronically or on paper, is a strong one politically exploited, Vanya Nusheva from "Transparency without borders" told BNR.
"It is not the problems in the technology, not the problems in the software or in the machines that are the premise to provoke discussion, but rather the political attitudes - the interpretations of the political leaders, which are guided mainly by whether electronic or paper voting would enabled their voters to participate more effectively in the electoral process".
According to her, the many statements on the subject have the opposite effect and make people have doubts about the electoral process:
"Especially when institutions undertake some actions, they must communicate various topics very well and professionally, because when a problem is overexposed too much, then instead of an effect, a defect in communication starts to occur.
In her words, the problem is that the commitments regarding the electoral process are scattered to different institutions. In order to carry out an activity, several institutions are included in it, Nusheva explained and added that this is how everyone tries to transfer the "hot potato" to the other. According to her, this is a problem of legislation.
"Things are relatively clear. The CEC is the institution that must determine all parameters of all materials, determine the necessary actions of the participants and others to assist it when it does not have the necessary administrative, institutional or technical capacity".
In the show "Above all" the expert also noted that with so many elections that have taken place so far, we have no information on whether an examination has been made of the quality of the different types of papers that have been used. The situation is the same with other parameters of materials in the election process, she added.
"The institutions are so stuck in small details that instead of trying to give more clarity about what is happening and have more confidence, it seems that we are increasingly losing confidence in whether the election will be well organized process. Therefore, it is important that the CEC communicates very well all these actions it takes and gives the necessary information, and also has an analysis of what the deficits from previous elections are due to. If we don't have an analysis, political players start speculating about the causes of one or another technical problem", Vanya Nusheva expressed her opinion.
She also commented on the case with the registration of the two DPSs: "We see how problematic the decision of the Supreme Court is, and only if it is extrapolated to other actions of the CEC and other decisions of the Supreme Court and the regional courts - we see what new problems and new questionnaires will open. Here is the big question about what the CEC's powers are - to what extent does it have the power to formulate even more specific details of the organization of the election process or should it mechanically copy the provisions of the Election Code in its decisions and documents.
The CEC must comply with the Electoral Code, but it gives it the authority to regulate specific details that cannot be determined by a single law, the expert specified.
"We have yet to see how the practice will be enforced regarding the registration of parties and coalitions for the next elections. There should be an explicit clear mention in the Electoral Code of how to proceed, because we see that this problem in the parties has become an extremely serious problem facing the CEC, which was in circular defense within the first day.
Regarding the incident with the two factions of the DPS, the CEC tried to act impartially, which was not at all easy, Nusheva commented and added, however, that the way she communicated was problematic. According to her, the CEC should have the authority to regulate more specific details of the organization of the election process, when they are not included in the Election Code.
The first weak spot in the whole process will be the determination of the composition of the sectional election commissions by the regional commissions, Nusheva believes and predicts:
"It is likely that no agreement will be reached again and all decisions will be transferred down the chain to the RIC, subsequently to the CEC, to the district administrative courts. The tension between the members of the SIC is also a contender for advocates of the two factions in the disputing party - it is obviously a factor that will greatly influence".
She reminded that the influence of the corporate, bought and controlled vote should not be excluded, which will be used as a factor to mobilize support that sociologists cannot capture.