A mayor has to combine leadership with administrative skills and competence. Figures of authority, persons who command public trust, are fewer and further between, says Assoc. Prof. Milena Stefanova.

The period of Bulgarian history from the last decades of the Ottoman Empire up to the year 1944 is interesting for what happened over those years, but also for the changes that took place in Bulgaria as a result of this. They are due to political leadership skills, administrative abilities and professional competence – qualities that are a must for any candidate for a position in civil service. From the time of the country’s liberation (1878) up until 1944 mayors in big cities were, on and off, elected or appointed. This means there had to be frequent changes in the criteria and rules, and in this sense, as Assoc. Prof. Milena Stefanova puts it the position of mayor has always been a bone of contention among political parties. Nonetheless, in the years from 1934 until 1944 when mayors were appointed by royal decree there were quite a few mayors whose names have gone down in history as the people who have done the most for the development of their towns and the prosperity of the citizens. One such example is the mayor of Sofia Ivan Ivanov, a proven professional even before his time as mayor. The Rila water-conduit was built during his term of office, later his knowledge and expertise were even made use of by the communist regime for the construction of the Iskar dam which provides the water supply of the capital city.

With the help of Assoc. Prof. Stefanova and her expertise in the study of public interest in local self-government, we take a look at the campaigns through the years after 1944, an analysis that is to a certain degree valid in our day:

“Party squabbles, partisanship, smear campaigns, claptrap against a rival candidate have always been part of all campaigns. Even before the country’s liberation (1878), at the time of the National Revival when the Bulgarian chorbaci (the wealthy class) as local rulers can be regarded as the prototype of the latter-day mayors, they formed chorbaci parties. They then went on to resort to any means to get what they wanted, not stopping short of murder even or of destroying existing schools. The reason, for example, being that rival parties were vying which part of town the school should be in. Such devious means to an end have always existed. In our day we are seeing vote buying and futile attempts to put an end to these corrupt practices.”

Assoc. Prof. Milena Stefanova has dedicated an entire book to the Bulgarian chorbaci, their ways and the times they lived in.

“In it I have analyzed the components accompanying the political process – though it can only be called that by a long stretch of the imagination. In the last years of the Ottoman Empire the official authorities tried to find ways to integrate representatives from the conquered territories because it was easier. There were only two things the Sultan was interested in – that any unrest be avoided and that there be a regular flow of tax money into the treasury. The more relaxed regime in the last years of the Ottoman Empire triggered a host of different interests, objectives and desires, part of the population grew more affluent and started to lay claim to different positions of power. This gave rise to the first conflicts and relationships that stretched over into the post-liberation years.”

In this sense the frequent changes of government that followed come as no surprise. Now, as then, what stood behind the battle of ideas was, in practice, a battle for power, influence and the allocation of resources. All this is described vividly in literary works by Bulgarian authors, like the feuilletons by Aleko Konstantinov. They sound as true to life now as they did then, even though:

“The means and the methods are now modern. In Aleko Konstantinov’s time there was no internet and access to information was limited. We should not forget that it (the internet – editorial note) empowers us as citizens, and affords more opportunities. I would really like to see us stop taking notice of the fake news, which, in those times was not called that, it was considered a blatant lie. And it cost the person who was smeared so much to clear their name. But in our day people are more or less at a loss whom to believe. The figures of authority capable of commanding public trust are fewer and further between, and that makes things in modern society very complicated. I would very much like to see a higher level of trust in the institutions. However they are not functioning as such, they are functioning as party-dependent entities,” says Assoc. Prof. Milena Stefanova in an interview for Radio Bulgaria.