By Genc Pollo
At the meeting of the National Council of the Democratic Party last week, a member asked in somewhat suspicious-reprimanding tones what the party’s position was on the “open lists” (hereinafter LH) in the negotiations with the Socialist Party in the Electoral Reform Commission. The answer from the presidium was full of technical details that were not very understandable, but the subtext sounded like “we were in favor of opening the lists, but the SP vetoed it and we had nothing to do.” I doubt that the explanation is true because I have the impression that both parties by consensus corrected to some extent a disgrace and a stupidity that the social-renaissance majority in October 2020 introduced into the Electoral Code with the help of the Janissary opposition. For this they should be congratulated!
In May 2021 in my note “False prophets, useful idiots, open lists and collective stupidity in v2019-2021” I found with surprise a quasi-public hysteria from stupid and not stupid characters, honest and conscientious but also propagandists serving who claimed that with LH they had found the philosophical stone with which all the flaws of the post-communist political system in Albania would be cured. The common refrain of this diverse crowd was “deputies should not be appointed by the president but elected by the people”.
On that note I argued that LHs proved to solve none of the problems they were supposed to solve. On the contrary, they served to shift the public debate from real problems to phantasmagorical formulas and to soften public pressure for realistic solutions.
First, the thesis of LH lovers that through the preference of the electorate, the monopoly of the leaders of political parties to actually determine the future deputies is destroyed by the result of the 2021 parliamentary elections. Only three candidates broke the quotient and thus became MPs. But even with a smaller quotient, little would change.
Secondly, the fixed idea that the popular vote cleans the dirt of the presidents in the lists is overthrown by the very few cases in Elbasan and Tirana of changing the list by popular vote. Even based on those cases, it can be said that we fell from rain to hail.
Thirdly, the rare cases of LH use in Europe and the world and the often not positive experience reported by them also removes the argument “let’s do it in Europe/the world” (which is actually a pseudo-argument if it was not accompanied by reasoning concrete in our context). Here we can also add the experience of breaking the intra-party harmony of the campaign that happened in the DP and SP in the 2021 elections.
Three years later this analysis has stood the test of time and thankfully the problem created in October 2020 has found a solution to the greatest extent through the electoral reform of this summer (this became possible even though the SP has never been fundamentally interested in LH; until he realized that he could use them as a trick to abrogate the coalition that benefited the real opposition; using the janissary opposition in Parliament).
Three years later, based on the public debate that accompanied the summer amendments to the Electoral Code, it can be said that the number of useful idiots who insist on LH has been significantly reduced; while the number of false prophets, for understandable reasons, remains at the levels of four years ago.
However, talking with different party members, it seems that the LH idea remains popular, especially among those who support the MP. The explanation seems to be as much a belief in the miracle of breaking early as exaggerated personal ambition that pushes you to short-cuts that bypass the regular career.
But a general and legitimate explanation is the image of political parties as organizations without transparency and meritocracy and with the personal control of the titular boss, where the lists are made according to the latter’s pleasure. A concrete example was the approval of the lists of candidates for deputies in v2021 in the two main parties. In one case, the approval meeting of the National Council was held in Zoom where the members were without a microphone (muted) except for the chairman; the latter would read the list of candidates and at the end he would say that it was voted-approved. In the other party, when the presidency met, the microphones were on and a former minister noticed with surprise that some names on the list of candidates (the winning segment) had “hemorrhaged public finances” (today the deputies in question are serving prison terms for the incinerators).
The idea of ”totally open lists” is actually a naive rejection of political parties perceived as captured and corrupt. Like many naive ideas in history it offers a false solution to a real problem. So e.g. Russian anarchists of the c. 19, outraged by serfdom and tsarist absolutism, proposed a social system without authority and hierarchy. But their idea would lead either to social chaos where the weakest suffered or, in its collectivist version which would feed Bolshevism, would bring the most oppressive and totalitarian regime of the century. 20. In the same way, the political forces in the current Europe claim the reduction of the European Union to a league of sovereign nation-states because the EU policies were gradually adopting elements of socialist planning in implementation of the ideologies of the day; with the consequence of the suppression of the market and the suffocation of businesses and farmers and further the decline of competitiveness and the reduction of the role of Europe in the global economy. This criticism may be well-founded but the proposal may be counterproductive. In fact, this year’s elections for the European Parliament marked a shift to the right of the electorate, validating many criticisms of Brussels’ policies so far. As a result, the programmatic speech of the President of the Commission before the European Parliament two months ago contained essential corrections reflecting the criticisms.
So we can agree that correcting wrong policies and reforming responsible institutions is more beneficial than abrogating these institutions in favor of historically failed or currently counterproductive alternatives.
The LH idea is de facto for a parliament with independent MPs, not affiliated with political parties. In the Albanian context and beyond, this means a sloppy legislature where the first does not know the second. This is not desirable even though the public may rightly be upset with the “voting cattle” MPs who approve corrupt PPP contracts with discipline and no conscience.
In a pluralistic and democratic political system as Europe has developed in the last two centuries, political parties are central elements that guarantee the organic connection of the people with the state. This is also achieved through the office candidates that the parties propose to the electorate. Their malfunction does not justify their abrogation; he wants to encourage their improvement.
Our malfunctions are not solved by eliminating the role of the party leader or its governing bodies. This would be undemocratic and irresponsible. But how can it be achieved that the candidates of the parties are not only normal and untainted people but also embody the political ideas of the party they will represent and be known and enjoy the trust of the membership, the party electorate and beyond? It is less simplistic and populist, but clearly more useful to insist and carry out democratic procedures within the parties, taking as a model the American primaries or at least consultations with secret or open votes with the base and party structures as widely practiced in Europe.
Even there, the role of the chairman or the central presidency is not denied, but by rule and tradition this role is limited to individual vetoes and small and always justified changes. But this requires will at the head of the party and long practice. But better to correctly identify the unsolved problem than to give completely wrong formulas.
P. S. While I was writing these lines, I came across the news that Edi Rama would put new candidates in the winning segment of the lists of the Socialist Party. The segment below where the LH formula works will list others who have seniority in the party. He killed two birds with one stone. First of all, no-name persons provide absolute voting cattle that do not even think to comment and criticize, not to mention not voting for the evil project/laws that the Prime Minister proposes to the Assembly. Secondly, he is giving himself the perverse pleasure of showing how the veteran comrades of the party and the government within the district will fight with each other for a handful of votes, as happened in 2021.
/Genc Pollo -Former minister and deputy/
