Technologies of Manipulation During the Presidential Elections of 1999 in Ukraine

The article examines the election campaigns of the late twentieth century. in Ukraine and proved, that they operated manipulation technologies. The state was democratizing the political system, adoption of new election legislation, transition to a mixed electoral system; political pluralism was formed, the number of parties has increased significantly, the struggle for power intensified. With each subsequent election campaign (presidential, parliamentary), the political struggle intensified, and voter engagement technologies have become more vulnerable. The author proves, that the ways and purposes of application of technologies depend on motivations of subjects of the power, as: obtaining, exercising and retaining power; the desire to achieve political and social results, most profitable for pragmatic actors, although this may run counter to collective goals. In Ukraine, democratic processes are not yet complete, traditions of democracy and stable political institutions are absent. Instead, manipulation technologies, electoral engineering, which are aimed at limiting the actions of competitors and creating favorable conditions for their own victory. This prevents the formation of certain restraints, barriers to manipulation technologies, familiar to many civilized democracies.

Azerbejdżan pod rządami Alijewów

In previous years Azerbaijan experienced only a few of leadership changes following independence in 1991. In 1992 Abulfaz Elchibey, the leader of the Popular Front, won first fairly contested presidential election. However the beginning of the current phase political life took place in 1993. As a result of the ensuing war, Armenian armed forces occupied then 14–16 percent of Azerbaijan (20 percent according to Azerbaijani sources), including the Nagorno-Karabakh region and seven surrounding districts. The collapse of the Popular Front government led to Heidar Aliev’s former communist party boss return to Baku as national leader. During his presidency (1993–2003), Aliev ensured political order, economic stabilization and peace, but suppressed political pluralism. At the time Azerbaijan has positioned itself on the international scene as an increasingly important actor, but in domestic politics system crafted by Aliev political power was concentrated in the hands post-Soviet cadres and regional clans. Ilham Aliev became president of the country in 2003. The period immediately preceding and following his reelection for a second term in October 2008 was marked by further steps towards the consolidation of the semiauthoritarian and authoritarian regime established by his father – Heidar.

Fight For Media Pluralism Or Just “JanŠA’S War On Media”?

Since Janez Janša’s government has been installed, not a day has gone by that the ruling coalition party, SDS (the Slovenian Democratic Party), has not been accused of undermining the freedom of media or threatening media pluralism. Sometimes, critics go even further in condemning Janša as wilfully subordinating media to politics. Regarding subordination, independent media studies from 2002, 2006, 2007, 2008 and lastly 2020 haveclearly indicated that the media in Slovenia are to a certain extent already under the influence of politics, namely those close to the left circles. Whilst scientific conclusions prove the fact that changes in media legislation are more than needed, the question that arises is whether the proposers are looking at the concept of media pluralism from the right perspective. Leaning on the most recent Media landscape research, this article stands out from the rest as it draws parallels with the state of political pluralism, demonstrating how partial and imbalanced covering of news could lead to the domination of one political spectrum. Further, we do a historical review of the right-wing media policy and bring to light those aspects that have undergone the sharpest criticism when it comes to media pluralism. In addition, new ideas for future research are discussed.

Political pluralism as a factor in the development of modern society and state

This paper presents the results of a study devoted to the legal phenomenon of political pluralism as a factor in the development of modern society and the state by the example of classical democratic countries. At the same time, attention is focused on such components of political pluralism as formalization of freedom of speech and assembly; a multi-party system, as well as a mechanism for coordinating the interests of various social groups at the parliamentary level. It was found that the most acceptable is the model operating in the FRG, since it allows people to find a balance between guarantees of political diversity, such as freedom of speech and the right to public events. The interaction between civil society institutions and parliamentarians is especially advisable when making decisions in the domestic and foreign policy of the state.

Non-competitive Elections at the Local Level and the Incumbency Advantage of Mayors – Research Experiences from Poland

The objective of this paper is an attempt to answer if non-competitive elections to commune councils in Poland may be the result of incumbency advantage of mayors. The author assumes, that the effects of incumbency advantage of mayors in influence not only the competition for the office of mayor, but also the entire local political scene. These effects may weaken the competitiveness of elections and lead to the cartelisation of local political scenes. In extreme cases, it may even cause the degeneration of political pluralism and lead to non-competitive elections at both the executive and legislative levels. The paper analyses relationships between the competitiveness of elections at the local level and the incumbency advantage effect as exemplified by a group of small communes with up to 20,000 inhabitants and presents the findings of the conducted research in the form of case studies of 18 localities representing six regions of Poland.

Muslim Women’s Social Movements in the Sahel

Since the 1990s, the countries of the Sahel have been experimenting with democratic systems that have resulted in both political pluralism with a gendered dimension and a renewed place for Islam in the public sphere. This chapter focuses on the emergence of critical Muslim women’s social reform movements advocating for women’s rights in the region. These movements manifest a diversity of Islamic and secularist trajectories and objectives. Strikingly, however, the majority converges on a common quest for gender justice against cultural and state patriarchy. Furthermore, they also display a range of responses to external hegemonic forces—including neoliberalism, local and global violent Islamist extremisms, human trafficking, and ethno-regional tensions. Starting with the politico-economic context within which many of these critical social movements have arisen in recent times, this chapter uses specific social frames—education, family law, arts, and entrepreneurship—to examine their strategies and transformative impacts in the Sahel.

The Principle of Democracy in Albania, from the Basic Acts of the State in Its Implementation

The principle of democracy is seen as the basic pillar of the construction and function of a state. Of course, for the implementation of this principle, different ideologies have been developed, often in contradiction with each other. Ideologies which undoubtedly saw in the principle of democracy the birth and functioning of a state and as a consequence of a governing model which was to be based precisely on the sovereignty of the people and the full expression of its will. In Albania after the end of the Second World War we have the birth of a form of government which was based on the organization of the state according to communist theory. The communist ideology, which developed after the division of the world into two camps, which were the result of the Second World War meant to bring to Albania the realization of the principle of democracy. With the consolidation of the power of the communist party which resulted in the creation of the party-state, the principle of democracy consisted in its expression more as a slogan than as an objective for the development and functioning of society and the functioning of power as the genuine will of the people. Consequently, after the fall of the Berlin Wall, as in all former communist countries and in Albania, what the people demanded was the establishment of a state where the principle of democracy was the foundation of its government. Not in vain after the acceptance of political pluralism by the now completed monopoly of the party-state, the establishment of a system based on the principle of democracy was required. However, the creation of political pluralism after the change of the system does not seem to have brought a realization of the principle of democracy as a basis for the functioning of a democratic state as required by Albanian society. It can even be said that the principle of democracy remains an endless challenge for the entire political spectrum in Albania, although this principle always needs to be consolidated. Through this paper it is sought to analyze how the principle of democracy is required to be adopted by all leaders of any kind of government even though in itself it will have to belong to the people. This paper aims to highlight how in the case of political pluralism and even more so in the existence of a single party the principle of democracy remains a challenge, although it forms the basis of all fundamental acts of the Albanian State since the end of the Second World War.

Liberalism and the Path to Treason in the Ottoman Empire, 1908–1923

This chapter looks at the final decade of the Ottoman Empire to examine the way that liberalism went from being part of the sensibility and worldview of an elitist Ottoman establishment, to a term of opprobrium as the Committee of Union and Progress took up the reins of power in the Ottoman government and state. While in recent years the discussion of pluralism has focused on how one state, as a unitary actor, has treated confessional or ethnic minorities, I show here that the very question of political pluralism was the source of a fissure in the Ottoman establishment, and ultimately a cause of conflict as the empire was dissolved and the Kemalist Republic was established.

Orthodoxy and Liberalism in Russian Politics

Russia, in contrast to other modern Orthodox European count ries, has never experienced struggle for church autocephaly and the formation of political pluralism simultaneously, which naturally brought the church and liberals closer together. The distinguishing feature of the Russian liberalism is its late, or “catch up”, development. In the 19th century, libera lism no longer needed a religious approval; the appeal to the Holy Scriptures looked archaic. Another Russian distinguishing feature — divergence of secu lar and spiritual traditions — is also very important. After the emergence of the dualistic monarchy in Russia (1906—1917), religious topics were no lon ger a taboo, but Christian liberalism as an influential trend failed to develop. The attempts of combining liberal and Christian ideas in the pre-revolutiona ry Russian politics faced a number of problems. The results in practice were modest either due to the lack of the electoral demand, or due to the blocking of specific initiatives at the state and church levels. The promotion of liberal va lues contradicted Ortho dox tenets, and the target electoral group — the lower clergy — heavily depended on the episcopate. In the post-Soviet Russia, in contrast to the count ries in Central Europe, Christian politics, including its liberal version, did not revive. At the end of the day, all such projects have remained marginal. The episcopate focuses on cooperation with the authorities, and there is little support for liberal ideas among the faithful. The future might see a gradual strengthening of liberal tendencies within the church, but at the same time, the Russian version of Christian democracy remains extreme ly unlikely.

The Venice Commission and Rule of Law Backsliding in Turkey, Poland and Hungary

How did the Council of Europe cope with its member states that engaged in rule of law backsliding? This article analyses the responses of the Venice Commission, the Council of Europe’s expert body on constitutional matters, to Turkey, Hungary, and Poland as their governments eliminated key checks and balances on their power, curtailed judicial independence, and undermined political pluralism and civil society. It finds that the Venice Commission managed to address a set of particularly vital issues that get to the heart to rule of law backsliding in these countries. Despite the breadth of the Venice Commission’s forthright involvement, these case studies display the limitations on the part of other Council of Europe bodies in forming a coordinated approach and response to rule of law backsliding.