Croatian politicians who found themselves in the middle of public scandals regularly deny their responsibility, but when the media pressure becomes unbearable, they resign with the explanation that they do not want to be a burden to their party, according to a recently published survey.

The survey conducted by professors from the Faculty of Political Sciences analysed 471 statements myde by 35 politicians and officials who involved in scandals from 2010 to 2021 and published the results in the scientific journal Medijska Istraživanja.

They observed that politicians’ affair communication takes place in three phases: in the first they deny the existence of the affair and their responsibility in it at all costs, in the second they mostly shift the blame, mostly to the media, and in the third phase they face the party and subordinate their interests to those of the party.

Two thirds of all scandals are from the HDZ

Most of the analyzed affairs, a slightly less than two thirds (21 out of 35), are related to politicians from the Croatian Democratic Union (HDZ), followed by members of the Social Democratic Party (SDP) with six affairs, and members of the Croatian People’s Party (HNS) with four affairs.

The rest are individual cases concerning politicians from IDS, HSLS, Željko Kerum and Milan Bandić. In terms of political duties, slightly more than half (19 out of 35) of the analyzed scandals involved the then ministers.

The second most represented group are mayors (five active and two former). One female prefect and two prefects, as well as a vice-president of the parliament and the president of the board of a large state-owned company (JANAF), who came to that position through political connections, were caught up in the scandals.

Of the presidents, only Josipovic finished his term in office without an affair

One affair pertained to a member of parliament and the president of the Croatian Chamber of Commerce (HGK).

The authors also included in the survey former heads of state in the period from 2010 to 2021, of whom only Ivo Josipović completed his term in office without an affair.

Almost half of the analyzed affairs (16 out of 35) relate equally to corruption and conflict of interest.

First they deny it, and then they transfer the blame to the media

In the first phase of communication, politicians try to deny the existence of the affair and minimize its importance. Of the 35 politicians involved in scandals, even 31 initially refused to acknowledge the existence of the affair. Even if it is proven, they refuse any personal responsibility.

An example of denial is the statement of former minister Zdravko Marić: “Everything that is being blamed on me is completely wrong and unfounded. I especially reject any idea that I put my interest before the public by any of my actions in the performance of a public job.”

By denying the existence of the affair, politicians believe that media interest in it will automatically disappear. However, the the opposite usually happens, which is why the actors no longer deny the affair, but try to mitigate its significance.

In the second phase, politicians generally try to shift the responsibility for the content of the affair to the media and political rivals, namely the leadership of rival parties. Then they refer to the capital at their disposal, especially intensively on the social capital related to the closeness to the party and its leadership. Among the listed examples is the statement of former minister Mija Crnoja: “The insinuations of the media are allegations of a false residence, it is an open attack on me and the new government.”

The fact that the media discovered most of the affairs confirms the opinion that investigative journalism is considered the most demanding of all types of journalism.

Even in cases where they are not directly responsible for uncovering affairs, the media still play a key role as they inform the public about the content and details.

Politicians generally react to the media to avoid further embarrassment and conflict, and their reactions represent the widely accepted art of “political games”, it is said.

“Save the party and it will save you”

In the third phase of the communication pattern, the politicians involved in scandals face their party, namely party leaders. But at that stage only in a small number of cases does a subsequent confession of guilt occur.

With the remark that they do not want to be a “weight” or a “burden” to the party, they resign from positions in institutions or parties. Eight of them were dismissed (23 percent), and seven (20 percent) resigned.

Former minister Martina Dalić finally, after a relatively long exposure to the “Agrokor” affair, said: “Suddenly it turns out that I have become a weight on the government, the HDZ and the democratic majority. I don’t want to be that at all.”

In 31 percent of cases, politicians did not bear any consequences

An insight into the epilogues of the affairs shows that in 31 percent of the cases the politicians suffered no consequences, and that only five of the analyzed affairs (14 percent) ended in a conviction that included a prison sentence, in one case it was only a fine.

Politicians are probably more afraid of the party the leadership than of the verdict of the judiciary. Thus, the responsibility for affairs in Croatia is almost always borne more by the directly involved politicians, and considerably less by the parties and their leadership.

The exception is the “Fimi media” affair, for which the HDZ was legally punished. However, political collectives are responsible if they did not timely prevent, detect and punish the specific violation of their members, and especially if they enabled and encouraged it.