Top News

What can be taught by Poland’s ‘ghost election’ about pandemic era democracy

Published

4 years ago

on

No, this is not the United States. This dynamic takes place in Poland, which is scheduled to hold a presidential election earlier this month. Concerns about the virus and protracted partisan setbacks caused delays, last-minute mess – and for the remnants of uncertainty about when and how new elections will take place.

The result was “the selection of strange ghosts,” as a news organization call it – election day where no one voted and there was no open polling place – was the culmination of weeks of political battles between the ruling Law and Justice Party (PiS) and the Polish opposition party. Although the election date was set before the virus hit Poland, PiS leaders insisted that the election should proceed according to plan, worried that candidates would fight in the next election when Poland began to feel the economic impact of the pandemic. They introduced a law in early April that would impose an unprecedented vote on all 10 May.
But opposition leaders and international observers strongly oppose this plan, saying reforms are pushed too fast – and that such elections, especially under a government that has been criticized for its approach to democracy and the rule of law, amounting to a power struggle by PiS and its incumbent president, Andrzej Duda. As a result, PiS leader Jaroslaw Kaczynski announced only four days in advance that the vote would not actually take place; Election officials later considered it invalid and called for new elections on a date to be determined this summer.
Holding elections during a pandemic is not an easy task, as countries such as Poland have learned: In changing circumstances, officials need to balance the protection of public health by ensuring the democratic right of citizens to vote. At least 62 countries in the world, from Britain to Italy to Ethiopia to Bolivia, have choose to postpone the selection because of the spread of the virus. Others, including France, the southern German state of Bavaria, and some WE stated, has advanced with direct elections despite fears that the vote could potentially harm citizens.

But while there are no guidelines for safe and fair elections during the coronavirus crisis, Poland’s experience offers several important lessons for other countries that navigate these questions, including the US: Doing this means planning as early as possible – and somehow finding ways to set aside political alignments to produce a voting plan that everyone believes is fair.

See also  How to write Waze in Portuguese - Apps & Software - Tecnoblog

In Poland, political polarization is at the heart of why the situation turns into uncertainty – and why the debate about new elections may be almost as difficult as what will happen on 10 May. Even if it is possible organizationally it is possible for Poland. to move at the last minute to a ballot by mail, the ability to prepare for elections effectively doesn’t mean much if you can’t find a political consensus on how to do it.

When no party trusts the other party to act in the best interests of citizens, it affects the way people view their democracy. And this “greatly influences trust in electoral institutions,” said Zselyke Csaky, director of research for Europe and Eurasia at the Freedom House democracy watchdog. “That is a very serious concern, because it is one of the most important elements of a functioning democracy.”

As in the US, control in the Polish parliament was divided: The ruling party coalition narrowly controlled the lower house, Sejm, while the opposition narrowly controlled the upper house, the Senate. When Sejm passed a law mandating an all-mail ballot in early April, the opposition used it constitutional ability to delay statute, ultimately taking a full 30 days is permitted. This means that the law will be held until May 6, only four days before the supposed election, which leads to a last-minute struggle.

All of this could have been avoided if the PiS politicians had proposed constitutional provisions called “natural disaster conditions,” which under conditions such as a pandemic would automatically postpone elections for at least 90 days. But once the PiS leaders insisted the election was carried out according to schedule, they did not want to back off and change direction – even when leaked ballots and ballots appeared on the road asserting that the selection of papers was not ready.

Widowers, candidates who are aligned with the PiS, also benefit from incumbency power, something which, at least in this case, was even worse during the pandemic with voters who were mostly trapped at home. As sitting president, Widower could travel throughout the country, visit hospitals and talk about government actions to fight the virus – many of which were then broadcast live to voters by state television, controlled by and sympathize with ruling party.
Opposition candidates, on the other hand, are left struggling to organize press conferences through Zoom and move their entire campaign online. Malgorzata Kidawa-Blonska, a candidate for the Community Coalition, the largest opposition party, suspended his campaign in protest and urged supporters to boycott the May 10 elections; one survey in early April suggested some Poles had planned to vote.
Postponing the election provides a much needed reprieve for Poland, and when the debate is open about what will happen next, some in the opposition are optimistic that things will be handled a little better this time. Legislation that requires direct voting with the option of voting by mail already considered, fund new election date – possibly by the end of June or early July – is expected to be fixed soon. The Civic Coalition announced earlier this month that it had chosen a new candidate for the new election, Warsaw mayor Rafal Trzaskowski, who had already received significant results in the polls.

But those on the opposition still have great concern about the inherent benefits that Duda will receive as incumbent, and about the PiS’s willingness to give the scales as he wishes wherever they can.

See also  Chain swings to a reduction

“There is a greater likelihood that elections will be free, but they will not be free in terms of an equal campaign,” said Milosz Hodun, an adviser to the liberal Nowoczesna (“Modern”) party, which is part of the Community Coalition. “Only the president can campaign throughout the country … all other candidates are limited to the presence of the media and online.”

The US also faces a deep political polarization that is increasingly exacerbated by this pandemic; President Trump has pitted himself against governors – especially Democrats – who have imposed stronger restrictions on fighting the virus, using his bully pulpit to call for the country to reopen as soon as possible. With each country responsible for setting its own election rules and regulations before the national elections in November, the debate over letters compared to direct voting, and access given by each country, is likely to fall along partisan lines; like Poland, this might also mean that every change only applies at the last minute.

Polish observers hope their country has learned from the failure of “ghost” elections – and that the country can immediately hold elections that run better and fairer than those that did not happen earlier this month. Others, especially the US, must pay attention as they do.

Related Topics:
Click to comment

Trending

Exit mobile version