Interplay Between Non-Partisan Presidents, Party System and Quality of Democracy in Lithuania

Lithuania has a semi-presidential political system with directly elected president, in the context of Central and Eastern Europe enjoying average presidential powers (Sedelius, 2006). There is a strong tradition to elect non-partisan presidents: since the restoration of state independence and transition to democracy, only two presidents had traceable background of belonging to a particular political party: Algirdas M. Brazauskas (1993-1998) and R. Paksas (2003-2004). If additional criterion of president coming from the established party system (hence not a new party) is added, this list shortens to only Brazauskas: the last time when Lithuania elected a truly partisan president was 1993. On other hand, Lithuania also has a semi-stable party system with average-to-high electoral volatility: traditional left-right parties persist, but are constantly challenged by newcomers. This poses two main questions: what are the conditions for such a success of non-partisan presidents and what is the political impact of this tradition, especially on the party system and quality of democracy? It is argued in the paper that there are three main groups of factors explaining the non-partisan presidents’ success in Lithuania: institutional, social and political. First, main institutional factors are direct elections themselves and clause in the Constitution that president cannot be a member of any party (this applies only after the election, hence parties can raise their candidates). Second, social factors are very important, since they enable voting for the non-partisan candidates (also observed in the parliamentary elections): low degree of party identification (lots of floating voters), low trust in the political parties and lack of ideological differences among the voters (the main cleavage being on the geopolitical orientation and historical memory). Finally, party strategies that try to maximise their political influence without antagonizing the potential supporters (in the parliamentary elections) also play the part: in 2009 and 2014 main right-wing parties (liberals and conservatives) chose to support popular non-partisan Dalia Grybauskaitė. Even though Grybauskaitė easily won both contests, quantitative analysis of her support base reveals both catch-all and right wing profile. This leads to a paradox: successful candidate in the Lithuanian presidential elections should be non-partisan, but also have the support of important parties. It is argued that such a “symbiosis” is actually damaging for the quality of democracy, since it reinforces the weakly structured party system and mistrust in parties: president enjoys the perks of being supported by the parties’ organizations in the campaign, but in order to stay popular has to keep the distance and exploit the “non-partisan” side of the politics when elected. Moreover, direct presidential elections are usually very personalized and strengthen the role of populism and plebiscitarian linkages (issues that have little to do with the post of president are emphasized: for example, socio-economic problems). Majority of Lithuanians would prefer the strengthening of presidential powers and support for the strong-hand politics is one of the highest in the EU.