Mečiar led Slovakia during thedissolution of Czechoslovakia in 1992–93 and was one of the leading presidential candidates in Slovakia in 1999 and 2004. During his time in office, he was criticized for hisautocratic style of governance and connections toorganized crime, which became known asMečiarizmus ("Mečiarism").[1][2][3]
Starting in theCommunist Party of Slovakia, the only road to prominence inCommunist Czechoslovakia, he became committee chairman in the town ofŽiar nad Hronom, only to be dismissed in the year after the1968 Warsaw Pact invasion of Czechoslovakia, when he delivered a pro-reform speech to the National Congress in 1969 and was thrown out. A year later he was also expelled from the Communist Party and then added to the Communist Party Central Committee's long list of enemies of thesocialist regime. He put himself through the Faculty of Law of theComenius University while working in a glass factory.
In late 1989, during the fast-paced anti-CommunistVelvet Revolution, he joined the new political party,Public Against Violence (Verejnosť proti násiliu, VPN), which was the Slovak counterpart to the better-known CzechCivic Forum. On 11 January 1990, when the VPN was looking for professionals to participate in the government of Slovakia, Mečiar was appointed as Minister of the Interior and Environment of Slovakia on a recommendation ofAlexander Dubček, who was impressed by Mečiar's thorough knowledge in all relevant fields.[4]
In 1990 the political landscape of theCzech Republic andSlovakia started to develop and many new political parties were formed, mainly from the Civic Forum and the VPN. By the end of 1990, some of Mečiar's partners in the VPN began distancing themselves from him. First, the party split into two fractions in early March 1991: Mečiar supporters (mostly members of his cabinet) and Mečiar opponents (led by the VPN chairmanFedor Gál). On 23 April 1991, the Presidium of the Slovak parliament (Slovak National Council) deposed him as premier of Slovakia and he was replaced byJán Čarnogurský, the leader of the Christian Democratic Movement. Three days later, the VPN officially split in two: theMovement for a Democratic Slovakia (HZDS) and the remaining VPN (since October 1991 called ODÚ-VPN, later justODÚ). Mečiar was elected HZDS chairman in June 1991.
In 1991 and 1992, there were frequent, but fruitless, negotiations between the Czech Republic and Slovak Republic concerning the future relations between the two constituent republics of Czechoslovakia. The winners of theJune 1992 elections in Czechoslovakia and new prime ministers were theCivic Democratic Party led byVáclav Klaus in the Czech Republic and the HZDS led by Vladimír Mečiar in Slovakia. Before and shortly after this election, the HZDS supported the creation of a looser federation—a confederation—between the two republics.[5] However, its Czech counterpart wanted an even more centralized Czechoslovakia than was the case in 1992 or two separate countries.[citation needed] Since these two concepts were irreconcilable, Mečiar and Klaus agreed (after intense negotiations, but without having consulted the population in a referendum) on 23 July inBratislava to dissolve Czechoslovakia and to create two independent states. As a result, Mečiar and Klaus became the prime ministers of two independent states on 1 January 1993. Mečiar also opposed the free-marketshock therapy proposed by Prague and Klaus' party to all of Czechoslovakia.[6]
After eight members of the parliament left the HZDS in March 1993, Mečiar lost his parliamentary majority. At the same time Mečiar's HZDS also lost the support of the president,Michal Kováč, who was originally nominated by the HZDS. However, it was only in March 1994 that he was unseated as prime minister by the parliament (National Council of the Slovak Republic) and the opposition parties created a new government underJozef Moravčík's lead. However, after the elections held at the turn of September and October 1994, in which his HZDS won 35% of the votes, he became prime minister again — in a coalition with the far-rightSlovak National Party headed by the controversialJán Slota, and the radical-leftZdruženie robotníkov Slovenska headed by the colourfulJán Ľupták, a mason.
During the following period, he was constantly criticized by his opponents and Western countries for anautocratic style of administration, lack of respect for democracy, misuse of state media for propaganda, corruption and the shady privatization of national companies that occurred during his rule. Privatization during the 1990s in both Slovakia and the Czech Republic was harmed by widespread unlawfulasset stripping (also described by the journalistic term oftunnelling).
At the same time relations between Mečiar and the President of Slovakia,Michal Kováč were rather strained. He was also blamed for having engaged theSlovak secret service (SIS) in theabduction of the President's sonMichal Kováč, Jr. — wanted on a warrant for a financial crime in Germany — toHainburg, Austria, in August 1995, but his guilt has not been proven.[7] However, after Kovač's term expired in March 1998 the Slovak parliament was unable to elect a successor, so Mečiar also temporarily assumed the role of acting president. As president, he issued an amnesty for some of those accused of the abduction. As a result, Slovakia under his rule became partially isolated from the West and the pace ofEU andNATO accession negotiations was much slower than in the case of neighboring countries, although Mečiar supported both EU and NATO memberships for his country and submitted Slovakia's applications to both organisations.
Mečiar and HZDS narrowly finished first in the1998 elections, with 27% of the votes. However, he was unable to create a coalition, andMikuláš Dzurinda from the opposition became the new Prime Minister. Afterwards, Mečiar was one of the two leading candidates for the first direct election of the president of Slovakia in 1999, but he was defeated byRudolf Schuster. In 2000, Mečiar's HZDS was renamed "People's Party — Movement for a Democratic Slovakia".
In 2000 Mečiar ostensibly gave up his political ambitions. His HZDS colleagueAugustín Marián Húska said: "The NATO-War against Yugoslavia in 1999 was also a signal to us, to not pursue any vision of political independence anymore. We have seen what will happen to forces that want to be independent."[8] In 2000, Mečiar was arrested by Slovak police on charges of fraud dating from his term in office.[9][10]
Mečiar was heavily favored to win the2002 election, but it was thought that if he became prime minister again, it would end any chance of Slovakia getting into the EU. The 2002 elections saw the HZDS score a high percentage (20%) again. However, as in 1998, no other party was willing to serve under him. The result was another term in government for Dzurinda. The lower percentage of Mečiar's HZDS (20%) compared to the 1998 result (27%) was due to internal disputes within the organization shortly before the election, which caused many traditional HZDS members to leave the party. Some of them created the HZD (Movement for Democracy) party led byIvan Gašparovič. In 2003, further traditional HZDS members left the party and most of them created thePeople's Union (Ľudová únia).
In the2004 presidential election, Mečiar tried to become Slovak president again, but was defeated in the second round by his former, long-standing ally Ivan Gašparovič. In the2006 parliamentary election in Slovakia, HZDS had the worst election result in its history, just 8.79%. Mečiar requested an examination of the election results.[11] While HZDS became part ofRobert Fico's coalition, Mečiar was not a Cabinet member. He declined to participate in the2009 presidential election but also denied considering political retirement.
In the2010 parliamentary election, Mečiar's HZDS dropped to 4%, leaving it out ofparliament for the first time in its history. In the 2012 elections, the HZDS saw its vote collapse to 0.93%, leaving it again outside of parliament. Eventually, the party was dissolved in 2014.
^Filep, Béla (2017).The politics of good neighbourhood : state, civil society and the enhancement of cultural capital in East Central Europe. London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group. p. 36.ISBN978-1-317-02044-8.OCLC960041065.
^Hayward R. Alker; Ted Robert Gurr; Kumar Rupesinghe (2001).Journeys through conflict : narratives and lessons. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield. p. 159.ISBN0-7425-1027-1.OCLC46777394.
^Smith-Cannoy, Heather M. (2012).Insincere commitments : human rights treaties, abusive states, and citizen activism. Washington D.C.: Georgetown University Press. p. 98.ISBN978-1-58901-896-9.OCLC797834608.