DOCSLIB.ORG

Political Parties' Positions on the EU

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

A University of Sussex DPhil thesis Available online via Sussex Research Online: http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/ This thesis is protected by copyright which belongs to the author. This thesis cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the Author The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the Author When referring to this work, full bibliographic details including the author, title, awarding institution and date of the thesis must be given Please visit Sussex Research Online for more information and further details The Attitudes of Political Parties in Serbia and Croatia towards the European Union in Comparative Perspective Marko Stojić University of Sussex Thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy December, 2013 iii Contents List of Tables and Figures vi List of Abbreviations vii Acknowledgements viii Summary ix Chapter 1: Introduction 1 1.1 Setting the scene 1 1.2 Serbian and Croatian relationships with the EU/EC 4 1.2.1 Serbian and Croatian relationships with the European Community until the 1990s 4 1.2.2 A decade of lost opportunities (1990-2000) 5 1.2.3 A difficult role for latecomers (2000-2012) 8 1.3 Serbian and Croatian party politics since 2000 11 1.3.1 Serbian party politics since 2000 – the agony of political and state fragmentation 11 1.3.2 Croatian party politics since 2000 – a gradual post-conflict normalisation and stabilisation 14 1.4 General literature review 16 1.4.1 Literature on the domestic politics of European integration 17 1.4.2 Literature on the EU’s impact on member and candidate states 20 1.4.3 Comparative Serbian and Croatian party politics 24 1.5 Contribution of the research 28 1.6 Research design and methodology 29 1.6.1 Methods of data collection 36 1.7 The structure of the thesis, hypotheses and major findings 47 Chapter 2: Conceptualisation and categorisation of the positions of Serbian and Croatian parties on the EU 51 2.1 Conceptual models in the comparative literature 52 2.2 Challenges of applying conceptual models to (potential) candidate states 55 2.3 The classification model 60 2.4 Classification model and Serbian and Croatian parties 64 Chapter 3: Party attitudes towards the EU and party ideology 67 3.1 Party attitudes towards the EU and ideology in the comparative literature 68 3.2 How to study party ideology and identity? 72 3.2.1 Criteria for mapping and classifying party ideology 74 3.3 The ideologies of Serbian and Croatian political parties 80 3.3.1 Social democratic parties 80 3.3.2 Conservative parties 85 3.3.3 Christian democratic parties 88 3.3.4 Agrarian parties 89 3.3.5 Liberal parties 89 3.3.6 Radical right parties 91 3.3.7 An overview of the ideologies of Serbian and Croatian parties 92 3.4 Party attitudes towards the EU and ideology in Serbia and Croatia 97 3.4.1 Social democrats and the EU 99 3.4.2 Conservatives and the EU 104 3.4.3 Christian democrats and the EU 110 3.4.4 Agrarians and the EU 112 iv 3.4.5 Liberals and the EU 113 3.4.6 Radical right parties and the EU 115 3.4.7 An overview of party ideology and attitudes towards the EU in Serbia and Croatia 118 3.5 Conclusion 125 Chapter 4: Parties’ strategies and attitudes towards the EU 129 4.1 Parties’ strategies and attitudes towards the EU in the comparative 130 literature 4.2 How to conceptualise party strategy? 134 4.3 Party strategy and attitudes towards the EU in Serbia and Croatia 135 4.3.1 The Socialist Party of Serbia 136 4.3.2 The Serbian Progressive Party 142 4.3.3 The Croatian Democratic Union 146 4.3.4 Party strategy and other political parties’ attitudes towards the EU 149 4.4 Conclusion 151 Chapter 5: Party attitudes towards the EU and their position in the party system 156 5.1 Party position in the party system and attitudes towards the EU in the comparative literature 157 5.2 Characteristics of the party systems and political parties in Serbia and 161 Croatia 5.2.1 Party systems in Serbia and Croatia 161 5.2.2 Characteristics of the political parties in Serbia and Croatia 164 5.3 Party position in the party system and attitudes towards the EU in Serbia and Croatia 168 5.3.1 The impact of government participation and opposition status 168 5.3.1.1 Governmental status and attitudes towards the EU 169 5.3.1.2 Opposition status and attitudes towards the EU 173 5.3.2 The impact of core and peripheral positions 178 5.3.2.1 Core parties and attitudes towards the EU 179 5.3.2.2 Peripheral parties and attitudes towards the EU 181 5.4 Conclusion 185 Chapter 6: Party attitudes towards the EU and relations with their electoral constituencies and socio-economic groups 189 6.1 Party attitudes towards the EU and relations with their electoral constituencies and socio-economic groups in the comparative literature 190 6.2 Methodology 194 6.3 Party attitudes towards the EU and public opinion 194 6.4 Party attitudes towards the EU and their electoral constituencies 198 6.4.1 The Socialist Party of Serbia 204 6.4.2 The Serbian Progressive Party 207 6.4.3 The Democratic Party of Serbia 210 6.4.4 Other political parties’ attitudes towards the EU and their core constituencies 212 6.4.5 Croatian political parties’ attitudes towards the EU and their core constituencies 214 6.5 Party attitudes towards the EU and relations with socio-economic groups 217 6.6 Conclusion 220 v Chapter 7: Party attitudes towards the EU and transnational and bilateral party linkages 224 7.1 Party attitudes towards the EU and their transnational and bilateral linkages in the comparative literature 226 7.2 Conceptual framework 233 7.3 Serbian and Croatian parties’ attitudes towards the EU and their relations with transnational party federations and foreign national parties 236 7.3.1 The European People’s Party 240 7.3.2 The Party of European Socialists 247 7.3.3 The European Liberal Democrat and Reform Party 250 7.3.4 Parties intending to join European transnational party federations 251 7.3.5 Parties not intending to join European transnational party federations 254 7.4 Parties’ attitudes towards the EU and their relations with EU institutions and foreign governments 256 7.5 Conclusion 262 Chapter 8: Conclusions and implications 266 8.1 Summary of the key findings 269 8.1.1 Conceptualising and classifying party stances on the EU 269 8.1.2 The relation between the dependent and independent variables 275 8.2 General conclusions 281 8.2.1 Ideology, strategy and party attitudes towards the EU 281 8.2.2 Attitudes of political parties towards the EU and the experience of opposition 283 8.2.3 Attitudes of political parties, public opinion and core voters’ concerns about the EU 284 8.2.4 The importance of external factors 285 8.2.5 The importance of the post-Yugoslav context 290 8.3 Avenues for further research 293 Bibliography 297 Appendix 1: List of interviewees 319 Appendix 2: Interview questions 322 vi List of Tables and Figures Chapter 1 Figure 1.1 The initial relation between dependent and independent variables 31 Chapter 2 Table 2.1 Model of party positions on Europe and their underpinnings in (potential) candidate countries 60 Table 2.2 The initial mapping of party positions on Europe in Serbia and Croatia 65 Chapter 3 Table 3.1 Party families and attitudes towards the EU of Serbian and Croatian political parties 98 Figure 3.1 Attitudes towards the EU and ideological position of Serbian and Croatian parties on the socio-economic left-right dimension 120 Figure 3.2 Attitudes towards the EU and ideological position of Serbian and Croatian parties on the cosmopolitanism vs. nationalism dimension 122 Figure 3.3 Support for/opposition to the EU by party families in Serbia and Croatia 123 Figure 3.4 Dimension of party competition, party families and positions on European integration in Serbia and Croatia 124 Chapter 4 Table 4.1 Government coalitions in Serbia and Croatia since 2000 136 Chapter 5 Table 5.1 Party systems in Serbia and Croatia 162 Table 5.2 Party governmental/opposition positions and attitudes towards the EU 169 Table 5.3 Party core/peripheral positions and attitudes towards the EU 179 Chapter 6 Table 6.1 Serbian public and party-based Euroscepticism 195 Table 6.2 Croatian public and party-based Euroscepticism 197 Table 6.3 Attitudes of Serbian parties’ voters towards Serbian EU membership 199 Figure 6.1 Support for Serbian EU membership by party electorates 200 Table 6.4 Preference of Serbian parties’ core voters for either Kosovo staying in Serbia or Serbian EU membership 201 Table 6.5 Attitudes of Serbian parties’ voters towards the European Union 202 Table 6.6 Attitudes of Croatian parties’ voters towards Croatian EU membership 215 Figure 6.2 Support for Croatian EU membership by party electorates 216 Chapter 7 Table 7.1 Indicators of the influence of European transnational party federations on national party attitudes towards the EU 235 Table 7.2 Transnational affiliation of Serbian and Croatian parties and its impact on party attitudes towards the EU 238 Chapter 8 Table 8.1 Party positions on Europe in Serbia and Croatia 270 Table 8.2 Party characteristics and sources of their attitudes towards the EU 273 Figure 8.1 The relation between the dependent and independent variables 277 vii List of abbreviations DOS Democratic Opposition of Serbia DS Democratic Party (Serbia) DSS Democratic Party of Serbia EC European Community ELDR European Liberal Democrat and Reform Party EP European Parliament EPP European People’s Party EU European Union HDSSB Croatian Democratic Alliance of Slavonija and Baranja
Recommended publications
  • Freedom in the World - Serbia (2010)

    Freedom in the World - Serbia (2010)

    Page 1 of 5 Print Freedom in the World - Serbia (2010) Political Rights Score: 2 * Capital: Belgrade Civil Liberties Score: 2 * Status: Free Population: 7,322,000 Explanatory Note The ratings through 2002 are for the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, of which Serbia was a part, and those from 2003 through 2005 are for the State Union of Serbia and Montenegro. Kosovo is examined in a separate report. Ratings Change Serbia’s political rights rating improved from 3 to 2 due to the consolidation of a stable multiparty system after several rounds of elections in the post-Milosevic period. Overview The parliament in November approved a new statute regulating the autonomy of the northern province of Vojvodina, ending a long political debate over the issue and demonstrating the effectiveness of the Democratic Party–led government elected in 2008. The country also made progress in its relations with the European Union, securing visa-free travel rights and the implementation of a trade agreement in December. However, press freedom groups criticized a media law adopted in August, and tensions involving the ethnic Albanian population in the Presevo Valley remained a problem. Serbia was recognized as an independent state in 1878 after several centuries under Ottoman rule. It formed the core of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes proclaimed in 1918. After World War II, Serbia became a constituent republic of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, under the communist rule of Josip Broz Tito. Within the boundaries of the Serbian republic as drawn at that time were two autonomous provinces: the largely Albanian-populated Kosovo in the south, and Vojvodina, with a significant Hungarian minority, in the north.
  • Elections in Serbia: 2017 Presidential Elections Frequently Asked Questions

    Elections in Serbia: 2017 Presidential Elections Frequently Asked Questions

    Elections in Serbia 2017 Presidential Elections Frequently Asked Questions Europe and Eurasia International Foundation for Electoral Systems 2011 Crystal Drive | Floor 10 | Arlington, VA 22202 | www.IFES.org March 28, 2017 Frequently Asked Questions Who are citizens voting for on Election Day? ............................................................................................... 1 What election system will be used? ............................................................................................................. 1 Who administers elections in Serbia? ........................................................................................................... 1 What is the structure of the Serbian government? ...................................................................................... 2 How are voters registered? .......................................................................................................................... 2 How will out-of-country voting be managed? .............................................................................................. 2 Who will be observing on Election Day? ....................................................................................................... 3 What is the political climate and why is this election important?................................................................ 3 Disclosure: These FAQs reflect decisions made by the Serbian elections authorities as of March 28, 2017, to the best of our knowledge. This document does not represent
  • Women in Parliaments Global Forum (Wip) at the World Bank / Imf Annual Meeting 2014

    Women in Parliaments Global Forum (Wip) at the World Bank / Imf Annual Meeting 2014

    WOMEN IN PARLIAMENTS GLOBAL FORUM (WIP) AT THE WORLD BANK / IMF ANNUAL MEETING 2014 8 - 11 OCTOBER 2014 WASHINGTON D.C, UNITED STATES FIRST DRAFT PROGRAMME EVENT OVERVIEW The Women in Parliaments Global Forum (WIP) is gathering in Washington D.C, from 8-11 October 2014, on the occasion of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund Annual Meeting 2014. From 8 to 9 October, WIP Delegates will join the Parliamentary Network Meeting of the World Bank and the IMF. This meeting will give female Parliamentarians a unique opportunity to engage with senior management and experts of the IMF and the World Bank Group, to discuss current issues related to international finance and development. The Managing Director of the IMF, Christine Lagarde, will introduce the 2-day meeting. Discussions will address issues like climate and energy pricing, youth employment solutions, gender equality and global economy. On Friday 10 October, within the framework of the World Bank/IMF Civil Society Forum, WIP will co-host the Special Session “How does economic empowerment of women enhance stability in fragile and transition contexts?”. This Session will be followed by a WIP Community Workshop and a WIP Community reception, gathering WIP Delegates and members of the WIP Advisory Board. On Saturday 11, WIP Delegates have been invited to visit the National Museum of Women in the Arts, the only major museum in the world dedicated exclusively to recognizing the achievements of women artists. FIRST DRAFT PROGRAMME WORLD BANK/IMF ANNUAL MEETING THE PARLIAMENTARY NETWORK
  • Growth Anatomy of Croatian Economy

    Growth Anatomy of Croatian Economy

    Munich Personal RePEc Archive Growth Anatomy of Croatian Economy Cizmovic, Mirjana and Jankovic, Jelena and Popovic, Milenko ISEA Mediterranean Univerzity, ISEA, ISEA Mediterranean Univerzity 1 September 2015 Online at https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/66478/ MPRA Paper No. 66478, posted 08 Sep 2015 14:48 UTC RIFIN and Faculty of Economics, Zagreb: International Scientific Conference: Croatian Economic Crisis and Shift from Recession to Economic Development Zagreb, Croatia, October 2015 Mirjana Čizmović, Institute for Socio-Economic Analysis, Podgorica, Montenegro & Mediterranean University, Podgorica, Montenegro Jelena Janković, Institute for Socio-Economic Analysis, Podgorica, Montenegro & Central Bank of Montenegro, Podgorica, Montenegro Milenko Popović, Institute for Socio-Economic Analysis, Podgorica, Montenegro & Mediterranean University, Podgorica, Montenegro Growth Anatomy of Croatian Economy Abstract: In this paper presented is research on anatomy of growth of Croatian economy in the period 1990-2013. Results of this analysis basically should be understood as a kind of growth diagnostic of Croatian economy. Conventional sources of growth analysis, which measure contribution of different factors of production, is given for growth of GDP and per capita GDP in relevant sub-periods. To get deeper understanding of results provided in this way, authors continue with analysis of sectorial side sources of growth. Further insights are provided by demand side sources of growth. Particular attention is, in that respect, devoted to analysis of net-export, capital formation and final consumption. Brief notions on institutional and other fundamental causes of growth are given as well. Policy recommendations for overcoming existing deadlock and acceleration of economic growth are only briefly discussed in concluding section of the paper.
  • The Formation of the Communist Party of Germany and the Collapse of the German Democratic Republi C

    The Formation of the Communist Party of Germany and the Collapse of the German Democratic Republi C

    Enclosure #2 THE NATIONAL COUNCI L FOR SOVIET AND EAST EUROPEA N RESEARC H 1755 Massachusetts Avenue, N .W . Washington, D.C . 20036 THE NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR SOVIET AND EAST EUROPEAN RESEARC H TITLE : Politics Unhinged : The Formation of the Communist Party of Germany and the Collapse of the German Democratic Republi c AUTHOR : Eric D . Weitz Associate Professo r Department of History St . Olaf Colleg e 1520 St . Olaf Avenu e Northfield, Minnesota 5505 7 CONTRACTOR : St . Olaf College PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR : Eric D . Weit z COUNCIL CONTRACT NUMBER : 806-3 1 DATE : April 12, 199 3 The work leading to this report was supported by funds provided by the National Council for Soviet and East Europea n Research. The analysis and interpretations contained in the report are those of the author. i Abbreviations and Glossary AIZ Arbeiter-Illustrierte-Zeitung (KPD illustrated weekly newspaper ) Alter Verband Mineworkers Union Antifas Antifascist Committee s BL Bezirksleitung (district leadership of KPD ) BLW Betriebsarchiv der Leuna-Werke BzG Beiträge zur Geschichte der Arbeiterbewegung Comintern Communist International CPSU Communist Party of the Soviet Unio n DMV Deutscher Metallarbeiter Verband (German Metalworkers Union ) ECCI Executive Committee of the Communist Internationa l GDR German Democratic Republic GW Rosa Luxemburg, Gesammelte Werke HIA, NSDAP Hoover Institution Archives, NSDAP Hauptarchi v HStAD Hauptstaatsarchiv Düsseldorf IGA, ZPA Institut für Geschichte der Arbeiterbewegung, Zentrales Parteiarchi v (KPD/SED Central Party Archive
  • AS/Ega (2018) PV 07 ADD / Minutes

    AS/Ega (2018) PV 07 ADD / Minutes

    Declassified1 AS/Soc (2018) PV 06 add. AS/Ega (2018) PV 07 add. 14 December 2018 Original: English Committee on Social Affairs, Health and Sustainable Development Committee on Equality and Non-Discrimination Minutes of the joint hearing on “Protecting the rights of persons with psychosocial disabilities with regard to involuntary measures in psychiatry”, held in Strasbourg, on 9 October 2018, from 8.30 to 10 am Mr Schennach, Chairperson of the Committee Social Affairs, Health and Sustainable Development opened the meeting, welcoming members of the two committees and the distinguished guests who had accepted to participate in the hearing. He set the background for the hearing: in its Recommendation 2091 (2016), the Assembly had asked the Committee of Ministers to instruct the Committee on Bioethics to withdraw the proposal to draw up an Additional Protocol to the Oviedo Convention concerning the protection of human rights and dignity of persons with mental disorder with regard to involuntary placement and involuntary treatment, which was at the time at the initial stage of drafting. The drafting process had, however, continued. The Assembly was now being consulted on the draft Additional Protocol in the context of an informal procedure. This hearing would provide food for thought for the comments to be prepared by the Committee on Social Affairs, Health and Sustainable Development and the Committee on Equality and Non- Discrimination. Ms Ioan, Chairperson of the Council of Europe Committee on Bioethics (DH-BIO) explained that the draft Additional Protocol was needed due to legal gaps in certain member states regarding measures for involuntary placement or treatment, and the increasing number of human rights violations found by the European Court of Human Rights in this field.
  • Green Parties and Elections to the European Parliament, 1979–2019 Green Par Elections

    Green Parties and Elections to the European Parliament, 1979–2019 Green Par Elections

    Chapter 1 Green Parties and Elections, 1979–2019 Green parties and elections to the European Parliament, 1979–2019 Wolfgang Rüdig Introduction The history of green parties in Europe is closely intertwined with the history of elections to the European Parliament. When the first direct elections to the European Parliament took place in June 1979, the development of green parties in Europe was still in its infancy. Only in Belgium and the UK had green parties been formed that took part in these elections; but ecological lists, which were the pre- decessors of green parties, competed in other countries. Despite not winning representation, the German Greens were particularly influ- enced by the 1979 European elections. Five years later, most partic- ipating countries had seen the formation of national green parties, and the first Green MEPs from Belgium and Germany were elected. Green parties have been represented continuously in the European Parliament since 1984. Subsequent years saw Greens from many other countries joining their Belgian and German colleagues in the Euro- pean Parliament. European elections continued to be important for party formation in new EU member countries. In the 1980s it was the South European countries (Greece, Portugal and Spain), following 4 GREENS FOR A BETTER EUROPE their successful transition to democracies, that became members. Green parties did not have a strong role in their national party systems, and European elections became an important focus for party develop- ment. In the 1990s it was the turn of Austria, Finland and Sweden to join; green parties were already well established in all three nations and provided ongoing support for Greens in the European Parliament.
  • Macro Report Comparative Study of Electoral Systems Module 4: Macro Report September 10, 2012

    Macro Report Comparative Study of Electoral Systems Module 4: Macro Report September 10, 2012

    Comparative Study of Electoral Systems 1 Module 4: Macro Report Comparative Study of Electoral Systems Module 4: Macro Report September 10, 2012 Country: Serbia Date of Election: May 6, 2012 (Parliamentary and first round presidential); May 20, 2012 - second round presidential Prepared by: Bojan Todosijević Date of Preparation: 05. 08. 2013. NOTES TO COLLABORATORS: ° The information provided in this report contributes to an important part of the CSES project. The information may be filled out by yourself, or by an expert or experts of your choice. Your efforts in providing these data are greatly appreciated! Any supplementary documents that you can provide (e.g., electoral legislation, party manifestos, electoral commission reports, media reports) are also appreciated, and may be made available on the CSES website. ° Answers should be as of the date of the election being studied. ° Where brackets [ ] appear, collaborators should answer by placing an “X” within the appropriate bracket or brackets. For example: [X] ° If more space is needed to answer any question, please lengthen the document as necessary. Data Pertinent to the Election at which the Module was Administered 1a. Type of Election [ ] Parliamentary/Legislative [X] Parliamentary/Legislative and Presidential [ ] Presidential [ ] Other; please specify: __________ 1b. If the type of election in Question 1a included Parliamentary/Legislative, was the election for the Upper House, Lower House, or both? [ X] Upper House [ ] Lower House [ ] Both [ ] Other; please specify: __________ Comparative Study of Electoral Systems 2 Module 4: Macro Report 2a. What was the party of the president prior to the most recent election, regardless of whether the election was presidential? Democratic Party (Demokratska stranka, DS) 2b.
  • From Understanding to Cooperation Promoting Interfaith Encounters to Meet Global Challenges

    From Understanding to Cooperation Promoting Interfaith Encounters to Meet Global Challenges

    20TH ANNUAL EPP GROUP INTERCULTURAL DIALOGUE WITH CHURCHES AND RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS FROM UNDERSTANDING TO COOPERATION PROMOTING INTERFAITH ENCOUNTERS TO MEET GLOBAL CHALLENGES Zagreb, 7 - 8 December 2017 20TH ANNUAL EPP GROUP INTERCULTURAL DIALOGUE WITH CHURCHES AND RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS / 3 PROGRAMME 10:00-12:30 hrs / Sessions I and II The role of religion in European integration process: expectations, potentials, limits Wednesday, 6 December 10:00-11:15 hrs Session I 20.30 hrs. / Welcome Reception hosted by the Croatian Delegation / Memories and lessons learned during 20 years of Dialogue Thursday, 7 December Co-Chairs: György Hölvényi MEP and Jan Olbrycht MEP, Co-Chairmen of 09:00 hrs / Opening the Working Group on Intercultural Activities and Religious Dialogue György Hölvényi MEP and Jan Olbrycht MEP, Co-Chairmen of the Working Opening message: Group on Intercultural Activities and Religious Dialogue Dubravka Šuica MEP, Head of Croatian Delegation of the EPP Group Alojz Peterle MEP, former Responsible of the Interreligious Dialogue Welcome messages Interventions - Mairead McGuinness, First Vice-President of the European Parliament, - Gordan Jandroković, Speaker of the Croatian Parliament responsible for dialogue with religions (video message) - Joseph Daul, President of the European People’ s Party - Joseph Daul, President of the European People’ s Party - Vito Bonsignore, former Vice-Chairman of the EPP Group responsible for - Andrej Plenković, Prime Minister of Croatia Dialogue with Islam - Mons. Prof. Tadeusz Pieronek, Chairman of the International Krakow Church Conference Organizing Committee - Stephen Biller, former EPP Group Adviser responsible for Interreligious Dialogue Discussion 20TH ANNUAL EPP GROUP INTERCULTURAL DIALOGUE WITH CHURCHES AND RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS / 5 4 /20TH ANNUAL EPP GROUP INTERCULTURAL DIALOGUE WITH CHURCHES AND RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS 11:15-12:30 hrs.
  • Freedom House, Its Academic Advisers, and the Author(S) of This Report

    Freedom House, Its Academic Advisers, and the Author(S) of This Report

    Croatia by Tena Prelec Capital: Zagreb Population: 4.17 million GNI/capita, PPP: $22,880 Source: World Bank World Development Indicators. Nations in Transit Ratings and Averaged Scores NIT Edition 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 National Democratic 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.75 Governance Electoral Process 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 3 3 3 Civil Society 2.75 2.75 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.75 2.75 2.75 2.75 2.75 Independent Media 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4.25 4.25 Local Democratic 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 Governance Judicial Framework 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 and Independence Corruption 4.5 4.5 4.25 4 4 4 4 4.25 4.25 4.25 Democracy Score 3.71 3.71 3,64 3.61 3.61 3.68 3.68 3.68 3.71 3.75 NOTE: The ratings reflect the consensus of Freedom House, its academic advisers, and the author(s) of this report. The opinions expressed in this report are those of the author(s). The ratings are based on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 representing the highest level of democratic progress and 7 the lowest. The Democracy Score is an average of ratings for the categories tracked in a given year.
  • Internalizing European Politics in Croatia Senada Šelo Šabić

    Internalizing European Politics in Croatia Senada Šelo Šabić

    ISSN: 2560-1601 Vol. 11, No. 1 (HR) October 2018 Croatia Political briefing: Internalizing European politics in Croatia Senada Šelo Šabić 1052 Budapest Petőfi Sándor utca 11. +36 1 5858 690 Kiadó: Kína-KKE Intézet Nonprofit Kft. [email protected] Szerkesztésért felelős személy: Chen Xin Kiadásért felelős személy: Huang Ping china-cee.eu Internalizing European politics in Croatia On 12 September 2018 the European Parliament voted on a resolution on a proposal to the European Council to consider possible measures against Hungary which is believed to be undermining the rule of law and fundamental rights. The resolution is based on a report submitted by Judith Sargentini, MEP (Member of the European Parliament) from the Greens. Croatian MEPs voted differently – some supported the resolution, some voted against it. This brief explains what were reasons for difference in voting. By doing so it also indicates how European politics is, step by step, internalized in Croatia which has marked its fifth year membership in the European Union. A motion against Hungary On 12 September 2018 the European Parliament voted for the first time in its history on a resolution against its member state. The resolution is “calling on the Council to determine, pursuant to Article 7(1) of the Treaty on European Union, the existence of a clear risk of a serious breach by Hungary of the values on which the Union is founded.”1 The resolution is an expression of concern that Hungary is underperforming in the following areas: the functioning of the constitutional and
  • ESS9 Appendix A3 Political Parties Ed

    ESS9 Appendix A3 Political Parties Ed

    APPENDIX A3 POLITICAL PARTIES, ESS9 - 2018 ed. 3.0 Austria 2 Belgium 4 Bulgaria 7 Croatia 8 Cyprus 10 Czechia 12 Denmark 14 Estonia 15 Finland 17 France 19 Germany 20 Hungary 21 Iceland 23 Ireland 25 Italy 26 Latvia 28 Lithuania 31 Montenegro 34 Netherlands 36 Norway 38 Poland 40 Portugal 44 Serbia 47 Slovakia 52 Slovenia 53 Spain 54 Sweden 57 Switzerland 58 United Kingdom 61 Version Notes, ESS9 Appendix A3 POLITICAL PARTIES ESS9 edition 3.0 (published 10.12.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Denmark, Iceland. ESS9 edition 2.0 (published 15.06.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Croatia, Latvia, Lithuania, Montenegro, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden. Austria 1. Political parties Language used in data file: German Year of last election: 2017 Official party names, English 1. Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs (SPÖ) - Social Democratic Party of Austria - 26.9 % names/translation, and size in last 2. Österreichische Volkspartei (ÖVP) - Austrian People's Party - 31.5 % election: 3. Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs (FPÖ) - Freedom Party of Austria - 26.0 % 4. Liste Peter Pilz (PILZ) - PILZ - 4.4 % 5. Die Grünen – Die Grüne Alternative (Grüne) - The Greens – The Green Alternative - 3.8 % 6. Kommunistische Partei Österreichs (KPÖ) - Communist Party of Austria - 0.8 % 7. NEOS – Das Neue Österreich und Liberales Forum (NEOS) - NEOS – The New Austria and Liberal Forum - 5.3 % 8. G!LT - Verein zur Förderung der Offenen Demokratie (GILT) - My Vote Counts! - 1.0 % Description of political parties listed 1. The Social Democratic Party (Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs, or SPÖ) is a social above democratic/center-left political party that was founded in 1888 as the Social Democratic Worker's Party (Sozialdemokratische Arbeiterpartei, or SDAP), when Victor Adler managed to unite the various opposing factions.