[FR] To better understand the Czech political crisis

The last few months of 2018 have been some of the most difficult for Czech Prime Minister Andrej Babiš. New revelations concerning his personal involvement in the embezzlement of European funds intended for the construction of the “Stork’s Nest” housing project first undermined his credibility, particularly when his son admitted, in front of television cameras, that he had been forced into exile in Crimea so that he could not testify about the affair to the investigators. He was taken there by force by the (Russian) husband of the psychiatrist who was treating him, who had been a municipal councillor in a Prague district for several months on the Prime Minister’s party list. Andrej Babiš cried media conspiracy and called for the protection of his family, pointing out that his son is being treated for bipolar disorder and his daughter for schizophrenia. His two children (from a first marriage) were the owners of the holding company that received the incriminating funds, which were immediately absorbed by Agrofert, the chemical and agri-food group that made Andrej Babiš’s fortune.

Following these events, which provoked an outcry in Czech public opinion, a motion of no confidence was tabled by the opposition parties against the Babiš government. Thanks to the support of the Social Democrats, who were in the minority in the governing coalition, the coalition survived the vote, strengthened by the remarks of the President, Miloš Zeman, who declared that he would reappoint Babiš as Prime Minister and entrust him with the task of forming a government even if the no-confidence motion won.

At the end of November, a memo from the European Commission’s legal services pointed the finger at conflicts of interest arising from Babiš’s political position, particularly insofar as his participation in the government committee deciding on the allocation of structural funds could lead him to favour the galaxy of companies owned by Agrofert. The analyses that followed suggested that Agrofert could be ordered to repay the 82 million euros received since Andrej Babiš came to power, or the sums received since the regulation governing conflicts of interest came into force. A communication from the European Commissioner for the Budget, Gunther Öttinger, then listed the options available to Babiš to eliminate any suspicion of a conflict of interest. On Monday 17 December, Babiš chose to withdraw from the government committee. This followed the vote on 13 December of a resolution by the European Parliament, with 434 votes in favour and 64 against (including only 23 against and 18 votes in favour within ALDE, the parliamentary group to which ANO, the party founded by Babiš, belongs), expressing serious concerns about the protection of the European budget in the Czech Republic.

Despite all this, it is difficult to believe that fears of a conflict of interest will be completely dispelled by this decision. Babiš’s influence in the country remains major, as does his group’s dominant position in the agri-food sector. If Babiš had severed all links with Agrofert, as suggested by another proposal, this would have been tantamount to admitting that links still exist despite his recriminations to the contrary.

According to the latest opinion polls, his party would win over 30% of the vote in the event of early elections, more than in the last elections. On the other hand, the coalition parties (Social Democrats and Communists) would have left the Chamber, amplifying Babiš’s one-man show and continuing to push him towards the extremes, especially in his anti-media and anti-European rhetoric.

This is the paradox of a country where Babiš was elected to fight corruption, but where proven acts of corruption have no effect. This is also representative of both a worrying political apathy on the part of the Czech people and the divisions that are skilfully maintained between the liberal forces on one side and the populists on the other.