The forthcoming local polls were the reason for a public discussion in Sofia, dedicated to accountancy in politics and political legitimacyand organized by the Friedrich Naumann Foundation and the European Liberal Forum.

“What we found out during the discussion was that we have formal accountancy requirements that are partially complied with,” said political analyst Dr. Vania Nusheva, programme director of Transparency without Borders. “We have a really good legislation, regarding the financing of the political parties and the campaigns. At the same time the results from the survey of a series of NGOs and researchers show discrepancies between the money spent within the election process and what is presented as financial reports afterwards. We witness funding attempts via companies or via the budgets of public institutions. To say nothing of the purchase of vote. None of this is presented in the reports of the political parties – that is one of the problem’s aspects. Our attention was attracted during the discussion by the necessity of control. Accountability in politics is also related to both transparency and control, implemented on at least two levels – the civic and institutional ones. The role of the citizens, the voters is a really a key one here, but not only within the frame of the election process. When we talk about the funding of political activity we know that very few of the regular members of the parties take part. I.e. the role of the interparty mechanisms for democracy is really important in view of parties’ accountancy. An accent needs to be put on the discussion process as well, on the consultation of the decisions prepared. One of the essential problems that drew public attention over the last few days were a series of local authorities’ decisions on the sale of municipal property without any preliminary consultation with the people living around. You see how broad is the range of issues that can be viewed in the context of accountability and legitimacy of the governing. I would like to underline the necessity of compliance of political intentions, pre-election programmes on one hand and the real political actions and decisions within the governing process on the other. Then, when we have discrepancies between those two categories, the level of trust towards the politicians is very low, we can talk on no effectiveness regarding the word accountancy,” Dr. Nusheva points out.

According to the political analyst, legitimacy in politics doesn’t end with legality – it is fulfilled by authority and trust.

“All political parties should focus their attention at such a type of behavior,” the political analyst goes on to say. “We have been witnessing a process over the past years with political parties tending to close themselves in a gradual manner for the possible influence of both their members and a broader range of citizens. Politics begins to turn into the job of a limited circle of people, who have no effective or stable connection with a wider circle of voters. We talk here of the understanding of how politics is done. The real internal party life is the main instrument that can determine the agenda and priorities of a political party, as well as its messages and pre-election programs. Governing actions are the final stage. So, the really more active role of citizens in the processes of forming of internal party decisions and within the process of important governing decisions are one of the key elements for accountancy and trust towards institutions,” said in an interview for Radio Bulgaria political analyst Dr. Vania Nusheva, programme director of Transparency without Borders.

English version: Zhivko Stanchev