-3

In Russia, today the second most popular condidate after Putin, with a pro-peace position, Nadezhdin, was not allowed to participate in election by vote of the electoral commission.

What happens in the democratic countries if the president's office orders the electoral commission not to register the opposing candidate to participate in election?

Anixx
  • 11,261
  • 2
  • 37
  • 57
  • 7
    I think I'd have a strong tendency to call a country where a member of the executive can order the electoral commission to decide over a candidacy undemocratic. That would make my answer: it can't happen in a democratic country. – ccprog Feb 08 '24 at 17:32
  • 1
    @ccprog: I think the OP means order in a covert manner, not necessarily with a legal basis. I vaguely recall there was a Q like that here not long ago though... I found it https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/83472/how-do-western-countries-get-people-who-vote-against-the-authorities Not quite the same though. – the gods from engineering Feb 08 '24 at 17:41
  • But re-reading that stream of thought, you wrote there "So, my question is: you have a person in charge, the boss, the authority who says to vote for them, to not allow this or that candidate to run to the electoral commision or to the court to make this decision, how can you do something in defiance?" – the gods from engineering Feb 08 '24 at 17:47
  • 1
    @ccprog It very nearly happened to Donald Trump. Thankfully, the Supreme Court seems inclined to overturn the bans on him running. – nick012000 Feb 09 '24 at 21:38

1 Answers1

8

What happens in the democratic countries if the president's office orders the electoral commission not to register the opposing candidate to participate in election?

In a democracy, if the law doesn't disqualify the opposing candidate for some reason, then this order is disregarded, and if it is not disregarded, a court orders the electoral commission to register the candidate.

On the other hand, if the law provides that a candidate isn't eligible to run for office, then the order is followed.

In democracies, the president's power is not absolute and the president can only do those things that the constitution and the laws authorize the president to do. If the president isn't bound by the laws in this way, then the country isn't a democracy.

ohwilleke
  • 79,130
  • 11
  • 224
  • 303
  • 2
    You might also note that it might happen in a democracy that one serious opposition candidate or even one party gets banned for good and legal reasons, but people would ask questions if all serious opposition candidates or parties are banned. – o.m. Feb 08 '24 at 19:44
  • @o.m. is not subordination of the courts, parliament and the electoral commission to the president one of the main principles of democracy? We were told so sinse 1993 from TV throughout the 1990s. They said that otherwise anti-democratic forces, like communists would return to power, instead of the president who was a democrat back then. – Anixx Feb 08 '24 at 21:52
  • 3
    @Anixx "is not subordination of the courts, parliament and the electoral commission to the president one of the main principles of democracy?" Heck no. Just the opposite. Everything else being subordinate to the President is just another name for a dictatorship. – ohwilleke Feb 08 '24 at 22:04
  • 4
    Depending on the eventual SCOTUS decision about Presidential "absolute immunity" goes, the US President may have lethal means to "disqualify" the opposition. – Barmar Feb 08 '24 at 22:46
  • @Barmar: Trumped was shocked before that he didn't get the loyalty he expected from SCOTUS [judges, he appointed]. Along the lines of "I gave you a job for life, why don't you give me one?" – the gods from engineering Feb 09 '24 at 10:02