The Skopje Fix: a Pothole in the Middle of the Street "Solved" With a Traffic Cone - the Problem Isn't Repaired, Just Marked
07.07.2026
07.07.2026
07.07.2026
07.07.2026
07.07.2026
07.07.2026
07.07.2026
07.07.2026
07.07.2026
06.07.2026
07.07.2026
07.07.2026
06.07.2026
07.07.2026
07.07.2026
07.07.2026
07.07.2026
06.07.2026
30.06.2026
07.07.2026
07.07.2026
07.07.2026
07.07.2026
07.07.2026
07.07.2026
09.03.2026
27.02.2026
19.02.2026
07.07.2026
06.07.2026
06.07.2026
No news available in this category.
23.04.2026
23.04.2026
12.04.2026
The debate over the new Electoral Code has again dragged the old dividing lines between the parties to the surface - and those lines are, as usual, drawn where it suits the biggest players. Levica claims the government's statements that their demands were accepted "are not true," and that the main demand - a single electoral district - was rejected.
The point Levica makes is sharp: a single electoral district is not a new demand invented overnight - it has been discussed for decades, and it even stands written in the party program of VMRO-DPMNE. The working group to amend the code was formed precisely because of that question. And now, they say, political conditions have been built into the proposed text, and even the solutions there was consensus on have been thrown out.
The most interesting thesis is the one about priorities. The government, Levica claims, is imposing electronic voting for Macedonians abroad as "the most important question for democracy." But that was never a recommendation of the international observers, nor the reason for forming the working group. In other words - the focus is being shifted from what would genuinely make the contest fairer to something that sounds modern but does not touch the core.
And the core, according to this critique, is simple: a single electoral district does not suit the big parties, because it reduces the effect of electoral engineering and creates a fairer contest. Changing the electoral model is allegedly "too big a step," but changing the way of voting for just one specific group is suddenly possible. When the rules keep changing so that the system stays the same, it is worth asking who really benefits from it.
This is an old Balkan story. Every government that reaches the top defends the system that let it get there. Red lines, if they must exist, should be drawn around the rules that create a fairer contest - not around the excuses that preserve the existing one. Whether the new code will be a real reform or just a rearrangement of the same scheme in favor of the same players, the final text will show. So far, the scheme looks familiar.
The latest 10 news from this category
VMRO accuses of a blockade, SDSM of manipulation, Levica demands money for citizens. And the rules we'll vote by at...
The mayor of Centar lands a top party post while SDSM hunts for a fresh face after losing power. But...
Mickoski announced a reshuffle, VLEN rolled out its names, SDSM instantly called it theater. But swapping ministers is the easiest...
The PM put his future on the table to win over the opposition on voting by citizens abroad. A personal...
The government calls it a step forward, the opposition calls it controlled voting. Who's the citizen supposed to trust in...
While the government and the opposition measure who stayed silent how long, the real question - what publishing security data...
E-voting from abroad, a ban on party promotion on official profiles - but electoral rules written by one side alone...
Another round in the Bulgarian squabble. The party claims a diplomatic note compromised Mickoski's security.
A sharp exchange that hides a familiar Balkan model. Residents, whatever their background, want the same thing: water, kindergartens, asphalt,...
Every government, the moment it takes the chair, discovers the same universal culprit - the ones before it. Accusations fill...
This site uses cookies - is that okay? Learn more