Democracy is a Greek word and means rule by the people (demos - people, kratos - rule, power). As you know, in Georgia, the illegitimate / de facto government held presidential elections, in which only one candidate - Mikheil Kavelashvili, was represented, which personally reminds me of the Soviet Union. I am also surprised by this step of the Georgian Dream, because if they were able to artificially create an artificial "opposition" to the "power of the people", then here too they could have found other means to make the elections look relatively democratic, but no... It is also worth noting that the illegitimate president was not elected by the people, he was elected by the electoral college and won with 224 votes / 100%. Let's consider to what extent current elections can be considered democratic. Single-candidate elections are considered part of democracy only in exceptional cases, but in general, they do not comply with the basic principles of democratic elections, such as competition, freedom of choice, and pluralism.
Why it is not democratic:
Lack of competition: The essence of democratic elections is free competition between different candidates. The existence of a single candidate eliminates this competition.
Limited choice: Citizens/voters should have alternatives so that they can actually choose a representative who corresponds to their own views and values.
Political pluralism: Democracy implies the coexistence of different ideas, ideologies, and parties. Single-candidate elections do not reflect this.
there is no democracy where there is no expressed opinion...and authoritarians (and other non-democratic regimes) hate dissent.
Special cases:
National consensus or period of crisis: If one candidate generates a broad public consensus and his or her election is a way to defuse a temporary or exceptional crisis, this may be somewhat understandable. However, this should still be done in an open and free process.
Independent candidate: If other candidates have decided not to participate, and there has been no coercion or manipulation in this process, this can formally be considered as an adherence to democratic principles.
Single-candidate elections may be formally held within the framework of a democratic process, but in practice, this does not reflect a fully-fledged democratic process. This requires multi-party competition and a real choice for citizens.
Single-candidate presidential elections are only held in authoritarian and semi-authoritarian countries where political competition was/is severely limited or non-existent. In such elections, the population has no real freedom of choice, as there are no alternative candidates. For example:
Soviet Union: In the Soviet Union (1922–1991), elections were formally held, but there was always only one candidate, nominated by the Communist Party. It is also known to this day that the Communist Party nominated a candidate for a fee of a certain ruble. The people had the choice only to say "yes" or "no" to the candidate chosen by the party.
North Korea: In North Korea (since 1953), elections are formally held, but there is always only one candidate on the list. This candidate is represented by the ruling party, and the elections are only a form of legitimation.
China: In the People's Republic of China, where the Communist Party is in power, only candidates selected by the party stand for election. The president is effectively elected by the party leadership.
Eritrea: Eritrea has never held competitive elections since gaining independence in 1993. President Isaias Afwerki has been in power for over 30 years and there were no other candidates in the election.
Egypt: During the rule of Hosni Mubarak from 1981 to 2005, only one candidate ran in elections in Egypt. His rule lasted for more than 30 years.
Georgia: one day I will remove this article from this list... The fight for democracy and a European future is not over yet.
In modern times, single-candidate elections are rarely held in an open format. We have seen this recently in the case of Georgia. Often this happens indirectly, for example, when opposition candidates are intimidated or imprisoned, making competition impossible. Single-candidate elections are mainly a sign of authoritarian or totalitarian regimes. This practice is alien to modern democratic states, as it ignores pluralism and freedom of choice.
Author: Luka Urumashvili
Comentários