Innovative practices in Bulgaria
Sharing innovations for improving local self-government
Plovdiv General Assembly an Experiment for Direct Democracy
Association for Plovdiv Renaissance
Background
The ideal for Democracy has always been connected with the widest and most active citizen participation in the governing of a country or of a region possible. The Classical Referendum could encourage citizens participation, but it is too clumsy and expensive endeavor, because as in the case of elections it requires Election Committees (over 560 for Plovdiv), voting bulletins, envelopes, security and waste of time for the citizens. For Plovdiv, the realistic cost for such a referendum would be 250-300 million leva, while the purpose to get the opinion of the citizens on an important to them question could be achieved much more easily and less expensively. The Plovdiv solution is to use a correct representative sample which, with calculable accuracy, to reflect the opinion of all Plovdiv citizens. The Association for Plovdiv Renaissance develops the project "General Аssembly", financed by the USAID through its "Democracy Network" program and realized with the assistance of the Municipal Council-Plovdiv as a first phase in 1998.
The ideal for Democracy has always been connected with the widest and most active citizen participation in the governing of a country or of a region possible. The Classical Referendum could encourage citizens participation, but it is too clumsy and expensive endeavor, because as in the case of elections it requires Election Committees (over 560 for Plovdiv), voting bulletins, envelopes, security and waste of time for the citizens. For Plovdiv, the realistic cost for such a referendum would be 250-300 million leva, while the purpose to get the opinion of the citizens on an important to them question could be achieved much more easily and less expensively. The Plovdiv solution is to use a correct representative sample which, with calculable accuracy, to reflect the opinion of all Plovdiv citizens. The Association for Plovdiv Renaissance develops the project "General Аssembly", financed by the USAID through its "Democracy Network" program and realized with the assistance of the Municipal Council-Plovdiv as a first phase in 1998.
Practice
The goals of the General Assemblies are:
to experiment with a model of a Plovdiv Town Assembly as an example of direct democracy;
to make Plovdiv citizens feel confident about the achievability of their citizens activities by demonstrating how the local authorities are taking into consideration the clearly-stated public opinion;
to establish among representatives of the local authorities democratic reflexes for taking into consideration the opinion of the public;
to solve some important local problems with decisions mutually taken by the General Assembly and the elected officials in the name of the sustainable development of the city;
The General Assembly of the Plovdiv citizens has two sessions with the participation of more than 1,000 citizens each time, included in the representative samples. The methods and materials used are:
overly correct unilateral representative sample;
a wide range of informational materials on the referendum problem, objectively introducing the opposing viewpoints, distributed to the citizens from the sample;
option for a direct or remote vote (by mail);
What makes the General Assembly a Referendum is the voting on a system by the Municipal Council-Plovdiv for taking into consideration the vote of the citizens from the representative sample by including the referendum problem on its agenda and voting on it. The decision is enacted only when both organs have voted "for" (which is just as in a dual-chamber parliament). In case of differences in the vote results of the two organs, the decision of the Municipal Council is considered valid. However, this happens only when the problem has been worked out in the Municipal Council commissions, a new hearing is held and the issue is re-voted with a qualified majority. This decision ( 126 from 1998) has been taken following the proposal of the Association for Plovdiv Renaissance. With its adoption, a working mechanism for influence of the public opinion over concrete decisions of the councilors has been legislatively established.
The goals of the General Assemblies are:
to experiment with a model of a Plovdiv Town Assembly as an example of direct democracy;
to make Plovdiv citizens feel confident about the achievability of their citizens activities by demonstrating how the local authorities are taking into consideration the clearly-stated public opinion;
to establish among representatives of the local authorities democratic reflexes for taking into consideration the opinion of the public;
to solve some important local problems with decisions mutually taken by the General Assembly and the elected officials in the name of the sustainable development of the city;
The General Assembly of the Plovdiv citizens has two sessions with the participation of more than 1,000 citizens each time, included in the representative samples. The methods and materials used are:
overly correct unilateral representative sample;
a wide range of informational materials on the referendum problem, objectively introducing the opposing viewpoints, distributed to the citizens from the sample;
option for a direct or remote vote (by mail);
What makes the General Assembly a Referendum is the voting on a system by the Municipal Council-Plovdiv for taking into consideration the vote of the citizens from the representative sample by including the referendum problem on its agenda and voting on it. The decision is enacted only when both organs have voted "for" (which is just as in a dual-chamber parliament). In case of differences in the vote results of the two organs, the decision of the Municipal Council is considered valid. However, this happens only when the problem has been worked out in the Municipal Council commissions, a new hearing is held and the issue is re-voted with a qualified majority. This decision ( 126 from 1998) has been taken following the proposal of the Association for Plovdiv Renaissance. With its adoption, a working mechanism for influence of the public opinion over concrete decisions of the councilors has been legislatively established.
Results
Two mini-referendums with the participation of over 2,000 citizens were conducted. The first one treats problems with the stray dogs; the second the creation of an eco -police. These issues are included in sessions of the Municipal Council-Plovdiv for voting by the counselors. The municipal administration then begins applying the decisions taken by both citizens and counselors. The interests of the Plovdiv citizens in participating in the local self-government and in solving of local issues is increased; their confidence in the civil society power is increased.
This innovative method of involving citizens participation the applied in Plovdiv mini-referendums using representative samples from the whole community and which vote is taken into consideration by the organs of local government represent a realistic, cheap and effective mix of direct and representative democracy, because:
they can be quickly prepared;
their participants could be introduced to opposing viewpoints of the problem at hand;
there are guarantees against a hasty decision-taking under the dictate of emotions.
Two mini-referendums with the participation of over 2,000 citizens were conducted. The first one treats problems with the stray dogs; the second the creation of an eco -police. These issues are included in sessions of the Municipal Council-Plovdiv for voting by the counselors. The municipal administration then begins applying the decisions taken by both citizens and counselors. The interests of the Plovdiv citizens in participating in the local self-government and in solving of local issues is increased; their confidence in the civil society power is increased.
This innovative method of involving citizens participation the applied in Plovdiv mini-referendums using representative samples from the whole community and which vote is taken into consideration by the organs of local government represent a realistic, cheap and effective mix of direct and representative democracy, because:
they can be quickly prepared;
their participants could be introduced to opposing viewpoints of the problem at hand;
there are guarantees against a hasty decision-taking under the dictate of emotions.
[Nominate]
back