For political parties in post-Soviet countries, and especially for Georgian ones, intra-party democracy is a notion devoid of any real meaning. 

If intra-party elections (primaries) in the West are the result of an open, competitive public selection process, Georgian voters are forced to settle for pre-written, ready-made candidate lists and are used to their unanimous approval. If Western political parties have strict internal party rules and electoral routines, Georgian political parties have merely formal management bodies and rules for their election.

In political parties of democratic countries, following an election defeat, public debates on what caused the defeat; party leaders resign; the composition of the governing bodies changes, and internal party elections are called. This is how a party begins to prepare for victory in next election. In Georgia, however, this never happens. In fact, no one bothers to enforce formal mechanisms written on paper, and no one is "punished" for non-compliance with or violation of the rules.

In Georgia, election results do not affect party elites: No one is ever held responsible for election results. As a rule, external factors are blamed for losses. By and large, voters are not interested in where the party elites come from or why and how the congress approves them; the role of governing bodies of the party, known as political councils, in the decision-making process; or how voter lists are created even though everyone—even party members—learns the names and pecking order of the list from TV.  While party supporters occasionally quietly raise their voices to question candidate lists, and there are whispers about potential high-level resignations, those tepid protests are temporary.  The feelings of ill-will are quickly suppressed and neutralized by party bosses.

But why should internal democratic processes (or absence thereof) be important to ordinary voters? Why should we be interested in what is written on paper and what is actually done? The State Audit Service and party members should be concerned with that, many say, but not rank and file members.

In general, what is intra-party democracy? Or why is it necessary in a country, which is partially occupied? When the country's economy is volatile, the GEL depreciates to record lows, the pandemic rages on, and people struggle to buy food?

Party democracy is the lever for voters to get what they demand and fight for; to get the economy, society and state they want through direct participation in political processes and pressure on political parties. Intra-party democracy is the tool every active citizen can use to determine how their chosen political team should behave, what decisions it should make, who it should represent, with whom it should enter into a long-term alliance, and what kind of country it should plan to build and in what way.

The supporter of this or that party must be involved in determining who will be their preferred candidate and representative on the parliamentary or majoritarian lists, in the shadow cabinets, or in the party elite that will lead them to victory. The active citizen should take part in the creation of such a force and should not take ready-made lists created by someone else following cabinet deals or backstage wars.

Party democracy is when voters of a particular party decide and control how their party leaders manage the budget funds or donations the party received because of their struggle; nominated candidates for prime minister and mayor; and decide who will represent their region on the governing councils, who better understands their pain and their economic or social problems. Because it is at the party level that popularly supported candidates (lists and programs) who have won (and not been exposed through fictitious or rigged internal "elections") have the prospect of winning at the national level. Only a critical mass created in such a way can give a mandate of confidence to this or that party and create a platform of proper strength to win the elections.

In a democracy, politics is determined not by party groups or individual politicians, but by the members, supporters, and voters behind those parties who are represented by these groups and politicians. The ability of the citizen to influence political decisions, party politics, and their success gives us the leverage to create our desired state. The ongoing processes within the parties are an indicator of what we will wake up to after each election.

Intra-party democracy may sound alien and remote, as if it is not our individual pain at all (let the parties themselves control the management of the parties!). But maybe the problem is that there is no political will to implement democracy in the parties themselves? It would be logical to ask how difficult it is to run a party democratically if the will to do so exists. Aren't the statutes made by the parties themselves? Didn’t they create the mechanisms of enforcing the rules? Are not political leaders constantly telling us about renewal, internal party elections, maximum involvement of members, and considering the interests of their constituents ? So where is the problem?

The problem is probably the party elites themselves and the lack of will to govern democratically. A party leader or group of leaders does not need democracy, transparency, accountability, or electivity within the party when they can oversee finances, compiling lists, party voters, and their constituents.

You may be wondering what resources do the opposition parties have? Or how can the leader of an opposition party not worry about real election or renewal after losing seven elections in a row? Consider, please, the annual funding parties receive from the budget based on the results of the 2020 parliamentary elections:

Georgian Dream - Democratic Georgia – 5,140,020 GEL

United National Movement - 2,199,635 GEL

European Georgia - Movement for Freedom – 1,124,409 GEL

Alliance of Patriots of Georgia – 1,043,120 GEL

Giorgi Vashadze - Strategy Builder – 939,925.35 GEL

Lelo for Georgia – 803,560 GEL

European Democrats – 460,000 GEL

Georgian Labor Party - 289,710 GEL

Movement for State People - 240,000 GEL

Republican Party of Georgia – 204,000 GEL

Law and Justice – 104,436.15 GEL

Progress and Freedom - 12,000 GEL

It is pointless to argue that no one voluntarily relinquishes control over such a large resource. A competitive electoral environment and transparent party finances are direct threats to policymakers and appointed leaders whose only leverages to maintain power and status are party resources and the suppression of intra-party democracy.

Maybe the general distrust of political parties, which is a growing trend in all local and international surveys, is the reason for the lack of intra-party democracy? Maybe that is why politics is "dirty" and this what scares the undecided masses from going to the polls? Maybe that is why there is not enough drive among ordinary people to come out to the streets to rally? Maybe the party which neglects the need to have an internal democracy is incapable of democratically governing a state if it miraculously comes to power? Perhaps this is the cause of the fundamental problem Georgian voters are trying to overcome?

When we say that intra-party affairs do not concern us, let us not forget that it is we who must build our trust in the politicians and leaders who will be accountable to us, not their artificially created superiors or interest groups. Do not leave our fate to others in the naive hope that no one will abuse power when left without supervision. Our direct participation and party democracy are guarantees that individual politicians, for whom party politics is more of a source of income than public service, will never dare to arbitrarily initiate or end a political boycott, sign or renounce political agreements without voter support, distribute party positions, enter or not enter the Parliament, or speak on behalf of the people without the people.