Long live the kakistocracy

Bilyana Gyaurova-Wegertseder

Kakistocracy means rule by the worst, the least qualified and the stupidest. The word is Greek and is derived from “kakistos”, meaning worst, and “kratos”, which translates as power, rule. The word was first used in England, in the early 17th century during a church service. A little later, in 1829, it came into use again in a novel by the English writer Thomas Love Peacock, where it is used as a homonym of aristocracy.

It's not one of the most used words and one might think it doesn't even exist. In the last few years, however, it has come back into use, and perhaps this is no coincidence.

Transferred to Bulgarian territory, it must be linked to the question - are we in a kakistocracy or are we on the way to becoming such a government?

Let us look at some of the basic elements of democracy. First of all, there are elections - the only constitutionally guaranteed right that gives everyone with the right to vote a real opportunity to exercise it and thus contribute to changing or consolidating the status quo. Next, we have the separation of powers, in reality, again guaranteed by the Constitution and with mechanisms that work to mutually deter them /the so called checks and balances/. Next comes the judiciary, which by definition is independent and the supreme arbitrator in disputes that arise between citizens, companies and state bodies. In Bulgaria, the judiciary is specific because it includes not only judges but also prosecutors and investigators. Another very important element is the mandate, which ensures, or should ensure, continuity and a healthy renewal of the leadership corps in the state, so as not to end up with capturing of institutions, privatisation of entire sectors and service of private /personal or partisan/ interests.

Now let us imagine a country that is governed not in a democratic way but as a kakistocracy. All the principles listed above cease to exist and operate or are available only on paper without real application.

We have elections, but the level of participation in them is reduced to an absolute minimum and can in no way change any status quo. The result is quite the opposite - low voter turnout leads to a preponderance of bought votes, who vote as subordinates rather than as constitutionally empowered citizens; electoral malpractices are so serious that they lead to demands for the annulment of elections. Is the electoral process run by the worst, the least qualified and the stupidest? The answer here is rather no, but one gets the feeling that the electoral process is purposely not being managed in the most independent and competent manner.

Under the Constitution, the separation of powers is regulated and the executive, judiciary and legislature are set out in the texts with certain rights and limits to their exercise. Again, the perception is that the powers are blurred, intertwined and mutual restraint of powers is absent. The country has not had a regular executive /regular government/ for years; there is a shift from one caretaker government to another; the names of ministers change so quickly that we do not even have time to remember them. Nor can we remember who enters parliament and why. All we remember is the devaluation of the legislative process and the production of legislation that can very much be described as a scrap. It should be noted here that, in terms of the executive and the legislature, the processes of kakistocracy started a long time ago and have only deepened in recent years. In Bulgarian political jargon, the word "Kalinka" (ladybug) has become a pejorative for a person who does not have the necessary qualities to hold a certain high office in the state, but is nevertheless appointed or "elected" to/for it according to some vague criteria. People holding high positions were found on the roads of the homeland and found themselves clothed with power and authority for which they were not ready or did not know how to handle. Contempt for expertise and accumulated knowledge and skills has led to them becoming a laughing stock and ceasing to matter when one is in power.  Harvard became a dirty word, being an expert in a field began to sound like a joke, and "you're stupid and I'm stupid and that’s why we get along" became the slogan of a long governing period.

How are things in the judiciary? It is supposed that there are people who have the necessary training and qualities to be independent arbiters and to investigate and bring charges in a sufficiently autonomous and objective way, and to apply the law equally to all. The judiciary, however, cannot remain isolated from what is happening in the country and in recent times it seems to be left with the feeling that it too has become quite flexible and adaptable. In other words, the kakistocratic governance that can be curbed through an impartial court and an accountable prosecution service finds itself further empowered by them. It is no coincidence that, regardless of the state, the first aspiration of those who have come to power is to secure judicial and prosecutorial backing because they are aware that this is the way to stay in power for as long as possible. In Bulgaria, things are further complicated by the way in which the people who administer the judiciary are chosen and take all the important decisions relating to the demotion, appointment, salaries, disciplinary proceedings and training of judges, prosecutors and investigators. The increased involvement of the legislature, and that too in a parliamentary republic, inherently implies political colouration of the Supreme Judicial Council, despite the fact that much of its members swear to the contrary. And when we have a situation of kakistocracy, there is no way it will not spill over into the judiciary. Well, they are not the worst and the stupidest there, but you can tell by their actions that they are rather the most unscrupulous and the most skilful in handling procedures and laws. In a negative way.

The inability of the 51st parliament to elect its own speaker, for almost two weeks now, is another touch to the kakistocratic model of governance in our country. Political loyalty trumps the oath of office and "to be guided in all my actions by the interests of the people" remains only a loud and good wish. Does the people have any culpability in this situation? Rather yes, because - we elected them. However, we must not forget that the whole political process is gradually moving us away from democracy, because kakistocracy is a characteristic precursor to the rise of a totalitarian or authoritarian regimes in their most ugly form.