Autoritatea Electorală Permanentă REVISTA ROMÂNĂ de STUDII ELECTORALE Vol. VII, nr. 1 – 2, 2019 Autoritatea Electorală Permanentă REVISTA ROMÂNĂ de STUDII ELECTORALE Vol. VII, nr. 1 – 2, 2019 Revista Română de Studii Electorale Publicaţie bianuală editată de Autoritatea Electorală Permanentă (continuă revista Expert Electoral) ISSN (print): 2601-8454 ISSN (L): 2601-8454 Consiliul știinţific: Rafael López-Pintor Paul DeGregorio – Universitatea Autonomă din Madrid Pierre Garrone – Asociaţia Mondială a Organismelor Electorale Robert Krimmer – Comisia de la Veneţia Toby James – Ragnar Nurkse School of Innovation and Governance, Tallinn University of Technology Ştefan Deaconu – School of Politics, Philosophy, Language and Communication Studies, University of East Anglia Sergiu Mişcoiu – Universitatea din Bucureşti Daniel Barbu – Facultatea de Studii Europene, Universitatea Babeş-Bolyai Constantin-Florin Mituleţu-Buică – Universitatea din București Marian Muhuleţ – Autoritatea Electorală Permanentă Zsombor Vajda – Autoritatea Electorală Permanentă – Autoritatea Electorală Permanentă Consiliul redacţional: Alexandru Radu Daniel Duţă Andrada-Maria Mateescu Bogdan Fartușnic Octavian Mircea Chesaru Camelia Runceanu Realizat la Autoritatea Electorală Permanentă Str. Stavropoleos nr. 6, sector 3, Bucureşti [email protected] www.roaep.ro CUPRINS Alexandru RADU, Daniel BUTI – Electoral Design in Central and Eastern Europe ..................... 5 Séminaire international sur la participation électorale et l’éducation à la démocratie et la 7e Assemblée générale du Réseau des compétences électorales francophones (Sinaia, du 5 au 7 juin 2019) ................................................................................................................................................................. 25 Déclaration du RECEF à Sinaia ....................................................................................................................... 30 Constantin-Florin MITULEŢU-BUICĂ – Discurs de bun venit al preşedintelui Autorităţii Electorale Permanente ........................................................................................................................................ 32 Siaka SANGARÉ – Discours d’ouverture du président du Réseau des compétences électorales francophones ........................................................................................................................................................... 33 Catherine LAGACÉ – La participation électorale et l’éducation à la démocratie, moteurs d’une citoyenneté engagée ................................................................................................................................. 36 Tanor Thiendella FALL – Les modalités d’accès au vote et l’information aux électeurs lors de l’élection présidentielle du 24 février 2019 .......................................................................................... 39 Marlène LEBREUX, Monica ROSALES – L’éducation à la démocratie : perspectives d’avenir ...................................................................................................................................................................... 42 Dániel LISTÁR – Shape Your Future! Vote! A Youth Education Case Study from Hungary ..... 47 Octavian CHESARU – Misinformation of the Electorate – A Factor in Declining Participation in the Vote ................................................................................................................................................................. 50 Camelia RUNCEANU – Quelques hypothèses concernant la participation électorale dans les pays d’Europe de l’Est ................................................................................................................................... 59 Constantin RADA – Finanțarea partidelor politice: tendințe și orientări naționale și europene 86 Luiza NEDELCU – Programul electoral pentru observarea alegerilor prezidențiale din data de 10 noiembrie 2019 ......................................................................................................................................................... 91 Alegerile din 1919. Câteva repere bibliografice ............................................................................................... 95 Raport privind organizarea şi desfășurarea alegerilor pentru membrii din România în Parlamentul European și a referendumului național din data de 26.05. 2019 (prima parte) ................................ 101 English Summary ............................................................................................................................................................ 174 Electoral Design in Central and Eastern Europe Alexandru RADU, Daniel BUTI Introduction s a Our paper i comparative analysis of the ways in which the national parliaments are elected in 11 European Union states of Central and Eastern Europe. The research question focuses on the existence of a pattern of electoral practice in these countries, starting from the general idea of the uniformity of the post-communist transitory processes. Our first aim is to see whether the sample countries have developed similar electoral practices, which may indicate the existence of a functional model specific to the region. In order to reach this objective, we first take into consideration the systematization and classification of the electoral systems in our sample countries. In this respect, the approach is based1 on the theoretical models established by literature, especially the classification used by Norris . At the same time, we propose to question the performances of electoral systems in those countries, namely what degree of electoral justice is to be found in each of them. To achieve this, we will employ as independent variables three factors of disproportionality. These are the methods for translating votes into mandates, the district magnitude, and the electoral threshold. As dependent variables, we will utilize wasted votes (political unrepresented votes), electoral premium (the bonus awarded to the winning party) and the Gallagher Index. We mention that, at this first level of research, our aim is to highlight the relatively unitary electoral practice in the region and to find out whether the institutional homogeneity can also be found in the effects of electoral systems, namely the proportionality. Our analytical approach is an important step for a complex comparative analysis, acting as an open window to this region. It is useful for research in the field, providing a basis for new research questions and well-grounded explanatory approaches. The comparative analysis concerns a number of 11 post-communist states, located in Central Europe and Eastern Europe, selected due to their membership in the European Union at the time of our research. In this category we find Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Croatia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia and Hungary. The reference period of our study surpasses a period of two decades beginning with the first multi-party parliamentary ballot in2 each country. In four countries from our sample, those for which the state existence was prior to 1989 – Bulgaria, Poland, Romania and Hungary –, the first multi- party elections were held in 1990 . In the other seven, the first multi-party elections followed the moment the state independence was declared: in 1992 in Croatia, Estonia, Lithuania3 and Slovenia, in 1993 in Latvia,Electoral in Engineering: 1994 in VotingSlovakia Rules and and Politicalin 1996 Behaviour in the Czech Republic . The two decades of 12 P. Norris, , Cambridge University Press, 2004. In Poland, the first parliamentary ballot took place in June 1989, based upon the “April Agreement” (“Round Table”), but it had a limited competitive feature, 65% of the 460 mandates of the First Chamber being reserved to the Communist3 Party. In the cases of the Czech Republic and Slovakia, we will consider also the 1992 ballot, the last one from the Czechoslovakia’s existence. 5 Vol. VII, nr. 1 – 2, 2019 Revista Română de Studii Electorale 4 electoral experience of those countries – between seven and nine parliamentary electoral cycles were organized – is sufficiently large to assure the relevance of the findings. We mention that for most of the analysed period, the countries in the sample are considered to be free (democratic) countries. According to thefree Freedom House data (2016), eight of our sample countries (Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovenia and Hungary)free are certified as having been uninterruptedlyfree since 1995, namely with almost a decade before their formal integration in the EU structures in 2004. They are joined by Romania, certified as beginning with 1996, but also Slovakia, since 1995, but with an interruption of two years – 1996 and 1997. Lastly, in the case of Croatia, which joined the EU in 2016, we find a certified democratic experience which had existed prior to this moment for more than a decade and a half, namely since 2000. For all these countries we take into consideration the electoral systems employed for the election of the national representations, with the following observations. The countries of our sample are divided in two unequal categories, split by their parliamentary institution type. Thus, most of them (seven) have unicameral parliaments,5 according to their reduced demographic dimensions and their unitary form of state: Bulgaria (the National Assembly – 240 mandates);