The Unjust Ban on Cǎlin Georgescu: A Threat to Democratic Principles

The article discusses the implications of Romania’s Central Electoral Bureau banning far-Right candidate Cǎlin Georgescu from running for president, arguing that such actions undermine the core principles of democracy, which require the right to express diverse political ideas. It critiques the EU’s endorsement of this ban and raises concerns about how this behavior reinforces authoritarian narratives.

The recent ban on Cǎlin Georgescu from running for president by Romania’s Central Electoral Bureau, which received backing from the European Union’s liberal framework, marks a severe blow to democratic principles. The essence of democracy involves the robust expression of ideas and the right of individuals, regardless of their ideology, to participate in elections. The outrage stems from the acknowledgment that the freedom to contest at the ballot box is paramount, a stance that the actions against Georgescu contradict.

The justification for this ban, rooted in allegations of violating democratic obligations, is fundamentally flawed. The right to vote and run for office should be an inherent entitlement for any citizen. Unlike rewards that require validation, such rights must remain unimpeded by arbitrary authorities; any mechanism to restrict them constitutes an affront to democratic values.

The author emphasizes their experience growing up under a fascist regime, which has imparted a deep understanding of the dangers posed by ultra-Right movements. Past experiences with authoritarian figures heighten their concern that liberal authoritarianism, marked by opportunistically banning opponents, only serves to strengthen extremist ideologies by casting doubt on the democratic process itself.

Moreover, the implications of this ban stretch beyond Romania, potentially serving as a tool for adversarial political narratives. The author questions how this action benefits figures like Putin, who may relish seeing Western democracies emulate his repressive tactics. It raises concerns about the EU’s credibility, especially when framed against accusations that it undermines democracy in Eastern Europe.

In conclusion, the ban on Cǎlin Georgescu represents a grave contradiction to the core principles of democracy. It underscores the necessity of safeguarding electoral rights, even for those with despised views. Engaging politically with those we oppose is essential rather than retreating into illiberal practices that could corroborate authoritarian narratives. The response to dangerous ideologies should remain rooted in democratic engagement, not suppression.

Original Source: unherd.com