It is the year 2016- all the three major parties in Albania show clear signs of authoritarianism, centralization of power and unification around the leader’s positions. The space for debate is narrowed and the process is made more difficult, the rebels are swiftly targeted and cast away with ease. Ben Blushi, not given any de facto influence in decision-making inside the Socialist Party and additionally prevented to join the race for party leader abandons his historical political home and starts a new political party. Majlinda Bregu is accused as a ‘traitor’ from the DP ranks for her positions vis a vis integration which seem to differ from the party line. Over 70 percent of the SMI membership reconfirm Ilir Meta at the helm of the party. Internal party democracy is considered by its primary stakeholders, the party members, as a desirable but not priority vector.
What happened with the trajectory of the internal party democracy, which once seemed on track to consolidation? Why are even those parties for which the expectations were larger and more well-founded starting to depart significantly from IPD practices? Does the level of internal party democracy in the main parties in Albania influence the general health of democracy in the country? This study answers briefly these questions which are particularly relevant in the context of the upcoming electoral process in 2017.
Abbreviations
IPD- Internal Party Democracy
SP- Socialist Party of Albania
DP- Democratic Party of Albania
SMI- Socialist Movement for Integration
CEC – Central Elections Commission
Introduction
The political parties that are active today in Albania have had no chance to inherit a political past that could serve as an orientation guide. The long communist dictatorship characterized by an absolute singularity of party line and a Stalinist enmity towards any differing opinions or stances towards party dogma or even worse the party leader created a difficult context. Hence after the regime change many problems, mistakes and gaps persisted and it was clear they would require much time and effort to change. Despite the expectation that with the passing of years, parties would evolve and become more representative, more free and more inclined to encompass a Western mentality, what can be observed is that most of the actual characteristics of the parties still do not correspond to this expectation. It is obvious now that the development of Albanian political parties rather than following a straight line with time is going through and will continue to go through various ups and downs.
Internal party democracy is one of the main traits which are particularly vulnerable to these cyclic shifts. The theories of political science show us that the quality of the overall democracy in a country is very much connected to and dependent on the internal party democracy of the main political forces. Therefore every effort to improve the situation in this regard and guide parties towards adopting more and more internally democratic standards is in fact an effort to consolidate the health of democracy for all the Albanian citizens.
The situation in the 3 main political parties in Albania
The Socialist Party of Albania was the first one to formally adopt practices consistent with IPD such as the main principle ‘one member one vote’ which started as early as 2005. Therefore it is at least ironic that the regress in internal party democracy is now more obvious precisely in this party. This development goes contrary to the past positive experience of the SP and the reputation it had for ample space devoted to internal debate and even rebels inside the family. Things seem to have completely changed especially during the last Party Congress (2016) which cemented the position of the party leader as unchallengeable, got rid of actual competition and produced an internal crisis which led then to the departure of two traditional socialist MPs. They formed a new political force called LIBRA.
Although these two, Blushi and Hafizi, were not the only ones to be critical of the SP leader Rama, they were the ones with the loud voices in the media and in the Parliament. According to their public declarations and programs so far it appears that their new party (Libra) will run on a platform that has internal party democracy placed at the corner stone. Furthermore the party identifies itself in contrast to the SP using the IPD as a denominator.
In the Democratic Party the main factor that influences the degree of internal party democracy is the duality created in the leadership position between the former leader Berisha who remains very popular and influential and the current leader Basha whose authority is still unconsolidated. This duality has yielded some space for traditional figures of the DP to express their discontent or different opinions more openly, however the practice of lynching the opponents to the main party line goes on. Members of the Parliament of the DP are often the subjects of party targeting and even personal attacks from inside when they dare to differ. It does not matter if the different opinions are expressed for main national causes such as the justice reform or European integration.
On the eve of general elections, DP leader Basha has made public several important initiatives which should they be carried out to the end, will fundamentally change the profile and the organization mode of this party. Therefore they are subject of much curiosity and need to be followed consistently. These include the call to party members to use online platforms to propose their MP candidate, the promise to adopt the principle of ‘one member one vote’ for all party elections, etc. Naturally when parties are in opposition they are more inclined to invest in their internal party democracy seeing that as an opportunity to increase and revitalize the membership and the support.
The Socialist Movement for Integration (SMI) being comparably new in its experience has had the opportunity to benefit from the already established models and hence has adopted since its establishment the principle of “One member one vote” for its party elections and some party decisions. The leader of the party, chosen by such an elections, has not changed since the creation of the SMI in 2004. In this party the same tendencies are observed: centralization of power at the hands of the party leader and around few key figures with a lot of influence in the party, which include one party MP simultaneously the wife of the party leader. SMI has not been immune to dramatic events when it comes to expressing dissent and that has resulted in the distancing or even formal separation of some key figures from the party in those cases when their discordance with the party leader has persisted.
The view from the party youth forums
The elections that took place this year (2016) in the Youth Forum of the Socialist Party (FRESSH) as well as in the Youth Forum of the Democratic Party (FRPD) are an interesting case study in order to speculate on possible developments scenarios for the future of the corresponding parties. The current developments in the youth forums can point at some expectations about the future of these parties’ developments. In this context it does not seem that there is much reason to hope for better. Young people in these forums seem at the very least comfortable and sometimes cherishing in encompassing the show aspect of the races which in turn replaces or weakens the process itself. The confrontation of the ideas and platforms is no longer the real serious race. Therefore in the case of the elections in FRESSH a race format was applied which bore much resemblance to TV talent shows. Furthermore one of the jury members was even selected from the television entertainment complex in the country. The scheme of competing was a double procedure in which once votes were cast by the general public via social media and then the voting was done formally by the forum membership. The results from these two processes were different and some of the candidates which seemed more popular according to social media did not even make it to the lists of the formal voting. This duality put some serious questions over the genuine objectives and reasons why the voting opened to the online public at all. In total the process showed more focus on sensationalist style than on content.
In the case of FRPD even after the race was completed and the leader was chosen, the forum failed to make public the lists of people who would run the leading structures of the forum. It seemed that ironically the only election that mattered was that of the head and the other structures supposed to guide the political life of the forum were downplayed. After this was pointed out the mistake was corrected but the conclusion over the tendency displayed is still valid.
Factors:
There are many factors that affect the quality of internal party democracy where some of the most well-known are the existence or the lack of a tradition that accommodates the different opinions and dissent; the will of party leader and leading structures to delegate decision making, the relationship between local branches with party headquarters and others. These are decisive factors which have been discussed in the public and even in studies focused on political parties’ development. However there are some other factors that deserve more attention such as the role of the party members themselves, the electoral system and the role of the international community.
The role of the membership
The prevailing mentality of the Albanian society, which naturally corresponds to that of the majority of party members, is favorable and appreciative of a strong authoritative and even arrogant leadership. This is one of the most serious impediments for the development of democracy in general because it requires much more time to change and it can change only organically. It is the same mentality that stand behind condemning dissent in a strong way. The party is understood as a family where the leader is ‘the patriarch – and where critics are supposed to stay inside instead of ‘in the eyes of the others’. This approach is illustrated easily from polls, among which one that was carried out two years ago revealed the following.
Asked over those cases when there can be criticizing from an individual member of the party over the decisions taken from the leading structures, “only half of the respondents said that the right to a different opinion of an individual is respected. A large part of them, 41 percent, despite the risks and the minimal chances to be heard suggest however to express criticism and dissent but only inside the party structures.”
However in some cases, particularly in the so called left parties, when people or groups in the party membership owe their loyalty to specific people that are connected to their local communities or seen as local ‘benefactors’. In case of a conflict between such figures and the party leader or leadership then these group publicly take the side of the former. However in this case we have obviously not an expression of internal party democracy and the strength of local branches but rather a display of the strength of bonds of a clan-based or nepotistic nature that prevail over the party link.
IPD and the electoral system changes
The 2009 constitutional changes and the subsequent alterations in the Electoral Code saw the two major parties, SP and DP, which disagree on almost everything, reach an accord to use closed lists in a representative system. This development vested the party leader with the almost absolute power of choosing the people to fill the MP candidate lists and moreover deciding their ranking in the list. This ultimately made the party leaders very strong in their position and forced all those MPs whose objective is to be re-elected to use utter self-censorship in case of disagreement because otherwise they would risk the chance of being considered again. In addition another trend started to emerge: an exacerbated tendency to condemn publicly and almost in chorus those colleagues or party members who dare to challenge the leadership position.
Currently the form of the Electoral Code is evaluated to be the most important factor that has led to the decrease and deterioration of internal party democracy be it in the formal way through stepping over the rules and procedures of the party statutes or in the informal way through a more general political behavior and the decision making style of political actors.
The quality of internal party democracy is also closely related to the negative phenomenon of the entry of people with criminal records and dark pasts in the Parliament and in other posts of public service. Many times those individuals who have gone against the party line and the party leader and have expressed their dissent publicly have accused and denounced these individual for alleged pressure or intimidation efforts towards them. This kind of burden is an ultimate threat to the democracy in general in Albania. Therefore it is crucial that the process of decriminalization which has started through the adoption of the specific law is carried out through to the end. The elections in June 2017 will be an important test in this regard. The candidate lists should be available to the public and should be examined by independent actors just as it has been already suggested by experts of civil society.
The role of the international community
Finally it should be acknowledged that the international community has played a role in the political developments within parties through various ways such as capacity building, networking and sharing of experiences but also very importantly the reactions from political party families (such as PES or EPP) in which the Albanian parties adhere. In addition another form of influence has come through the reactions of certain individuals from European politics which are present with their work in or for Albania.
It has been already noted several times from experts that for the international community stability is the first key priority, often at the expense of democracy in the region. The same focus on stability for Albania has shaped an often too comfortable relation between internationals and authoritative leaders and Prime Ministers ‘who get things done fast.”
Denouncing regressive steps in internal party democracy is not something that comes easy to the international community members because their reputation and public trust depends on the degree and perception of neutrality. However the big party families of the European Union have a strong role to play in order to educate and orient Albanian political parties with their experiences and the value they place on IPD. In addition there is a number of political foundations active in Albania that can use their technical and financial assistance to offer improvement opportunities in this regard especially to raise awareness in party youth forums.
The situation in the region
It is important to contextualize the developments in Albania with what has been happening in the same vein in the region. The different kind of historical communist experience as well as the implications of the ethnic conflict in the neighboring ex-Yugoslav countries have generated some contrasts uncommon to Albania. However when it comes to diminishing space for accommodating different opinions as well as internal party critics the same phenomenon can be observed almost everywhere.
According to a series of studies undertaken and published by in the majority of the Balkans countries in each case major problems with IPD stand out. Hence the specific country studies show a similar regress can be noticed in Montenegro, Kosovo, Bosnia and Serbia. For Montenegro parties are described as resembling cartels in which party members are worthless,; in Kosovo there are no mechanisms to check and sanction parties even in those cases where infringements upon IPD are against the law and therefore the decision making is quite informal; in Serbia things are exacerbated by the lack of free and independent media as well as the preference for a single authoritative leadership figure. In the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia ethnic dynamics create even more vulnerabilities and the complexity is high. However there also decision making of parties belongs to leaders and the relationship between headquarters and local branches in the party is quite weak.
The situation in the region does not present much grounds for optimism since it is generally accepted the regional context exerts influence on the country developments. Moreover these troubling similarities do not only refer to the phenomenon itself but most importantly to the factors that shape the results including here the role of the international community.
Conclusions and suggestions
Internal party democracy is retreating and the space for dissent is rapidly shrinking in the major political parties. This is producing a negative effect on the overall health of democracy in the Albanian state and society. In order to avoid the deterioration of the situation an engagement of nonpolitical actors is necessary and should be empowered. This includes the willingness of media, civil society and the international community to denounce the regressive steps in IPD that parties are taking. The continuous denouncing of these steps should be done carefully to avoid the alienation and negative reaction of party members. On the contrary the action should aim at mobilizing them so that they can use their rights and responsibilities as party members to seek accountability from party leaders and party top forums. The assistance given for the development of political parties should include a comprehensive pillar of raising capacities and awareness of the politically engaged youth to observe the values and recognize the benefits of internal party democracy.
List of sources
– “Strengthening Internal Party Democracy” , Dori Hyseni, Albanian institute for International Studies (AIIS): 2007
– ‘ The need to publish MP candidate lists at least 90 days ahead of elections’, Zef Preci Tirana Times, 10/01/2017 https://www.tiranatimes.com/?p=130634
–Shqiptarà«t dhe modeli social evropian : demokracia e brendshme nà« partità« politike shqiptare ; rast studimor pà«r DBP nà« PS, PD dhe LSI / Afrim Krasniqi ; Ardian Hackaj. – Tirana : Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, [2014].
http://library.fes.de/pdf-files/bueros/albanien/11316.pdf
-“Electoral and Party System in Kosovo. A Perspective on Internal Party Democracy and Development” , Kosovar Institute for Policy Research and Development, http://www.rrpp-westernbalkans.net/en/News/News-Archive/2016/Research-results–Country- studies-on-Internal-Party-Democracy.html
-“Electoral and Party System in Montenegro. A Perspective on Internal Party Democracy and Development” , Center for Monitoring and Research CeMI (Podgorica), http://www.rrpp-westernbalkans.net/en/News/News-Archive/2016/Research-results–Country- studies-on-Internal-Party-Democracy.html
-“Electoral and Party System in Serbia. A Perspective on Internal Party Democracy and Development” , Faculty of Political Science, University of Belgrade, http://www.rrpp-westernbalkans.net/en/News/News-Archive/2016/Research-results–Country- studies-on-Internal-Party-Democracy.html
-“Analysis of internal Party Democracy in Macedonia” , CRPM, http://www.crpm.org.mk/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/kas_33615-1522-2-30_Eng.pdf
