SDSM has changed its position for the election of the Committee’s president

SDSM first said, then denied – the Committee’s president designated prior the plenary session in the Parliament. Photo: Print screen



On the press conference after the coordination of the parliamentary party groups on 23 March 2017, SDSM’s Secretary-General, Oliver Spasovski, announced that a concord about the composition of the Committee on Elections and Appointments and its president has been reached. Spasovski then, inter alia, said:

Though there was one demand in the series of unreasonable demands submitted by VMRO-DPMNE, we accepted VMRO-DPMNE’s member to be Committee’s president, with the intent to unblock the processes in the Republic of Macedonia thereby allowing the democratic tendencies to start functioning, so neither the citizens nor the legislative body won’t be hostages of any politician or political party in Macedonia anymore. By doing so, we want to put the Parliament of the Republic of Macedonia in function as the highest representative body of the citizens of the Republic of Macedonia.

[Source: SDSM’s web site, date: 23 March 2017]



We consider this position of SDSM, proclaimed by the party’s Secretary-General Oliver Spasovski, as inconsistent with the previous positions of the party, more precisely in terms of what SDSM’s leader Zoran Zaev said after the meeting with the Commissioner for European Neighborhood Policy & Enlargement Negotiations, Johannes Hahn, (21 March 2017). Then, when asked whether the president of the Committee on Elections and Appointments will be from SDSM or VMRO-DPMNE, Zaev said that it will be decided on a constitutive session, not on the coordination.

We have been watchful and dedicated to the whole process this entire time. All the while,  we have been literally dribbled that somebody is privately busy, so coordination cannot take place, but we waited for that moment. When they were standing on their ground that the members’ composition should be 6, 5, 1, 1, while we were for 5, 5, 2, 2, we accepted that too. And now they request that the president of the Committee must be from VMRO-DPMNE. We have no problem with this issue either, but it is one more excuse for blocking the election of the Parliament’s president, which we won’t allow. One must remember that according to the Rules of Procedure, the Parliament elects the president of the Committee on Elections and Appointments and its deputy in a plenary session. It elects members and deputy members. VMRO-DPMNE should state its arguments, in front of the entire public, why should the president of the Committee on Elections and Appointments be from their party, and this should be discussed in a plenary session. We will state our arguments, but it is widely known how decisions are made in a democratic country – a hand is risen or the button is pressed, and that’s how the Parliament’s president will be elected – Zaev stated (from 0:00 to 1:23 in the video).

Hence, by taking the two statements into account we noticed inconsistency in SDSM’s position, especially after Zaev’s announcement that the election of the Committee’s president should be debated in the Parliament and that’s how it will be determined which party will get the presidency. According to Spasovski’s last statement, on the other hand, it is clear that the Committee’s president has already been designated, and his/her appointment will by only confirmed by voting.

Also, we should mention that according to Parliament’s Rules of Procedure, Article 20, Paragraph 1, the president of the Committee on Elections and Appointments is elected by the Parliament.

  • At its constitutive session, the Assembly, upon the proposal of at least ten members of the Assembly, shall elect a Committee on Elections and Appointments.



Assessed by: Dimitar Tanurov


All comments and remarks regarding this and other Vistinomer articles, correction and clarification requests as well as suggestions for fact-checking politicians’ statements and political parties’ promises can be submitted by using this form

This article was created within the framework of the Project to increase the accountability of the politicians and political parties Truthmeter implemented by Metamorphosis. The article is made possible by the generous support of the National Endowment for Democracy(NED) and The Balkan Trust for Democracy (BTD), a project of the German Marshall Fund of the United States, an initiative that supports democracy, good governance, and Euroatlantic integration in Southeastern Europe. The content is the responsibility of its author and does not necessarily reflect the views of Metamorphosis, National Endowment for Democracy, the Balkan Trust for Democracy, the German Marshall Fund of the United States, or its partners.

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.