The Prague Post Online: Opinion: Postview

December 5th, 2008

Endowment Fund Business Listings ONLINE Reservations Classifieds

Gift Subscriptions

Prague accomodation

Postview

Presidential vote should be an open process
Postview | Search restaurants | Archives

February 13th, 2008 issue

Is there ever a time when it’s a good idea for elected officials to vote in secret? Even in a parliamentary system like the Czech Republic’s, a straight “no” seems like the correct answer for anyone who supports the ideals of participatory democracy.

But politics is always a messy business. And democracy, no matter where it is practiced, is a constantly moving target, even in a relatively sophisticated place like the United States.

Still, one thing holds true: When individual votes are made public, politicians are accountable to those who elect them.

The counter-argument offered in this country is that open voting makes politicians more susceptible to peer pressure from members of their party to vote a certain way — or, on the flip side, vulnerable to retaliation if they don’t. Which helps explain why it took 10 hours of bickering and speeches and apparent back-room threats before Parliament could hold its first round of voting in this past weekend’s attempt at a presidential election.

The ruling Civic Democrats (ODS), with current President Václav Klaus as honorary chairman, wanted to keep things private; the Greens, the Social Democrats (ČSSD), the Christian Democrats (KDU-ČSL) and even the Communists called for them to be public. Though the latter finally prevailed, the question isn’t settled. It will be debated again before the coming weekend’s round of voting, raising the possibility that this time the voting could be by secret ballot.

As journalists, we’ve seen elections around the world, from the former Soviet Armenia and dictator-controlled Albania to breakaway Kosovo, that tiny piece of the former Yugoslavia clamoring for independence. They all embody the rough and tumble of politics, and, more often than not, efforts by those in power to control the vote.

This is true even in the United States, where, in a tight and combative race for the Democratic presidential nomination, the focus is suddenly on nearly 800 “superdelegates” who can vote for whomever they want at the convention, regardless of how their constituents voted. Though superdelegates have existed since 1982, they seem a particularly cynical tactic in an election year when voters are turning out in record numbers, and polls indicate that the American youth vote is being energized for the first time in a long time.

So it’s hard to fault the Czech presidential election system, though, as noted in this space last week, there is a growing sense that it’s time for a change. It’s our hope that Parliament will reconsider the voting system after this election, and give serious consideration to having a direct vote by the electorate in place for the next presidential election.

As for Friday’s scheduled rematch under the current system?

All we can hope is that the members of Parliament will once again do the right thing and decide to make the process public. Czech citizens deserve to know how their elected officials voted in one of the most important decisions affecting their country.

Be the first to add a comment!

Most e-mailed articles
Glass company declared bankrupt State pushes fish as healthy, tasty choice 10 Questions

Related articles
Deprivation dining

Most visited in Business Listings

The Prague Post Online contains a selection of articles that have been printed in
The Prague Post, a weekly newspaper published in the Czech Republic.
To subscribe to the print paper, click here.
Unauthorized reproduction is strictly prohibited.