It was recently made clear that a referendum for changes in the Election Code would take place on November 6, alongside the presidential polls. The pre-history of the event showed a growing enthusiasm in favor of referendums as an expression of direct democracy. A famous showman kicked off the initiative and his initial six questions won many hearts. Who wouldn’t like to diminish the number of MPs, to reduce the influence of the purchased vote via e-voting and to win the fight against crime via a direct election of district police chiefs in this environment of widespread corruption and immature democracy? However, the Constitutional Court overthrew exactly those three questions for the forthcoming referendum. Now the voters will have to decide on the majoritarian election of MPs, the introduction of the compulsory vote and the reduction of the state subsidy for the parties.

No matter the questions or the surrounding euphoria on the direct democracy idea, one thing is clear – the trust of the citizens, regarding the political class and especially the MPs hits the bottom and digs. We elect 240 MPs per 4 years that are supposed to represent us and defend our interests. However, the parliament has been the lone leader for years in the list of institutions, trusted the least by the citizens. The latter simply try to regain their representation via the referendum form, but are forced to judge on state politics issues. A 2013 referendum asked the question: “Should Bulgaria’s nuclear energy sector be developed via the construction of a new NPP?” which in fact asked about the fate of the Belene NPP project, now abandoned. Some 60% said “yes”, but that didn’t mean they supported automatically the building of the plant. Then those who said “no” didn’t reject the development of the nuclear energy sphere, but the concrete project only. Three and a half years later we know that the referendum didn’t determine the future of the Belene project.

Asking the people on such major issues in fact moves away the campaign debate on the latter. Political parties rarely offer to their voters chances to get informed on the ideas for the state’s development before casting their ballot. Instead of arguments on the core of the state policy proposed, they throw efforts in personal attacks and one-day-sensations which prevent the formulation of long-term goals while continuity in politics continues to be something unfamiliar for Bulgaria’s party elite.

So it comes naturally as the will of the citizens to find an alternative and a way to change the political reality. However, a referendum is not the right instrument at all. The belief that this is how citizens will gain back their power is lying and thus showmen use people’s desperation to initiate referendums. One cannot expect seriously that the average person will become competent in so many issues, ranging from voting rights to nuclear energy. So they will most likely follow their intuition. Furthermore the civic vote at a referendum doesn’t result in responsibility, ideally born by politicians in a democratic society.

We are to witness the result of the referendum on November 6 and the events to follow. One thing is for sure – it won’t raise the level of trust into Bulgaria’s democratic institutions, but might work well on the rating of the showman who initiated it.

English version: Zhivko Stanchev