Political campaigns before elections are always filled with certain tensions. Obviously, for some political parties, it will be decisive whether they remain in power in a next coalition cabinet, for others it's a struggle to make it at least into parliament, by getting over the minimum threshold. Given the fact, whether you are in power, whether you are in the opposition, whether you have economic haydays or whether you are in the midst of a recession, strategically planning a campaign, determining the party's agenda is not a child's game. One deals with party principles, electorate preferences to mention just a few.
Slovakia's ruling SMER-SD, the social-democratic party under the leadership of Mr Fico, has turned into a party, which (in all seriousness) behaves like the Polit-Bureau before the 1989 revolution. Being social-democrat, would implicate, you are still democratic, yet any possible free discussion is curbed as much as possible. As for me, nobody at this moment, can convince me in any possible way, that SMER is indeed a true social-democratic party. Far from a German SPD, British Labour, Dutch PvdA or SP, and the like.
The upcoming elections, will be - prom a politological point of view - very interesting, to see how a crypto-communist club will be trying to remain in the saddle (although becoming a bit wobbly lately); without the gift of being able to face political debating - or even allowing them - and painfully embarrassing scandals.
Yet, last Friday, our Dear Comrade Mr Fico demonstrated a daring piece: Calling a press briefing where he publicly announced having found "new evidence" where the opposition SDKU party, apparently was involved in money laundering practices. Not "allegedly", no: just a clear and proven case. Further he added, that the opposition should watch its steps, as he [Mr Fico] could use this agains them [SDKU].
There is, however, one quite odd point: Since Mr Fico is originally a lawyer - specialised in criminal law (let's leave for a while aside, that he never won any case - but according to him, it's enough reason to label himself as being a "successful lawyer") he must for sure know that money laundering is a serious thing, and certainly must be reported immediately to the state attorney. The cardinal question is: why doesn't he do so, since not reporting a known crime makes you an accomplice? Hardly something to explain that to a lawyer... or is it something else?
In civilised countries, political campaigns are about discussions and political issues, party programmes, etc. Threatening the opposition is making a politician far from credible. Mr Fico, this case makes you, as a lawyer unconvincing. For if it were true, you would (should!) have acted much faster and the state attorney would be fully in charge now. So why don't you? As a politician it disqualifies you completely, to use such murky tactics of mud slinging. Not even a slight sense of political intuition tells you, that this is a no-go?
MS
No comments:
Post a Comment