Zabeau Bellanton

Elisabeth "Zabeau" Bellanton (1751-d. "after" 1782), was a French slave trader. She is known to have been the most successful business woman in the French colony of Saint Domingue prior to the Haitian Revolution.
Life.
Zabeau Bellanton's background is largely unknown. She lived in Cap-Haïtien and was listed as a "mulatresse", a free woman of color. Her father was unknown, and although she had a daughter listed to be a "quarteronne", no lover or spouse is known, and the daughter bore her own name Bellaton.
Zabeau Bellanton was to become the most successful business woman in the colony, a success somewhat unusual for both her combined gender and race in Saint Domingue. While the free people of color often engaged in business, and the "Gens de couleur" in Saint Domingue was particularly known as the most wealthy in the Caribbean, the number of truly wealthy free colored were nevertheless small. While it was unusual for white women to engage in business, it was common for free women of color to do so: two thirds of the clients of color appearing before the notaries in Cap-Haïtien or Port-au-Prince to buy or sell property in 1776-1789 were women. However, only three of them; Zabeau Bellanton of Cap-Francais, Jeanne-Genevieve Deslandes of Port-au-Prince, and Anne Rossignol of Cap-Francais, was counted as truly wealthy.
In Saint Domingue, it was very common for free women of color to become a kept mistress of a white man who, when he died or left to settle in France, left her with money or property, enabling their former mistresses to support themselves as business women, and most colored business women had this background.
Bellanton was unusual in the sense that she, as far as it was known, started and developed her business by herself rather than on money left to her by a former white lover.
Business activity.
She was officially listed in the notarial acts as a "confiseuse" (Jam - or jelly maker), but was in reality engaged in slave trade. Her business was to buy the cheapest of the "bossale", slaves directly from the slave ship from Africa, slaves which had a low price because of their young age or health condition; she then rented them out by pawning them for a fraction of their value for a period of some months, until they were healthy enough for her to find a buyer, after which she would take them back and sell them. This method ensured that should the slaves die before she could sell them, they would lose only the small difference of the payment upon the time of the pawn, and the small purchase price.
During the American Revolutionary War, she also bought illegally from smuggling British slave ships, and she also had contacts with the slave traders in Martinique.
Officially, she had no business partner aside from her "procureur" or business manager Justin Viart, but in reality, she seem to have had unofficial business partners who invested in her activity, even white partners: she is known to have paid Jean Baptiste Le Sueur Fontaine for a "loan" of 13884 "livres", which was likely in reality his share of profit for investing in her business.
Her business method was regarded to be immoral even in the contemporary slave economy of Saint Domingue, but it was enormously lucrative and gave her a standard in class with the white planters. She invested her profit in urban real estate and owned several houses in Cap-Francais, one of them worth 18000 "livres", and six slaves for her personal use.
Later life.
In 1782, Zabeau Bellanton left Saint Domingue for France, which was common for the elite in Saint Domingue, who often left the colony to settle in France when they could afford to do so. Before her departure she left a will in which her fortune is evident: she left real property worth 1500 "livres" to her godmother in usufruits; 3000 "livres" to the priest of the parish of Le Cap to be distributed to poor white and free colored; 132 "livres" as a montlhy allowance to her mother; and 2000 "livres" and 10 percent of her real estate to her business manager Viart, with a power of attorney to manage the affairs of her daughter until she became an adult.


Graceham Moravian Church and Parsonage

Graceham Moravian Church and Parsonage is a historic church building and parsonage located at 8231 Rocky Ridge Road, MD 77 in Graceham, east of Thurmont, Frederick County, Maryland. It is a two-story Flemish bond brick church built in 1822, and covered with white stucco because of deteriorated masonry. The church was built as an addition to the adjacent meeting house and parsonage built in 1797. This building and the church's cemetery having uniform flat gravestones (called God's Acre by the Moravians) represents Maryland's only remaining 18th century Moravian settlement.
History.
The Moravian Church originated in Bohemia and Moravia in the 1400s, with the first Moravians settling in North America in the 1700s. The first Moravian settlements were in Pennsylvania, but Moravians began to move south to Maryland, Virginia, and Salem, North Carolina. The Moravians who settled in Maryland were one of the groups to move south during the mid-1700s, travelling from Pennsylvania to Maryland via an Indian road.
The Graceham congregation was formally organized by Bishop on October 8, 1758 as "Manakosy" (Monocacy) Moravian Church. Their first place of worship, a "Gemeinhaus" (English: "congregation house"), had been constructed in 1749. A second church edifice was dedicated on October 16, 1773, before being replaced by the current edifice that was dedicated on October 27, 1822. The official name change of the village took place in 1785, following the recommendation of Johannes von Watteville, who wrote (transl.), "May this village be a "hamlet", or little town of the Lord's, in which "grace" abides, with simplicity and a childlike spirit," hence the name Graceham.
It was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1976.


Venetian Independence

Venetian Independence (, , IV) is a Venetist, liberal and, to some extent, libertarian political party active in Veneto. The party seeks to achieve full political independence for the former territories of the Venetian Republic from Italy through a referendum. IV, which functions also as an advocacy group, counts a handful of municipal councillors and has not been represented yet in the Regional Council of Veneto.
The party was formed in May 2012 as a split from Veneto State (VS) and several members of IV are former affiliates of the Venetian National Party (PNV). The party's most recognisable member is Alessio Morosin (a former regional councillor of the LV–LN), but its formal leaders have been Michele Favero, Massimo Vidori, Juri De Luca and Michele Favero.
History.
Background and foundation.
In September 2010 a joint Venetist-separatist party named Veneto State (VS) was formed mainly by the merger of the Venetian National Party (PNV) with the Party of the Venetians (PdV). Lodovico Pizzati, president of the PNV, was elected at the head of the new party. In less than a year, however, the two groups became more and more uncomfortable with each other and, at a congress in October 2011, Pizzati was replaced by Antonio Guadagnini by a slim majority.
The liberal/libertarian wing led by Pizzati never fully recognized the new leadership and organized a new congress, which was boycotted by the party majority around Guadagnini and which elected Pizzati as secretary. Since December 2011 VS was thus split in two different groups, both claiming to be the official party. In late March 2012 the tribunal of Venice endorsed the claims put forward by Guadagnini and his followers. No agreement was reached among the two parties and in May they took part to municipal elections in their strongholds. Candidates from the Pizzati's wing ran with some success in Loreggia (7.2%), Susegana (10.4%), Silea (3.5%), Conegliano (2.0%), Casale sul Sile (2.2%), Santa Maria di Sala (4.7%), and Mirano (1.6%). In Susegana Davide Pozzobon was elected to the city council.
Venetian Independence (IV) was officially founded on 12 May 2012 in Treviso. During the founding congress, Lodovico Pizzati was elected secretary, along with president Luca Azzano Cantarutti (who narrowly beat Gianluca Busato) and honorary president Alessio Morosin.
Referendum campaign.
During the first months of 2012 IV activists, while being still members of VS, collected more than 20,000 signatures in support for a referendum on independence. On 22 May they presented the signatures to the President of Veneto, Luca Zaia. Zaia informed the Regional Council and its President Clodovaldo Ruffato asked an opinion to the legal office, which explained that such a referendum was not legal under the Constitution of Italy.
On 6 October IV organized a march in Venice, during which it proposed a resolution for a consultative referendum on independence to be approved by the Regional Council: the text of the resolution was given to Giovanni Furlanetto, a regional councillor of the LV–LN, who supported the proposition. Another Council member, Mariangelo Foggiato of North-East Union (UNE), officially presented the resolution in the Council. On 17 October a total of 42 regional councillors out of 60 officially asked a discussion on the issue. IV thus obtained national and international attention.
On 28 November the Council approved the resolution, in which "independence" was replaced by "self-determination", with 29 votes in favour, 2 against and 5 abstentions. Those in favour included Foggiato, the entire group of the LV–LN, most councillors of The People of Freedom, Pietrangelo Pettenò of the Communist Refoundation Party, Diego Bottacin of Toward North and independent Sandro Sandri, who had expounded the resolution at the start of the session, while the entire group of the Democratic Party left the floor in protest, but proclaimed their support for a special statute for Veneto. IV member rejoiced.
After a hunger strike by two members of IV, on 18 March 2013 Zaia and Ruffato implemented the first step mandated by resolution 44, by appointing the special commission of jurists who would examine the issue from a legal point of view. The commission was composed of six experts, including IV's Cantarutti.
In April 2013 Stefano Valdegamberi, a regional councillor of the Union of the Centre and later of Popular Future, introduced a bill (342/2013) in order to call a referendum on independence by the end of the year. By 7 June the bill was endorsed by more than 15 regional councillors, sufficient to convene a special session of the Council on the issue. Also several municipal councils endorsed the bill.
2013 general and local elections.
The party took part to the 2013 general election and garnered 1.1% of the regional vote, and 2.0% in the province of Treviso. IV's support was concentrated in the border areas between the provinces of Treviso and Padua, where it obtained its best results (Villa del Conte 10.6%, Vedelago 9.4%, Campo San Martino 8.4%, etc.).
In the 2013 municipal election the party focused especially on Treviso, where IV's Alessia Bellon won a mere 2.1% of the vote. The party had much better results in Vedelago (17.9%), Nervesa della Battaglia (8.2%), San Stino di Livenza (4.1%) and Lazise (3.9%). Most strikingly, in Vedelago Cristina Andretta, The People of Freedom's deputy mayor who had switched to IV, was elected mayor by a landslide 65.6%. Andretta's candidacy had caused a rift between Pizzati, who opposed her alliance with a tricoloured civic list and cut party's funds for her campaign, and Cantarutti, who supported it, but her election was finally saluted by Pizzati.
Plebiscite 2013 vs. Let Veneto Decide.
In June 2013, having reconciled with Veneto State (VS), Pizzati formed a joint separatist cartel with Stefano Valdegamberi, VS leader Guadagnini, Fabrizio Comencini of Liga Veneta Repubblica (LVR), other Venetist groups, associations and individuals. Subsequently, on 7 July, Pizzati launched Plebiscite 2013 (P2013), a cross-party nonpartisan committee for the referendum, which was endorsed by politicians, intellectuals and professionals.
The birth of P2013 caused a rift within IV: the party's historical bulk (Bernardini, Busato, etc.) sided with Pizzati, while others, led by president Cantarutti, who, in recent times, had frictions with Pizzati on several issues and finally blocked Pizzati's request of "extraordinary powers" during a special party congress on 30 June, severely criticized it. Honorary president Morosin, who had initially joined P2013, backtracked, remained equidistant from the two factions and eventually sided with Cantarutti's. For his part, Bernardini explained that he supported both IV, of which Pizzati was still secretary, and P2013: the former was a separatist party, while the latter was intended to be a broader committee for the referendum, including people of different parties and also individuals opposed to independence but in favour of the right of Venetians to decide. However, by early August the two factions seemed irreconciliable: the one led by Pizzati and Busato operated only through P2013, while that of Cantarutti and Morosin launched a new website, formed an alternative referendum committee (Let Veneto Decide) and declared that anyone had joined P2013 was incompatible with IV. In late August the steering committee of IV, in absence of Pizzati, asked the secretary, Busato and other members of their faction to resign from the party, but the deliberation was suspended by Pizzati. A few days later the committee declared that Pizzati was no longer secretary, after more than 2/3 of local coordinators had voted a motion of no confidence against him. Giuliomaria Turco was chosen as Pizzati's successor.
Let Veneto Decide, which was officially endorsed also by Valdegamberi, VS, LVR, "Raixe Venete", Veneto First, Independentist Youth, other Venetist groups and individuals, was launched on 4 September 2013 in Vedelago, at the presence of Carlo Lottieri of Lombard Committee for Resolution 44, MEP Mara Bizzotto of Liga Veneta–Lega Nord and Jordi Fornas i Prat of Catalan Solidarity for Independence. IV soon lost interest in the coalition, which would eventually become Independence We Veneto.
2015 regional election and next years.
In January 2014 another internal struggle resulted in a radical change of the party's constitution and the marginalisation of Cantarutti, to Morosin's advantage. Subsequently, Cantarutti and a group of followers abandoned IV and launched Independent Venetians (VI). IV decided not to participate in the 2014 European Parliament and local elections. For the EP election the party however endorsed some candidates due to their support of the independence referendum.
In the run-up of the 2015 regional election it was announced that Morosin would stand as IV's candidate for President and that the party had signed a political pact with Chiavegato for Independence, a group led by Lucio Chiavegato, in his support. Among the leading candidates fielded by the party, Fabio Padovan, founder of the European Federalist Free Entrepreneurs, former deputy of the LV–LN and candidate for President with the Fronte Marco Polo in 2000, stood out. Despite these good candidates, the party was overshadowed by Independence We Veneto and won 2.5% of the vote, not enough to send any IV member to the Council.
In March 2016 the party held a congress and elected Massimo Vidori as its new first counselor. In the 2017 local elections, the party fielded lists only in a few places, including Santa Maria di Sala (11.1%), Jesolo (4.2%), Mirano (1.4%), and Thiene (1.4%). In October 2017, while campaigning hard for the successful autonomy referendum, the party elected as its leader Juri De Luca, whose title was re-named from first counselor to spokesperson.
In the 2018 municipal election in Vedelago, a traditional stronghold, IV won 13.8% in joint list with the LVR and in alliance with the LV–LN, while in much more populous Treviso Silvia Nizzetto, IV's deputy spokesperson, stood as candidate in Mario Conte's personal list (Conte was the LV–LN's candidate for mayor), was subsequently elected to the municipal council and was consequently appointed by elected mayor Conte as municipal minister for Education, Sport and Participation.
In July 2018 IV signed a political pact with We Are Veneto (SV), Guadagnini's new party. The pact was confirmed for the 2019 local elections.
2020 regional election and aftermath.
Between April and October 2019 SV was a founding member of the Party of Venetians (PdV). In the 2020 Venetian regional election, in which Zaia was elected by a landslide 76.8% of the vote and LV-sponsored lists won virtually all Venetist votes, the PdV obtained 1.0% of the vote, far less than IV alone in 2015.
In January 2021 IV changed again its internal organisation and Favero was elected to the new office of party secretary.


Kieskompas

Kieskompas is a Dutch voting advice website. Visitors can use the application to discover their position in the political landscape for upcoming elections. Electoral Compass was officially established at the VU Amsterdam on October 23, 2007.
Users are asked to give an opinion on 30 propositions, clustered within several issues. The result appears in a spectrum, as a pencil point, between the different political parties or candidates. Visitors can further analyse their political preferences by clicking on the various issues, after which they can compare their position on these different topics with the candidates or parties.


Selina Hastings, Countess of Huntingdon

Selina Hastings, Countess of Huntingdon (24 August 1707 – 17 June 1791) was an English religious leader who played a prominent part in the religious revival of the 18th century and the Methodist movement in England and Wales. She founded an evangelical branch in England and Sierra Leone, known as the Countess of Huntingdon's Connexion.
She helped finance and guide early Methodism and was the first principal of Trevecca College, Wales, established in 1768 to train Methodist ministers. With construction of 64 chapels in England and Wales, plus mission work in colonial America, she is estimated to have spent over £100,000 on these activities, a huge sum when a family of four could live on £31 per year.
A regular correspondent of George Whitefield and John Wesley, she is also remembered for her adversarial relationships with other Methodists.
Personal life.
Selina Shirley was born in June 1707 at Astwell Castle, Northamptonshire, second daughter of Washington Shirley, 2nd Earl Ferrers, and Mary Levinge. The family moved to Staunton Harold Hall, in Leicestershire when she was 17 and in 1728, she married Theophilus Hastings, 9th Earl of Huntingdon, who lived at nearby Donington Hall. This was arranged by his elder half-sister, Lady Elizabeth Hastings, a well-known religious philanthropist and supporter of women's education.
She gave birth to seven children in the first ten years of the marriage, four of whom died young; her husband died in 1746, while she allegedly suffered from poor health. The family were interested in politics, religion and the arts, and commissioned portraits from fashionable artists of the day.
Foundling Hospital.
On 21 April 1730, she became one of the twenty-one aristocratic women whose support Thomas Coram would enlist in his efforts to establish the Foundling Hospital. Securing the support of notably pious women such as Lady Huntingdon as signatories to the Ladies' Petition for the Establishment of the Foundling Hospital lent his endeavour not only respectability but cachet; many of the women were lending their signature where their husbands had previously refused, making the Foundling Hospital 'one of the most fashionable charities of the day.' Selina would later provide the Coram with 'financial support for fees, stamp duties, vellum, seals and others expenses [sic] connected with the presentation of the Foundling Hospital Charter for the King's signature.'
The petition was presented to King George II in 1735.
Religious revival.
In 1739, Lady Huntington joined the first Methodist society in Fetter Lane, London. Sometime after the death of her husband in 1746, she threw in her lot with John Wesley and George Whitefield in the work of the great revival. According to Schlenther, it was Wesley who first attracted her to Methodism, noting a visit to his chapel in Donnington (Wood) in East Shropshire, in which a rare exception to egalitarian principles was made and she was offered a private pew. Whitefield became her personal chaplain, and, with his assistance, following problems put in her path by the Anglican clergy from whom she had preferred not to separate, she founded the "Countess of Huntingdon's Connexion", a Calvinistic movement within the Methodist church.
In the earlier part of her life Isaac Watts, Mary, Lady Abney, Philip Doddridge, and Augustus Montague Toplady were among her friends. Lady Anne Erskine (eldest daughter of the 10th Earl of Buchan), was her closest friend and companion for many years in the latter part of Lady Huntingdon's life.
Chapel building.
In 1748, the Countess gave Whitefield a scarf as her chaplain, and in that capacity he preached in one of her London houses, in Park Street, Westminster, to audiences that included Chesterfield, Walpole and Bolingbroke. She held large dinner parties at which Whitefield preached to the gathered dignitaries after they had eaten.
Moved to further the religious revival in a Calvinistic manner compatible with Whitefield's work, she was responsible for founding 64 chapels and contributed to the funding of others, insisting they should all subscribe to the doctrines of the Church of England and use only the "Book of Common Prayer". Amongst these were chapels at Brighton (1761), Bath (1765), Worcester (c. 1766), Tunbridge Wells (1769), several in Wales, and a small number in London including founding one adjacent to her London home at Spa Fields, Clerkenwell/Finsbury (which resulted in a case being brought before the ecclesiastical courts by the vicar of the parish church of St James). She partly funded the independent Surrey Chapel of Rowland Hill. She appointed ministers to officiate in them, under the impression that as a peeress she had a right to employ as many chaplains as she pleased. In her chapel at Bath (now owned by the Bath Preservation Trust and housing the Building of Bath Collection which is open to the public) there was a curtained recess dubbed "Nicodemus' Corner" where bishops sat incognito to hear services.
Trevecca College and later history.
Following the expulsion of six Methodist students from St Edmund Hall, Oxford in 1768 the Countess founded a ministers' training college at Trefeca (Trevecca) near Talgarth, in Mid Wales, not far from Brecon. George Whitefield preached at the opening ceremony. The college moved to Hertfordshire in 1792, and was renamed Cheshunt College. It moved to Cambridge in 1906. Cheshunt College, Cambridge merged with Westminster College, Cambridge, the training college of the Presbyterian Church of England (and after 1972, of the United Reformed Church), in 1967.
In 1842, the Presbyterian Church of Wales opened a college at Trefeca which is approximately a quarter of a mile south of the site of the Countess's college (which is now a farmhouse).
Foreign missions.
The Countess had an interest in the Thirteen Colonies, and issues related to Native Americans and enslaved Africans there. During the mid-1760s, she met and befriended Mohegan preacher Samson Occom, then on a tour of England to raise funds for Indian missions in the colonies.
She became a slave owner herself in 1770 when she inherited Whitefield's overseas estates in Georgia and South Carolina, including the Bethesda Home for Boys. On Whitefield's advice, she bought additional slaves for the orphanage's benefit.
The Countess promoted the writings and freedom of formerly enslaved Africans who espoused religious views compatible with her own. For instance, she supported publication of memoirs, or slave narratives, by Ukawsaw Gronniosaw and Olaudah Equiano.
She also used her influence in the world of the arts to secure publication for Phillis Wheatley's 1773 volume of poems, "Poems on Various Subjects, Religious and Moral by Phillis Wheatley, Negro Servant to Mr. John Wheatley, of Boston, in New England", which was dedicated to the Countess. Because the Countess was ill when Wheatley visited London, the two women never met. Several pieces of their correspondence are extant.
Until 1779, Lady Huntingdon and her chaplains were members of the Church of England, with which most Methodists were still connected. That year the consistorial court prohibited her chaplains from preaching in the Pantheon in Spa Fields, Clerkenwell, which had been rented by the Countess. To evade the injunction, she was compelled to take shelter under the Toleration Act. This placed her among classified dissenters. Such prominent members as William Romaine and Henry Venn did not want to be classified in that status, and left the Connexion.
After the Patriot victory in the American War of Independence, the Crown fulfilled promises to enslaved Africans and African Americans who had fled their American masters to join the British. The British evacuated thousands of former slaves from the colonies, who became known as Black Loyalists. About 3,000 were resettled in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, where they were to be given land and supplies. The Countess sent missionaries to these colonies, including John Marrant and William Furmage, to attend to the Black Loyalists.
Legacy.
Until her death in London, Lady Huntingdon exercised an active, and even autocratic, superintendence over her chapels and chaplains. Alice Membury, appointed schoolmistress in Melbourne, Derbyshire by Lady Elizabeth Hastings, was ejected by the Countess for 'not turning Methodist'. Selina successfully petitioned George III about the gaiety of Archbishop Cornwallis' establishment, and made a vigorous protest against the anti-Calvinistic minutes of the Wesleyan Conference of 1770, and against relaxing the terms of subscription of 1772.
On the Countess's death in 1791, the 64 chapels and the college were bequeathed to four trustees. Amongst them were Dr Ford, as well as Lady Ann, who was requested to occupy and reside in Lady Huntingdon's house adjoining Spa Fields Chapel, and carry on all needful correspondence (which was immense). She did this dutifully until her own death in 1804 and burial at Bunhill Fields.
The principal trustee was the Reverend Thomas Haweis, who presided at the Convocation of the Connexion, comprising about 120 chapels. As rector of the Church of England parish at Aldwincle until his death in 1820, he ensured the Connexion kept as close to the Church of England as was possible; many chapels became part of the Free Church of England in 1863.
One of the earliest changes under the new trustees was to complete plans to relocate the college. In 1792 it removed to Cheshunt, Hertfordshire where it remained as "Cheshunt College", until 1905, when its functions were transferred to Cambridge University. The college was noted for the number of men it sent into foreign missions.
In 1795, Spa Fields Chapel, was used by the founders of the non-denominational "Missionary Society", which became the London Missionary Society, for preachers contributing to this, its founding meeting. After her death, much of her movement merged with the Congregationalist Church, who came to predominate in the London Missionary Society, and more joined the Free Church of England in 1863, although there are still 25 Connexion congregations functioning in England, with others in Sierra Leone.
In her will, she requested no biography of her should be written and none was attempted until 90 years after her death. Obituaries and tributes were written: Horace Walpole described her as "the patriarchess of the Methodists", whilst the Roman Catholic, John Henry Newman, commented "She devoted herself, her means, her time, her thoughts, to the cause of Christ. She did not spend her money on herself; she did not allow the homage paid to her rank to remain with herself." She was clearly a pivotal figure in the Evangelical Revival.
Huntingdon College, in Montgomery, Alabama, is a coeducation liberal arts college named after the Countess of Huntingdon to honour her contributions to Methodism.
Huntingdon Street in Savannah, Georgia, is likewise named after her in recognition of her association with Whitefield and John and Charles Wesley in their apostolic works in the Colony of Georgia.
Lady Huntingdon Lane at the Givens Estates in Asheville, North Carolina, a retirement community affiliated with the United Methodist Church.
Lady Huntingdon Road on the grounds of the United Methodist Assembly, Lake Junaluska, NC, located near the World Methodist Center.
Family.
By her marriage to Theophilus Hastings, 9th Earl of Huntingdon, she had seven children. Of those, three died in childhood and the death date of a fourth is unknown. Her longest surviving children were:
Further reading.
On the Countess of Huntingdon and the Welsh Methodists, see E. Wyn James, 'Blessèd Jubil!’: Slavery, Mission and the Millennial Dawn in the Work of William Williams of Pantycelyn', in "Cultures of Radicalism in Britain and Ireland", ed. John Kirk, Michael Brown & Andrew Noble, 'Poetry and Song in the Age of Revolution', vol. 3 (London: Pickering & Chatto, 2013), 95-112.


Western Squadron

The Western Squadron was a squadron or formation of the Royal Navy based at Plymouth Dockyard. It operated in waters of the English Channel, the Western Approaches, and the North Atlantic. It defended British trade sea lanes from 1650 to 1814 and 1831 to 1854. Following Admiralty orders to Lord Anson he was instructed to combine all existing commands in the English Channel those at the Downs, Narrow Seas, Plymouth and the Spithead under a centralized command under the Commander-in-Chief, Western Squadron in 1746. The squadron was commanded by the Flag Officer with the dual title of Commander-in-Chief, English Channel and Commander-in-Chief, Western Squadron
History.
In 1650 Captain William Penn, was charged with guarding the Channel from Beachy Head to Land's End with six ships. This system continued following the Restoration. It was the start of what was to become a Western Squadron. In 1690 the Edward Russell, 1st Earl of Orford was given command of a fleet in the channel. From 1705 until the 1740s it was essentially Cruising Squadron before it changed to blockading duties. In 1746 the Admiralty authorised Admiral Anson to combine all the Channel commands into the Western Squadron, based in Plymouth. During the Seven Years' War (1756-1763) the Western Squadron was one of Britain’s most critical military assets frequently patrolling the entrance to the English Channel and making regular sweeps into the Bay of Biscay and the waters off Ushant. One of its responsibilities was trade protection ensuring the safe return of inbound trade from the East Indies and West Indies. The squadron was involved at the Second Battle of Cape Finisterre (1747), the Battle of Quiberon Bay (1756), and the Battle of Ushant (1778). By 1801 its main role was still to stop French ships from French naval bases at Brest, Le Havre and elsewhere in the Bay of Biscay from entering the English Channel. The Western Squadron was the forerunner of the Channel Squadron that was later known as the Channel Fleet.
Influence on British naval policy, strategy and thinking.
In the seventeen hundreds, British Naval policy had not changed very much in previous centuries. With British trade interests growing, however, so were the problems posed by French Naval expansion since the 1660s-1670s, along with the need to resolve them. English War planners were constantly dealing with the threat of war with France but no strategy had been put in place to provide sufficient infrastructure to meet these challenges. The majority of the navy’s manufacturing capacity and dry-docking facilities were concentrated on the South East coast which had expanded to meet the demands faced by the Anglo-Dutch wars. In 1689 when war with France eventually came the only dry dock facility in the channel was located at Portsmouth. In 1692 the main focus of naval activity shifted to west because the French moved their primary fleet to Brest. In 1698 the Admiralty authorised a complete new dockyard be built at Plymouth housing a dry dock and wet dock. Having both of these facilities allowed Western Squadron to grow fast and by the early 1740s it had become the navy's main battle fleet. The British were concerned with maintaining control of their own sea lanes – particularly the English Channel - while restricting the activities, both military and economic, of their rivals and foes. In 1747 Admiral Hawke suggested the squadron should be used for containment purposes and developed the idea that it keep an almost continual watch on the French Navy and French coast. This was agreed by the Admiralty and the naval blockade developed as a consequence of this policy. During the 1759 blockade of Brest, Admiral Hawke was the first to establish a system of replenishment at sea in order to maintain a blockade.
Commanders.
Incomplete list of post holders included:


Minsk Spring

“Minsk Spring” or “Belarusian Spring” () was a series of mass street protests in 1996–97 against the increasingly authoritarian President Lukashenka.
Background and causes.
The protests were triggered by a constitutional referendum on amendments to the 1994 Constitution of Belarus. The referendum was called following a dispute between President Lukashenka and the elected parliament, the Thirteenth Supreme Council, over the president's proposal to amend the constitution to extend his term of office from five to seven years, create a second legislative chamber whose members would be appointed by the president, and limit the power of the Constitutional Court.
Officially, the public voted in favour of the amendments by a wide majority, although many countries, including European Union member states and the United States sharply criticized the conditions under which the referendum was held as “riddled with violations of democratic norms” and refused to recognize its results:
“"The constitutional referendum occurred in a repressive political environment and with pervasive government control of the media. Through this control, the Government denied the voters access to the views of the opposition--including members of Parliament and of the Constitutional Court"”.The referendum resulted in the dissolution of the Supreme Council, which was replaced by a new, bicameral parliament. The president handpicked the members of the lower chamber and gained substantial influence over the upper chamber. The net result was the effective removal of all representatives of opposition parties from government.
Protests and their suppression.
The protests in the spring of 1996 started with commemoration of an anniversary of the Belarusian Democratic Republic on 24 March and peaked during the Chernobyl Way-96 on 26 April 1996, which became one of the largest rallies in the period between the anti-Soviet protests of 1991 and the 2020 Belarusian revolution. According to various estimates, between 60 and 100 thousand people took to the central avenue of Minsk.
Following the constitutional changes in November 1996, the Belarusian political system became increasingly authoritarian with the government seeking to curtail all political freedoms. The authorities did not sanction most of requested street demonstrations and then brutally dispersed "unsanctioned" ones. They began to apply a wide range of repressive measures against their participants – from brutal police force to fines and administrative arrests to expulsion of students and dismissal of employees on political grounds.
Arbitrary and violent arrests of demonstrators, without regard to age or infirmity, have become commonplace. In violation of the terms of both the Belarusian constitution and international instruments such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which Belarus is a state party, Lukashenka issued a draconian decree in March 1997, codified into law later that year, which severely limited the right to citizens to demonstrate, regulating the even the types of symbols, flags, and banners participants may use.
The protests resumed in the spring of 1997 with at least 10,000 demonstrators marching through central Minsk on 16 March.
Charter 97, a declaration calling for democracy in Belarus was published on the anniversary of the 1996 referendum.


Elections in Croatia

Regular elections in Croatia are mandated by the Constitution and legislation enacted by Parliament. The presidency, Parliament, county prefects and assemblies, city and town mayors, and city and municipal councils are all elective offices. Since 1990, five presidential elections have been held. During the same period, nine parliamentary elections (including two for the upper house when the parliament was bicameral) were also held. In addition, there were six nationwide local elections. Croatia has held two elections (in 2013 and 2014) to elect 11 members (12 in 2013) of the European Parliament following its accession to the EU on 1 July 2013.
The President of Croatia is elected for a five-year term by a direct vote of all citizens in a majority system, requiring runoff elections if no candidate wins more than 50 percent of votes in the first round. Members of Parliament are elected for a four-year term in ten multi-seat constituencies, with additional members elected in special constituencies reserved for the Croatian diaspora and national minorities. As of November 2011, legislation provides for the election of 151 members of the unicameral parliament (including three representatives of the Croatian diaspora and eight representatives of national minorities). Out of 31 political parties which won seats in Croatian parliamentary elections held since 1990, only six have won ten seats or more in any one parliamentary election. Those were the Croatian Democratic Union, the Croatian Peasant Party, the Croatian People's Party – Liberal Democrats, the Croatian Social Liberal Party, Social Democratic Party of Croatia and the Bridge of Independent Lists. The county prefects, city/town mayors and municipality presidents are elected for four-year term by a majority of votes cast within applicable local government units, with a runoff election if no candidate achieves a majority in the first round of voting. Members of county, city/town and municipal councils are elected for a four-year term through proportional representation, with the entire local government unit as a single constituency.
Any Croatian citizen over age 18 may be a candidate in presidential, parliamentary or local government elections, provided that a sufficient number of endorsements by Croatian voters is obtained beforehand. Croatian elections are relatively well-regulated; regulations include spending limits, annual donation limits, a limitation on the number of endorsed candidates and election lists and regulations governing media coverage. Voting takes place in polling stations in Croatia and abroad, monitored by an electoral board and observers at each station. Ballots consist of an alphabetical list of candidates, or an election list with ordinal numbers (which are circled to indicate a vote). All votes are counted by hand. The State Electoral Commission publishes official results and handles complaints, supported by county, city and town electoral commissions during local elections. Decisions of the electoral commissions may be appealed at the Constitutional Court of Croatia.
Parliamentary elections.
The Parliament of Croatia () consists of 151 members elected to four-year terms in twelve constituencies. Out of that number, 140 are elected in ten multi-seat territorial constituencies. These are defined on the basis of the existing county borders, with necessary amendments to achieve a uniform number of eligible voters in each constituency (plus or minus five percent). The eleventh constituency is for citizens of Croatia living abroad; the number of seats held by this constituency was fixed at three for the parliamentary election held in December 2011. The 2010 constitutional amendments abolished the former scheme, in which the number of MPs elected from the eleventh constituency was proportional to the ratio to the number of ballots cast in the other ten constituencies. In the 2007 general election, this method led to the eleventh constituency electing five MPs.
The standard d'Hondt formula is applied to the vote (except for the twelfth constituency in which national minority representatives are elected), with a five-percent election threshold in each constituency. Since 2015, the parliamentary elections have an element of preferential voting by letting voters choose not only for a list of candidates, but also a single member of the same list. If the percentage of votes for a candidate exceeds 10%, they are elected as if it was an open list system. The list ranking is maintained for those candidates that do not meet this quota.
An additional eight members of the parliament are elected from the twelfth constituency. It encompasses the entire country; candidates in this constituency are elected by voters belonging to 22 recognized minorities in Croatia: the Serb minority elects three MPs, the Hungarians and Italians elect one MP each, the Czech and Slovak minorities jointly elect one MP, and all other minorities elect the final two MPs. Minority MPs are elected by simple plurality system (candidates with the most votes are elected). The nationality of the voters is listed in the voter registry, which is provided by the registrar's office that maintains Croatia's vital records. Voter nationalities are normally officially declared by the parents at birth, but any citizen may declare or change that information later on at the registrar's office at least 14 days ahead of elections (not at the polling station). The voter's nationality need not be declared or may be declared as unknown. During elections, voters who have officially declared they belong to one of the recognized minorities in Croatia may choose to vote for either a territorially applicable list or a corresponding national minority list; a voter of unknown or non-declared nationality may vote for either a territorially applicable list or any minority list; a voter who has declared a nationality other than Croat or a recognized minority may vote only for a territorially applicable list (the same as someone who has declared themselves a Croat). Minority voting and minority representation rules have raised controversy and were eventually upheld by the Constitutional Court.
An election silence is enforced on the day before and the day of the elections, ending at 7:00 pm when the polling stations close and the exit polls are published.
Although political parties fund their campaigns using donations or their own assets, the government reimburses them for each parliamentary seat won. For instance, each seat won in the 2011 parliamentary election brought a party 180,000 kuna ( euros). Smaller sums were paid to parties or candidates failing to win any parliamentary seats, provided that they received more than five percent of the votes cast in a constituency.
Next parliamentary election.
"See article": Next Croatian parliamentary election
Parliamentary elections are to be held no later than 60 days after the expiration of the 4-year parliamentary term, counting from the day that parliament is constituted with the election of a Speaker. As the 10th Assembly of Parliament first constituted on 22 July 2020 the next elections for the Croatian Parliament are to be held no later than 20 September 2024.
Previous parliamentary elections.
Since 1990, nine parliamentary elections have been held in Croatia. These have included the 1990 elections for a tricameral parliament, three elections of the Chamber of Deputies during the bicameral parliament's existence, three elections of the unicameral Parliament and two elections of the Chamber of Counties—the upper house of the bicameral parliament.
The elections held in 1990 were the first multi-party elections after 45 years of Communist rule; candidates vied for all 80 seats in the Social-Political Council of Croatia, all 116 seats in the Municipalities Council of Croatia and all 160 seats in the Associated Labour Council of Croatia (since Parliament had three chambers at the time). The first round of the election saw a turnout of 85.5 percent, and the runoff-election turnout was 74.8 percent. The Croatian Democratic Union (HDZ) won 205 seats, and the Social Democratic Party of Croatia won 107.
Previous Chamber of Deputies and unicameral Sabor elections.
Eight parliamentary elections have been held since for the Chamber of Deputies () or the unicameral parliament since then—in 1992, 1995, 2000, 2003, 2007, 2011, 2015, 2016, 2020. Beginning with the 1992 elections, the number of seats in the Chamber of Deputies (and, later, in the unicameral parliament) was significantly changed—ranging from 127 in 1995 to 153 in 2007 and 151 in 2011. In the Croatian parliamentary elections held since 1992, when the number of seats in parliament was limited below 160, only five parties have won ten seats or more in any single election: the HDZ, the Croatian Peasant Party (HSS), the Croatian People's Party – Liberal Democrats (HNS), the Croatian Social Liberal Party (HSLS) and the SDP.
Several other political parties (besides the HDZ, HSS, HNS, HSLS and SDP) have won parliamentary seats since the 1990 election. Those are (in alphabetical order): the Alliance of Primorje-Gorski Kotar (previously known as the Rijeka Democratic Alliance), the Croatian Christian Democratic Union, the Croatian Citizen Party, the Croatian Democratic Alliance of Slavonia and Baranja, the Croatian Democratic Peasant Party, the Croatian Independent Democrats, the Croatian Party of Pensioners, the Croatian Party of Rights, the Croatian Party of Rights dr. Ante Starčević, Dalmatian Action, the Democratic Centre, the Istrian Democratic Assembly, the Liberal Party, the Party of Liberal Democrats, the Serb Democratic Party, the Slavonia-Baranja Croatian Party and the Social Democratic Action of Croatia.
The following parties have won the special seats reserved for national minority representatives (also in alphabetical order): the Bosnian Democratic Party of Croatia, the Democratic Union of Hungarians of Croatia, the German People's Union – National Association of Danube Swabians in Croatia, the Independent Democratic Serb Party, the Party of Democratic Action of Croatia and the Serb People's Party.
In addition, numerous independents have won seats through party lists, and Ivan Grubišić's nonpartisan list won seats as a territorial election list. Since the parliamentary seats won belong to individuals, not parties, there have been instances where members have become independent or switched to another political party.
Chamber of Counties elections.
Under the Constitution of Croatia adopted in 1990, the Croatian Parliament became bicameral. The Chamber of Deputies had been elected a few months earlier, and its members enacted legislation creating a new territorial organisation of Croatia. This included 21 counties that were to be represented by the new Chamber of Counties (). The first election of members to the chamber was held on 7 February 1993, with each county acting as a multi-seat constituency; three MPs were elected in each county on the basis of proportional representation. In addition, the President of Croatia appointed up to 5 more members of the Chamber of the Counties to complete its 68-strong membership. The second election for the Chamber of Counties was held on 13 April 1997. The Chamber of Deputies was abolished by a constitutional amendment in 2001.
Presidential elections.
The President of Croatia (officially the President of the Republic, ) is elected to a five-year term by a direct vote of all citizens, with a majority vote required to win. A runoff election is held if no candidate secures a majority in the first round. The presidential elections are regulated by the constitution and dedicated legislation; however, the latter only defines technical details, appeals and similar issues. Any citizen of Croatia, 18 or older, may be a candidate in a presidential election if the candidate is endorsed by 10,000 voters. The endorsements are required in the form of a list containing name, address, personal identification number and voter signature. The presidential elections are regulated by an act of parliament. Election silence is in force on the day of the elections and the previous day, ending at 7 in the evening as polling stations close; exit polls may be published after that time.
Unless the presidential term is cut short by death, resignation or removal from office, resulting in an early election, the elections for President of the Republic are scheduled to take place every 5 years, with the incumbent having a possibility of re-election. The president is currently term limited to two 5-year terms.
Previous presidential elections.
Presidential elections were held in Croatia for the first time on 2 August 1992, concurrently with the 1992 parliamentary elections. Voter turnout was 74.9 percent. The result was a victory for Franjo Tuđman of the HDZ, who received 57.8 percent of the vote in the first round of the election (ahead of seven other candidates). Dražen Budiša, the HSLS candidate and runner-up in the election, received 22.3 percent of the vote. The second presidential election in modern Croatia was held on 15 June 1997. The incumbent, Franjo Tuđman, ran opposed by Zdravko Tomac (candidate of the SDP) and Vlado Gotovac (nominated by the HSLS). Tomac and Gotovac received 21.0 and 17.6 percent of votes, respectively, in the first round of voting and Tuđman secured another term. The third presidential elections were held on 24 January 2000 to fill the office of President, after incumbent Franjo Tuđman died on 10 December 1999. The first round of voting saw Stjepan Mesić (candidate of the Croatian People's Party, or HNS) in front with 41.3 percent of the vote, followed by Dražen Budiša of the HSLS with 27.8 percent and Mate Granić (nominated by the HDZ) receiving 22.6 percent. The runoff election (the first in a modern Croatian presidential election) was held on 7 February; Mesić won, picking up 56.9 percent of the vote. Voter turnout was 63.0 percent in the first round, and 60.9 percent in the runoff. The first round of the fourth presidential election was held on 2 January 2005. No candidate secured a first-round victory; however, incumbent Mesić enjoyed a substantial lead over the other candidates. Mesić received 48.9 percent of the vote; the second- and third-ranked candidates (Jadranka Kosor of the HDZ and Boris Mikšić, an independent) managed only 20.3 and 17.8 percent, respectively, of voter support. Ultimately, Mesić won reelection by receiving 65.9 percent of votes in the runoff held on 16 January. The most recent Croatian presidential election was held on 27 December 2009 with Ivo Josipović (SDP) picking up 32.4 percent of the vote, followed by Milan Bandić (independent), Andrija Hebrang (HDZ) and Nadan Vidošević (independent) receiving 14.8, 12.0 and 11.3 percent of the vote respectively. The second round of voting was held on 10 January 2010, when Josipović defeated Bandić with 60.3 percent of the vote.
Local elections.
Croatia's county prefects, city and town mayors are elected to four-year terms by a majority of votes cast within applicable local government units, with a runoff election if no candidate achieves a majority in the first round of voting. Members of county, city and municipal councils are elected to four-year terms through proportional representation, with the entire local government unit as a single constituency. The number of council members is defined by the councils themselves, based on applicable legislation. Electoral committees are tasked with determining whether the national minorities are represented in the council (as required by the constitution), adding further members to the council (who belong to the appropriate minorities) by selecting them from unelected-candidate lists. Election silence, as in all other elections in Croatia, is enforced on the day of the elections and the previous day, ending at 7:00 pm when the polling stations close and exit polls may be announced.
Of the six nationwide local elections held in Croatia since 1990, the most recent were the 2009 local elections to elect county prefects and councils, city and town councils and mayors. In these elections, HDZ-led coalitions won a majority or plurality in 15 county-council and 13 county-prefect elections. SDP-led coalitions won a majority or plurality in five county councils (including the city of Zagreb council), and the single remaining county council election was won by an IDS-SDP coalition. The SDP won four county prefect elections and the city of Zagreb mayoral election, the HSS won three county-prefect elections, and the HNS and HDSSB won one county-prefect election each.
National Minorities Councils and Representatives Elections.
National Minorities Councils are bodies that enable national minorities participation in public life and management of local affairs. Elections for councils and representatives are regulated by the Constitutional Act on the Rights of National Minorities in the Republic of Croatia and the Law on Election of Councils and Representatives of National Minorities. National minorities are electing municipal and county councils or representatives depending on relative and absolute minority population. Councils are elected in municipalities and cities in which minority population constitute at least 1,5% of the total population and there is at least 200 members of certain minority group. County councils are elected if there is more than 500 members of certain minority in a given Croatian county. Units with smaller numbers of members of certain minority, but in which there is still 100 or more members of given minority are electing minority representatives. 10 members are elected into municipal minority councils, 15 into city councils and 25 into county councils.
Minority elections are called by decision of the Government of the Republic of Croatia. The State Election Commission is proposing to the government the fees for the work of the members of the electoral bodies. Bodies responsible for the implementation of the elections are the State Election Commission, county election commissions, the Election Commission of the City of Zagreb, town and municipal election commissions and polling boards.
European Parliament elections.
Croatia first elected 12 members of the European Parliament (MEPs) in a by-election held after its accession to the EU in 2013. Thereafter, its number of members in the European Parliament was reduced to 11 and the country elected them as part of the regular election in 2014. The elections are regulated by special legislation enacted by the "Sabor". Provisions of the legislation are very similar to the parliamentary-election legislation, with the main difference being that the 11 members of the European Parliament are elected in a single constituency encompassing all of Croatia, instead of multiple constituencies used in the parliamentary elections.
Referendums.
A referendum in Croatia can be called by the Parliament or the President on any issue falling within the purview of parliament, or on any other issue the president considers important to the independence, unity and existence of the republic. Since the constitution was amended in 2001, parliament is obligated by the constitution to call for a referendum if signatures of 10 percent of registered Croatian voters are collected. The signatures, by law, must be collected within a 15-day period. Referendums are regulated by Article 87 of the constitution of Croatia which requires that the parliament passes an act on each referendum and that the outcome is binding unless the referendum is called as an advisory referendum.
There have been three referendums in modern Croatia: Croatian independence referendum, Croatian European Union membership referendum and Marriage definition referendum, and in all three majority voted in favor. There have been four other public initiatives to collect the support of 10 percent of voters for a referendum, none of which were successful: concerning Croatian cooperation with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, concerning accession of Croatia to NATO in 2008, concerning Arbitration Agreement on Croatian-Slovenian border issues in 2009, and concerning Labour Act in 2010.
Political campaigns.
Any Croatian citizen aged 18 or over may become a candidate in presidential, parliamentary or local elections. In order to become an official candidate, 10,000 signatures from Croatian citizens aged 18 or over must be collected and submitted to the State Electoral Commission. This must be done within 12 days following the publication of the decision to hold elections in Narodne Novine, the official gazette of the Republic of Croatia. The endorsements are made in a list comprising name, address and personal identification number (PIN) of each of the citizens supporting a particular candidate. Each citizen may only endorse a single candidate. The election commission verifies the endorsement lists, publishes the candidate list in all daily newspapers in Croatia (and on Croatian Radiotelevision) and delivers it to the Croatian diplomatic missions for publication.
In parliamentary elections, 14-member election lists may be submitted to the State Electoral Commission for any number of constituencies in Croatia. A 14-member list of candidates may also be submitted for the Croatian diaspora constituency, while a two-member list can be submitted for the ethnic-minority representatives. In each case, 500 endorsements are required for an election list to become valid. The lists may be supported by one or more political parties, or by a group of voters as an independent list. No one may be a candidate on two or more lists simultaneously.
The same procedure applies to local elections, except that council-election lists require 100, 150 and 500 endorsements for town, city and county-council lists respectively. The city of Zagreb council is treated as a county council under election law. The number of voter signatures on mayoral and county prefect candidate nominations ranges between 50 (for mayoral elections in towns of up to 1,000 residents), 100 (for other town mayoral candidates), 500 (for mayoral elections in cities of up to 35,000 residents), 1,000 (in cities with populations between 35,000 and 100,000) and 2,000 endorsements for cities of 100,000 residents or more (with the exception of Zagreb). County prefect election candidates require 2,500 endorsements, and candidates running for mayor of Zagreb need 5,000 voter endorsements for their nominations to become valid.
Candidates running for European Parliament seats need not be Croatian citizens and may hold citizenship in any member state of the European Union, while having a permanent (or temporary) residence in Croatia. Their nominations are valid if endorsed by 5,000 Croatian voters.
Funding.
The funding of political parties, independent politicians and election campaigns is relatively highly regulated in comparison with developed western democracies. Applicable legislation encompasses cash receipts, provision of free services (except the labour of volunteers), and products and other forms of support (including membership fees). The legislation also stipulates that the government budget provides funding for political parties and non-partisan political representatives in the amount of 0.05 percent of the previous year's budget expenditures. Additional funds are appropriated in local government budgets. The funds are distributed to elected members of parliament and councils, and the political parties with which they are affiliated receive 10 percent of the funds. Each election candidate (or slate) must have a dedicated bank account to handle election-campaign donations, other related funding, and all campaign-related expenditures. The maximum donation to a single party, candidate or slate made in a year is also regulated. In cases of individuals it is set at 30,000 kuna ( 4,050 euro), regardless of purpose. Companies and other legal persons are limited to the same amount in local elections; 100,000 kuna ( 13,500 euro) for parliamentary or European Parliament elections and 200,000 kuna ( 27,000 euro) for presidential elections to any one candidate, party or slate (whichever is applicable). Total campaign expenditures are also limited to 8 million kuna ( 1.08 million euro) per candidate in presidential elections, 1.5 million kuna ( 202,000 euro) per candidate (or slate) in European Parliament or parliamentary elections, 500,000 kuna ( 67,600 euro) per candidate in Zagreb mayoral elections and 400,000 kuna ( 54,000 euro) per candidate in county-prefect or mayoral elections in cities of 35,000 residents or larger and in county seats. Mayoral election-campaign expenditures in other cities and towns is also limited, depending on the local government's population: 250,000 kuna ( 33,800 euro) if the population exceeds 10,000 residents, 100,000 kuna ( 13,500 euro) in population units of 3,000–10,000 and up to 50,000 kuna ( 6,750 euro) in smaller self-governing units. All candidates and parties (or slates) are legally required to publish financial reports detailing their funding, which are audited by the State Electoral Commission and the State Audit Office. They are also legally required to turn over all receipts exceeding the legal limits in favour of the central government budget within eight days.
In the 2007 parliamentary elections, the leading political parties reported campaign spending as follows: the Croatian Democratic Union spent 19.5 million kuna ( euro), the Social Democratic Party of Croatia spent 15.8 million kuna ( euro), the Croatian People's Party – Liberal Democrats spent 9 million kuna ( euro), while the Croatian Peasant Party led coalition reported spending 8 million kuna ( euro) and the Croatian Party of Rights spent a similar amount.
All presidential election candidates receiving at least 10 percent of the vote are awarded an equal sum as election-campaign reimbursement. The amount is decided by the government at least 30 days before the election. This amount was set at 250,000 kuna ( euro) for the 2009–2010 presidential election, representing a 50-percent decrease from the sum determined for the previous presidential election (when the reimbursement sum was set at half-a-million kuna). Similarly, the government also reimburses the political parties and slates for each parliamentary seat won. For the 2011 parliamentary election, each seat will be given 180,000 kuna ( euro). A sum of 30,000 kuna ( euro) will be paid to parties or candidates failing to win any parliamentary seats if they receive more than five percent of votes in a constituency. In addition, national-minority-representative candidates running on the minority ballot failing to win parliamentary seats (but still winning at least 15 percent of votes in their constituency) will receive 27,000 kuna ( euro) if the minority comprises less than 1.5 percent of the total population of Croatia. All European Parliament election candidates and county-prefect and mayoral-election candidates receiving at least 10 percent of the vote are also entitled to receive reimbursement of costs in an amount determined by the government ahead of each election.
Media coverage and promotion.
Legislation requires that all presidential and parliamentary election candidates (or slates) are guaranteed equal opportunity to present and discuss their platforms in the media (in addition to paid advertising). In 2007 the parliamentary election campaign was covered by all media, including nationwide television broadcasters. During this period the broadcasters, which included Croatian Radiotelevision (HTV), RTL Televizija (RTL) and Nova TV, aired 27.8 hours of news on 22 different programs with 1,196 news reports. This total included 171 reports dealing directly with the elections. Analysis of news coverage indicated evenly-matched coverage of the combined ruling party (HDZ) and official government statements on one side, and the main opposition party (SDP) on the other; each received an average of a 37.5-percent share of coverage and a 33-percent share of interviews aired. HTV and Nova TV gave a slight advantage to the HDZ and the government, while RTL gave more coverage to the SDP. However, the differences were small and resulted in matching ratios. Other political parties received considerably less coverage. HNS received an average of approximately 11 percent of the coverage, HSS received six percent and all other parties received less than five-percent coverage. The national television broadcasters air programs where all slates and candidates may talk about their platforms and organise debates.
Paid promotion largely followed this pattern, as the HDZ and the SDP were two dominant parties in that field as well. The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) noted in its report that the largest parties reported their advertising spending below their actual value, and the largest proportion of expenditure was for television ads. Election silence is in force on the day of the elections and the previous day, ending at 7 in the evening as polling stations close and exit polls may be published after that time.
Voting and appeals.
Polling stations are set up in public buildings throughout the country; voters may only vote at their assigned polling station (according to their permanent residence), but voters deployed abroad in the armed forces, voters on Croatian-flagged ships and imprisoned voters are allowed to vote elsewhere. Other voters residing in Croatia, but traveling abroad on election day may vote at Croatian diplomatic missions. Polling stations are open from 7:00 am until 7:00 pm, but all voters present at the polling stations at closing time are allowed to vote. Polling stations may be closed early if all registered voters have voted. Presidential election ballots contain a list of candidates verified by the State Electoral Commission, in alphabetical order. This entails the name and PIN of each candidate, and the names of political parties endorsing the candidate (or a note that the candidate is running as an independent. The names are preceded by ordinal numbers. Parliamentary election and European Parliament election ballots contain the name of the slate and the name of the person heading the list, in addition to candidates, who is not necessarily a candidate on the particular list, but may be included as a figurehead symbolizing specific political party or a coalition putting forward the list—usually head of the party of coalition at the national level. The lists are in alphabetical order and preceded by an ordinal number. Voting is done by circling the number associated with a particular candidate. Ballots marked otherwise (but positively indicating a candidate for which a vote is cast) are also considered valid. Blank ballots and ballots on which multiple numbers are circled (or multiple candidates are otherwise indicated) are invalid. Official results are announced and published by the State Electoral Commission.
Voter registry.
The register of voters in Croatia is defined by law. The register lists all citizens of Croatia aged 18 and over, except those who have been stripped of their voting rights by a court decision. The register is organized according to legal residence () and maintained by government offices in counties and the city of Zagreb. Each citizen of Croatia may request a review of the register and amendments to personal information (supported by applicable documents). The voter register is used to confirm the right to vote at the polling station and to verify voter endorsements of candidates and election lists submitted to the electoral commissions. Voters who expect to travel in Croatia or abroad on election day may require inclusion in a provisional list which allows them to vote at a polling station other than that assigned to them by residence. Failing that, a voter may obtain an excerpt from the registry on election day to be allowed to vote.
A pattern of irregularities has been discovered concerning the updating of the list when citizens of Croatia turn 18 or die. In 2005, it was estimated that the register contained a large number of irregularities and erroneous entries. Since then, public attention was directed to the issue by NGOs monitoring elections through roundtables and advertising campaigns; according to GONG—a NGO specializing in election monitoring—although the register was improved, there is room for further improvement. The 2011 census also indicated a large number of voters in the registry who should not be there, leading to claims that up to a half-million voters in the registry should not be included.
Complaints and appeals.
Political parties, candidates and voters who have endorsed a particular candidate (or state) in presidential, parliamentary or European Parliament elections may file complaints with the State Electoral Commission regarding irregularities in the election process within 48 hours of a disputed activity. In the European Parliament elections, voter complaints are required to be endorsed by at least 100 voters (or five percent of the voters). If the commission finds the complaint valid, it will order the part of the election process directly affected by the disputed activity to be repeated (possibly postponing the election date if there is insufficient time left). The commission must provide its decision within 48 hours after the complaint is submitted. The decision may be appealed before the Constitutional Court of Croatia within 48 hours of its receipt and once petitioned, the court must return a ruling within 48 hours. In local council elections, complaints are processed by county, city or town electoral commissions (as appropriate). In mayoral elections, complaints are filed with the county electoral commission. This does not apply to Zagreb mayoral elections, where complaints are submitted to the State Electoral Commission (the case also in county prefect elections). The time allowances and appeals procedure are the same as for presidential and parliamentary elections.
Monitoring.
Elections are governed by the State Electoral Commission and electoral boards. Members of those bodies are required to have a university degree in law, and they may not be members of any political party. The State Electoral Commission prepares and manages elections in accordance with legislation, appoints lower-ranking election-commission and board members, issues directives to such bodies and supervises their work. The State Electoral Commission compiles and publishes candidate lists, supervises the legality of political campaigns and compiles and publishes election results. All members of election boards (or their legal deputies) must be present at assigned polling stations at all times while the polling station is open. The board verifies the identity of voters against the list of registered voters and records the turnout. The turnout number is later checked against number of votes cast; if the number of votes exceeds the turnout, the election at that polling station must be repeated. Votes are tallied by hand, and that information is forwarded (along with all other records kept at the polling station) to the State Electoral Commission.
Further monitoring is performed by non-governmental organizations specializing in election monitoring, such as GONG. There are also other monitoring organisations headquartered in Croatia and abroad; the OSCE set up a limited monitoring mission to observe the 2009–2010 presidential elections. The last parliamentary election (held in 2007) was monitored by 8,540 observers fielded by a number of organisations and political parties.


Stamira

Stamira (sometimes spelled Stamura) (date of birth unknown – Ancona, 1 September 1173) was, according to a long-standing tradition, a heroic self-sacrificing woman who saved the city of Ancona during the 1173 siege by Emperor Frederick Barbarossa. Her memory was later taken up prominently by Italian nationalism.
Background.
Emperor Frederick Barbarossa bore a long-standing grudge to Ancona, one of the Italian Maritime Republics, for its assertion of independence. Ancona had already stubbornly and successfully resisted an earlier attempt of Imperial occupation in 1167. Moreover, to counterbalance the power of the Holy Roman Empire, the Anconitans made a voluntary submission to the Byzantine Emperor Manuel I Komnenos, and the Byzantines maintained representatives in the city.
In the later part of May 1173 the Imperial forces, commanded by Christian von Buch, Archbishop of Mainz, laid siege to Ancona. In preparation for this step, the imperial troops had previously requested and obtained the naval alliance of the Republic of Venice. Despite the ongoing conflict between the Empire and the Italian cities associated in the Lombard League, of which Venice was also part, Venice was happy to seize this occasion to rid itself of Ancona, a long-lasting rival for the maritime trade in the Adriatic and Mediterranean. The combination of the Imperial Army by land and the Venetian Navy by sea presented the Republic of Ancona with a formidable challenge.
Stamira's heroic self-sacrifice.
The siege lasted over four months. During a particularly dire moment of the siege, Ancona inhabitants staged a short sortie and managed to throw a barrel containing resin and pitch in front of the besiegers - but it was very dangerous to light it. It was at this moment that the widow Stamira boldly came out of the walls, wielding an ax with which she broke the barrel and set it on fire, thus destroying part of the besiegers' war machines – but at the price of herself being killed. Thanks to this sacrifice, the Ancona inhabitants were able to leave the walls for a short time, so that they could supply themselves with food and continue the resistance of the city.
This bought Ancona time until mid-October, when reinforcements came from Ancona's allies Aldruda Frangipane, Countess of Bertinoro, and Guglielmo Marcheselli, Guelph Chief of Ferrara. The arrival of these forces caused the Imperial and Venetian troops to lift the siege.
Later depictions.
The events of the 1173 siege – including Stamira's heroic act - were narrated some years later, in 1204, by Boncompagno da Signa, in the ‘’Liber de Obsidione Anconae’’. Of this, three copies remain: one is kept in the Vatican, the second in the National Library of Paris and the third remained unpublished until 1723, when it was bought by Father Auriberti of Brescia, from which the text was translated and published by the historian Ludovico Antonio Muratori in 1725. In the Nineteenth Century this copy was again sold and transferred to Cleveland, Ohio.
Muratori, after long research on the history of Italy – especially on the Medieval Period - published the "Annals of Italy", a major work recounting Italian history up to 1749, and giving considerable attention to the Heroine of Ancona. Muratori called her “Stamura”, and this version of her name was long current.
In 1848 the publisher Pier Carlo Soldi of Florence brought out the novel “The Siege of Ancona in The Year 1174” by the Italian Nationalist writer Giuseppe Cannonieri of Modena, written while Cannonieri was living in exile at Blois, France. In this account the story of Stamira/Stamura is made into a full-fledged historical novel in the manner of Alexandre Dumas.
“Stamura" is given as her family name. The heroine's first name is given as Maria, and she has a daughter named Virginia. She is the widow of Pietro Stamura, a Milanese citizen, who for being opposed to the troops of Barbarossa, was brutally tortured and killed together with other Lombard patriots. (The manner of his death is described at great and horrifying detail). At the time of her heroic self-sacrifice, Maria Stamura is engaged to Guglielmo Gosia, son of Martino, Mayor of Ancona, and is a friend of the priest Don Giovanni da Chiò, another hero of the siege of 1173.
All of the above details are entirely fictional, derived from 19th Century invention. Of the actual historical woman, hardly anything is known beyond the bare fact of her having been a widow. Still, the fictional account had a considerable popularity during the struggle for Italian Unification. Since that time, she is often characterized as “An Italian Patriot” though this designation is an anachronism when applied to a person who lived at a time when Italy was divided into numerous, often mutually-hostile principalities and city states, and a common Italian national identity did not exist.
In 1877 Francesco Podesti, himself a native of Ancona, made for the Earl Ragnini a painting of Stamira. Another Podesti painting depicted "The Oath of The Anconetani", also an incident of the same 1173 siege. The Stamira painting was eventually donated to the city of Bertinoro, in appreciation of the intervention of Aldruda Frangipane, Countess of Bertinoro, which ultimately helped lift the siege. The canvas is placed at present at the office of Mayor of Bertinoro.
Debate on the correct spelling of her name.
Due to the great popularity of Cannonieri's work, especially widely disseminated in mid-Nineteenth Century Italy, “Stamura” was the commonly accepted version of her name.
However, the vernacular poet Ferruccio Marchetti, in an essay entitled “"Stamira or Stamura?"” pointed out that “Stamira” must be the correct version of her name, based on the specific grammatical rules of the Ancona Dialect. In 1936 Palermo Giangiacomi, self-taught historian and Ancona City Councilor, convinced the municipal administration to accordingly change the name in the public locations commemorating her.


Next Slovak parliamentary election

Parliamentary elections are scheduled to be held in Slovakia by February 2024 to elect members of the National Council, although they can be held sooner if a snap election is called. The last snap election was back in 2012. The previous elections in 2020 resulted in a coalition government led by the Ordinary People and Independent Personalities movement.
Political parties.
The table below lists party groups currently represented in the National Council.


Foelke Kampana

Foelke Kampana (1355 – c. 1418), also known as Foelke the Cruel, was a Frisian noble. She served as regent for the Frisian territories Oldeborg, Brokmerland, Auricherland and Emsigerland in East Frisia in 1400 during the absence of her son Keno II and in 1417 during the minority of her grandson Ocko II.
Born in Hinte, Foelke was the daughter of Frisian Kempo von Hinte, chief of Westerburg van Hinte, and married in 1377 to Frisian knight Ocko I tom Brok (d. 1389), lord of Oldeborg, and chief of Brockmerland, Auricherland and Emsigerland in East Frisia. In 1389, her spouse fell in battle fighting on the side of the count of Holland. Foelke had tried to assist them, and raised her own army to aid him, but when she arrived, he was already dead. During her absence, Aurich was captured by an enemy, who barricaded himself in the church. Foelke retook Aurich with her army and executed two hundred prisoners. Because her son Keno was still a minor, Widzel tom Brok, an older illegitimate son of her late spouse, succeeded his father as chieftain. During his ten-year rule, he aligned himself with Folkmar Allena, a traditional enemy of his father. Widmer died in a feud in April 1399. Her son, Keno II, was by then of legal majority. Foelke acted as his political adviser, until Keno's death in 1417. She then briefly became regent until her grandson Ocko came of age that same year. Foelke died soon after in Aurich and was buried there.
The court historian Eggerik Beninga (1490–1562), who was related to the Allena family, who competed for power with the Tom Brok family, introduced a number of legends about her in his "Chronica der Fresen" which led to her becoming an icon of cruelty. Some of the stories appear to be based on real atrocities committed by Keno II, which were transferred to his strong-willed mother.