Are we playing politics in the parliament, or do we have a crisis of democracy. Is it about the state at all, or is the question based on who is the most in the National Assembly. Are there any chances for a cabinet… The political scientist Prof. Milena Stefanova.
- Prof. Stefanova, 35 years later, how distorted is democracy in Bulgaria?
- The crisis of the party system has a significant impact on the functioning of state institutions. It is bad that this crisis, already in its 4th year, does not allow the formation of a stable majority in the National Assembly, which would issue a regular government. We did all sorts of experiments – rotations, assemblies, but it doesn't work. Democracy rests on stable parties, systematic political players and leaders. Moreover, the foundation of democracy is free, equal and fair elections. After the 7 elections in a row within 4 years for citizens' representatives in the parliament, things have completely changed. Always during these 34 years – the first elections since 1989. were on June 10, 1990. – there was talk of buying votes.
But now we also have crimes such as forging ballots and election records.
In fact, we don't know if and how many there were before. Thanks to CCTV, there is now some evidence. After the elections of October this year, the situation is different, because for the first time we have a request to the Constitutional Court for a complete annulment of the results. It would be interesting to know the evidentiary part of these claims. But… We will wait and see if the SC decides to open all the sacks again and count. Honestly – I can't believe it. At most, the results should be counted in separate sections, and if they are the necessary amount that can change the final results, the CEC will have to recalculate them and this will lead to a change in the mandates for the individual lists in the National Assembly. Whatever the Constitutional Court decides, the next elections should not be held under the current rules. At the very least, district counting centers should be introduced to stop the vicious practices of buying entire sectional election commissions and not being able to track the vote of voters by section. In addition to this, of course, it would be good to introduce the active registration of voters in order to clear the lists, as well as to select the people who count in the centers on a non-partisan basis. There are enough students, for example, who can be recruited for this work.
- Why did we get into a situation where the first one is asked to give up power in order to have a government. What is the logic?
- Such a request is part of the reality after every election, when GERB-SDS are the first political force. It is the result of the unrealized dream/goal of the new, but no longer quite new political formations, which wanted to dismantle GERB, put Boyko Borisov in prison and other similar extremes. The creation of the PP engineering project failed.
„The screenwriters“ they had not found the faithful people apparently.
The demonstration of administrative and political weakness quickly turned away more than 300,000. souls of support for them. From today's perspective, their behavior only reinforces the conclusion that they were created to clear, not to build. The demonstration of “stubbornness at any cost“ can only add the definition “saboteurs“ to everything with which they are already adorned.
To some extent, the problem is leadership. There is one leader and that is undoubtedly Boyko Borisov. He became such, thanks to charisma, and Kiril Petkov and Asen Vasilev, who are struggling to become leaders, do not have charisma.
No one can explain to the public how Boyko Borisov should resign in favor of Kiril Petkov and Asen Vassilev.
Everyone looks at each other from their bell tower, but it is necessary to look in one direction, which is determined on the basis of compromises and consensus.
- 62% of Bulgarians say that the elections will not be free and fair. What kind of syndrome is this?
- When from morning to night on various media and in social networks and electronic video sharing channels various politicians, analysts and serving “authorities” they speak and write all kinds of truths and untruths, there is no way to form a different public opinion. However, when nearly two-thirds say they don't, they don't trust anyone or anything. It is a distrust of politics in general that is quite frightening. And again it is the responsibility of the parties to set a different tone of conversation in society. Not denigration, spitting and gossiping, but a constructive and constructive dialogue is needed.
- Are you going to vote knowing that the vote will be flawed? It's kind of like schizophrenia…
- There is no way the whole vote is flawed. If voter turnout is high, the share of bought, corporate, manipulated votes cannot have a significant impact. I don't feel schizophrenic when I vote every time.
There are increasing calls to change the electoral system of competing parties because it is not working. In what direction can this happen…
When we talk about the electoral system, it has nothing to do with it. The proportional system is the fairest possible and suitable for the parliamentary republic, which is Bulgaria. There is a need to improve the electoral process, as I already mentioned with two or three less complicated things – the district census centers, the active registration of voters and the professionalization, not the partisanship, of the members of the commissions. It is not the parties' fault for the electoral system to form a government. They are not taught to work in coalitions, to put public interests ahead of party interests. The parties are in crisis and the sooner it is resolved the better for all of us.
- We see the leader of the DPS –NN Delyan Peevski increasingly attacking President Rumen Radev. Is this the new “target“ of Peevski, after DPS became two?
- Mr. Peevski's lust for power has long been known. The split in the DPS, although surprising, reflects and will continue to influence political life in the country. The battle for DPS is not over. The president is convenient for attacks, because he is the guru of the PP, which has fixed on Peevski. Despite the alleged distancing of the PP from the president, the cooling of their relations, and today again attempts at rapprochement, the PP would not exist if it were not for Radev, who promoted them in politics. They exchanged gestures of goodwill in the presidential elections and successive parliamentary elections, but the relationship has not been broken, however frozen. That's at least on the surface. I have no information about other possible motives for such behavior hidden from the public.
- An interesting division is noticeable among the PP-DB, when you see how they voted for the election of Raya Nazaryan (GERB-SDS) as Speaker of the Parliament at the end of last week - 20 to 17 (against and “abstained se“), in the repeated 19-18…
- The PP-DB coalition is a very complex coalition. It still has no clear and unified leadership. Various ideologically oriented formations participate in it, besides those without experience in politics – The PP, led by its two leaders Asen Vasilev and Kiril Petkov, completely dominates. After the resignation and withdrawal of Hristo Ivanov as the leader of “Yes, Bulgaria”, this party is without a legitimate leader, and it is not visible who can successfully replace Mr. Ivanov. DSB is almost marginalized under the leadership of Mr. Atanasov, and it is convenient for them to stay in a coalition, but it is not clear to what extent they can determine the policy of the coalition. In my opinion, they can't. And so the supremacy of Cyril and Asen remains. And they are both hardliners and persistent.
I don't know why they think, or someone has instilled in them, that when you're persistent but inexperienced enough, you're good. Not so, quite the opposite.
Wanting to blame the other person doesn't help. The blame for the crisis is common. As for the division of their votes in the election of Raya Nazarian, that is part of the whole picture – sensible politicians abstain when it comes to a clear vote of respect for a colleague. The votes “abstained“ are actually against it and the end result is the same.
- “Revival“ they all want unification against GERB-SDS and DPS-NN. Is it possible?
- Let's see who these all are: “Revival“ – an openly anti-European, pro-Russian and nationalist formation, Alliance for Rights and Freedoms or Dogan's DPS, under the influence of the former State Security and Russian secret services, BSP, which is also in crisis and facing an upcoming congress, but is a systemic party with a lot of experience, ITN – a relatively new formation, which with its participation in politics constantly clarified its positions, but there were never extremes in them, SWORD – it is not clear what kind of parliamentary behavior he will have, but judging by the past participations of Radostin Vasilev, who toured INT and PP before creating the party, it will be neither constructive nor honorable. And finally PP-DB, about which I have already spoken, with all their complexity of relations. GERB-SDS and DPS-NN in total have the support of about 1 million. voters – 924339 to be exact. “All“ others exceed them by about 400 thousand. – 390971 to be exact. This is a negligible difference against the background of the number of voters in Bulgaria. It does not provide a sufficient physical and moral basis for ignoring all other differences that exist between these 6 formations that appeal to unite against. But “all” it cannot have for several reasons. First, PP-DB want a sanitary cordon against Peevski, but not against “Vazrazhdane”, while in the European Parliament “Vazrazhdane“ and the faction created in the EP by them and other far-right formations is already under a sanitary cordon. The positions of PP-DB in our country are strange, but they will hardly dare to declare cooperation with “Vazrazhdane”. Second, the ideological differences are too great. The voters will not stand for this and everyone together will suffer huge damage. And third, and last but not least, I think the time of the rant is over. Weak leaders cannot give birth to a revolutionary situation.
- Who and how is positioned in the parliament. What impresses you?
- It's too early to tell, only a week has passed, but this week it's every man for himself, as they say. The pre-election rhetoric has not left anyone. Statements on the media, briefings and generating tension by involving the Constitutional Court in the political process do not help in any way to calm down and sober up. PP-DB are looking for allies for a sanitary cordon. Meanwhile, during the unsuccessful voting for the chairman of the National Assembly, we saw that their candidate had support from MECH and APS, but in the end MECH withdrew it, DPS-NN did not support anyone, so as not to harm, and I approve this position. But with such a fragmented parliament and without the awareness that there must be a formed majority to constitute the National Assembly, and then the executive power, everyone is for themselves. Apparently they need more time. Unfortunately, the constitutional procedure does not imply a long delay, for this reason time can be secured by delaying the election of the Speaker of the National Assembly. This delay, however, unnerves the public, the media in anticipation of the election organize commentary studios, at least once a week there is some “remarkable“ speech from both major political formations. I don't know if the politicians realize that their patience has run out.
Only Radev and DPS-NN are interested in new quick early elections.
Because these elections would be held according to the current rules. Everyone else has no interest in new elections in two or three months. It is clear that the majority would be a coalition and the only option that would be useful for Bulgaria would be a majority of GERB-SDS, PP-DB, BSP and ITN. Not really, but if in past parliaments it was possible to form a majority from only the two first formations, today it is no longer possible. After one more election, 4 formations will not be enough. How majorities are made is clear – responsibilities are distributed according to the weight of the participants. Well, PP-DB doesn't like that, because GERD – The SDF will have to bear the greatest responsibility, but it is presented to the public as a privilege, not an obligation. It is necessary to get out of the encapsulation and limited narrow party understandings about the role of one or another formation in society. They are so focused on Borisov and Peevski that they can't see anything else. Daily through the media and the social network, “evidence” for the guilt of the opponent, who must become a partner. Well, how to do it? In fact, one of the main problems is that it speaks with mantras, accusations, but without substantive evidence. This should stop!