Nearly 80% of public consultation participants oppose the abolition of the two-term limit in local government. Enough of the back-and-forth and lifelong grind of office – reads one of the 1,735 comments collected as part of the review of the bill abolishing the two-term limit. Most public consultation participants expressed a similar stance.
78.6% of participants in the public consultation on the parliamentary draft amendment to the Electoral Code, which aims to abolish the two-term rule in local governments, in force since 2018, voted against the proposed legislative solutions, according to information on the Sejm website.
The public consultation on the draft bill amending the Electoral Code, submitted to the Sejm by a group of MPs from the Polish People's Party, was attended by 2,779 participants. According to their declarations, 98.1% of them (2,725 individuals) represented themselves, while only a small percentage represented a legal entity (1.3%) or an entity other than a legal entity (0.6%).
Advertisement See also: Hungry for profit? We serve hot companies on a virtual plate. Dessert? Real prizes!
To the question, “In your opinion, is the adoption of this law necessary?”, the vast majority of respondents (78.6%) responded negatively, while only 17.5% of public consultation participants expressed the opposite opinion. Nearly identical proportions were recorded for the question, “Do you accept the solutions contained in the draft law?” 78% of respondents answered “no,” while 17% of consultation participants provided a positive answer.
Nearly two-thirds of respondents (62%) agreed with the statement that the regulations contained in the draft apply directly to them, and exactly the same percentage of consultation participants decided to add comments to the entire draft law.
The vast majority of the opinions expressed were clearly critical of the solutions proposed in the project, and their authors did not shy away from strong wording.
“Politicians – like diapers – need to be changed frequently, for exactly the same reason . It is not advisable for citizens to keep the same people in office constantly, and this type of change creates the risk of the same people wielding power dynastically,” wrote one participant in the consultation, while another emphasized: “Enough of this back-and-forth and sitting in office for life.”
Below we present an overview of the opinions expressed in the consultation.
“The introduction of these changes will result in a return to the previous state of affairs, which was unfavorable for local communities due to the formation of local agreements with entrepreneurs, the prevention of staff turnover and rejuvenation, and the authorities being guided by their own interests rather than the public interest.”
“It is impossible to resist the impression that the proposal to abolish the two-term limit is a measure aimed at maintaining power for those who already hold it, and not a genuine concern for the quality of local democracy.”
“Two-term limits offer new candidates greater opportunities when there is a significant power imbalance. New candidates have a better chance of breaking through when they don't have to compete with long-serving officials with strong support and recognition. Term limits can also reduce the risk of abuse and corruption, especially in places where local media are dependent on local governments.”
“The introduced change leads to the transformation of the positions of mayors and commune heads from local government to oligarchic ones.”
“The lack of term limits in local government leads to the formation of cliques and networks, burnout, and routine among local government officials. Term limits bring fresh blood and creativity.”
“Two-term positions are desirable for many reasons: firstly, they reduce the risk of pathologies related to excessive attachment to power; secondly, they protect against burnout and stagnation, which often occur after performing the same function for too long; thirdly, they open the way to a fresh look at old problems, enabling the introduction of innovative solutions and adaptation to changing conditions.”
“History clearly shows that eliminating term limits was the first step in establishing most totalitarian regimes.”
There were significantly fewer voices supporting the abolition of the two-term limit – some of them are listed below.
“The current provision limits the right to choose. It prevents or significantly limits the continuation of long-term plans. It negates the desire of the mayor, commune head, or city president to implement long-term strategies. It also discourages the building of good relations between bodies at different levels. It, in a sense, negates the experience gained in office.”
“Two-term terms are a limitation for mayors who implement long-term local government development programs. It contradicts the idea of democracy when the mayor proves himself in office and enjoys public support.”
“I would like to have the right to vote, I live in a commune with an experienced mayor and I would like to vote for him again.”
In early July, the Polish People's Party (PSL) submitted a bill to the Sejm (lower house of parliament) that would abolish the rule that a mayor, commune head, or city president can serve only two terms. In addition to abolishing the two-term limit, the draft amendment to the Electoral Code also proposes eliminating the ban on candidates for commune head, commune mayor, or city president from also running for district council and provincial assembly elections.
Public consultations on the parliamentary draft bill amending the Electoral Code concluded on August 7. A report on the consultations is available on the Sejm website.
The two-term rule for mayors, commune heads, and city presidents was introduced in 2018 and has been in effect since the local elections held that same year. The amendment to the Electoral Code introduced at that time also extended the term of local governments from four to five years. (PAP)
I have/ ktl/
