DOCSLIB.ORG

Keynote Speech by the President of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Slovenia, Mag

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Keynote Speech by the President of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Slovenia, Mag Keynote speech by the President of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Slovenia, Mag. Miroslav Mozetič Independence and Unity Day, Cankar Hall, 23 December 2015 Oh, motherland, when God created you, He blessed you abundantly, saying: "Merry people in this place will dwell; song will be their language and joyous cries their song!" And it happened just as He said. Seeds of God had sprouted, ample fruit they bore - Heaven grew 'neath Triglav's mighty slopes (Ivan Cankar, Kurent) Your Excellency, Mr Borut Pahor, President of the Republic, Honourable Members of Parliament - the representatives of the people, Honourable representatives of the Executive and Judiciary, representatives of religious communities, “my beloved Slovenes,” and citizens! Let us ask ourselves today: Have we been successful at fulfilling the vision of Cankar? Or was it just a dream? Today is the right day for such a question, as we are celebrating the Independence and Unity Day in commemoration of that magnificent day 25 years ago, when on 23 December 1990 we replied to the plebiscite question: “Shall the Republic of Slovenia become an independent and sovereign state?” by saying: YES. And there were 1,289,369 of us who chose this answer. There were only 57,800 votes against. We can certainly state that on that day, Slovenes and other residents of the then Republic of Slovenia demonstrated unity, as well as a firm determination and courage of many to bring to life a dream of and longing for the establishment of our own state. We did not miss out on the historic opportunity offered to us. We all know that this was a very turbulent period, the situation in Eastern Europe reached a boiling point, the Berlin Wall fell, and it was the time of democratic uprisings in all European states with communist totalitarian regimes. We were full of joy and happiness, there was song and joyous cries. I think it is appropriate that we are merry and joyful also today, not only because we remember that historic event, but primarily because we have our own state. Not all nations are that lucky. For that reason, we have to be proud of our state. This is our only state, although it sometimes behaves more as a stepmother than a mother. It is magnificent for a nation to have its own state, but with this also comes great responsibility. Namely, it is not without importance what the state is like. I am also convinced that in the plebiscite we did not decide for just any kind of state. That it would suffice to have one, no matter what it was like. No. Before we established our own state, we had lived in a state that as we stated in the Basic Constitutional Charter on the Sovereignty and Independence of the Republic of Slovenia did not function as a state governed by law and within it human rights, national rights, and the rights of the republics and autonomous provinces are grossly violated; that we do not wish to live in such a state; and solemnly declared that the Republic (the state) of Slovenia would guarantee the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms to all persons in its territory. 2 Before the plebiscite, we wrote about the kind of state we wanted to establish in a series of documents. In 1987, the Contributions for the Slovenian National Programme were published in the 57th issue of the Nova revija magazine, in which the authors demanded that the communist system be abolished and that a politically pluralistic democratic system with free social market economy be introduced. In April 1988, the “Writers’ Constitution” followed, and in March 1990, we got the “Demos Constitution”. After that, the first democratic multi-party elections were held in April 1990 and they led to the constitutive session of the newly elected Legislative Assembly of the Republic in May 1990. During this period and before the plebiscite, we have clearly shaped the underlying basic values, the fundamental tenets of the new independent state: the state shall be governed by the rule of law and shall be a social state, it shall be based on the separation of powers, democratic political system, respect for human dignity as the foundation of all human rights and freedoms, and it shall ensure respect for individual's political, intellectual, and economic freedom. Hence, the decision in the plebiscite was already a decision regarding the substance, values of the state. We did not only formally decide on establishing a state, but it was already then that we also clearly defined what kind of a state we wished to establish. The Constitution, which will celebrate its twenty-fifth (25th) anniversary next year, only reaffirmed all of that. I am convinced that we can be proud of all of this. Twenty-five years have passed by since the plebiscite, and next year twenty-five years will have passed since the declaration of an independent and sovereign state. Again, everything is in turmoil, everything is in motion, and, as politicians say, the circumstances are difficult and complicated. There is turmoil also in the wider community – in the European Union, to which we acceded inter alia also for reasons of security and in order to ensure the respect for human dignity, political and economic freedoms, and diversity. It seems that, again, everything is changing. New challenges are in front of us, but we seem to be unable to find the answers. As if we were wandering, as if we were lost, not knowing where and how to find our way, as if we had no vision, as if we did not possess that bravery and unity that we had in that ground- breaking period 25 years ago. Therefore, it is appropriate to at least ask ourselves at this anniversary whether we have succeeded in creating such a state as we imagined and also outlined in the constitutional documents 25 years ago. The question of how to move forward necessarily follows. If we wish to fairly assess the path we have taken, we must not ask ourselves what went wrong and what was the outcome of promises and expectations, but rather: What have I, what have we done wrong, have we done everything we should have done. We must free ourselves of the servile mentality and wallowing in our self-pity; let us not seek for scapegoats outside of ourselves, let us not seek for the enemies outside. No one else but us is responsible for our state! We are at fault for the things that went 3 wrong and they are our responsibility. This does not, of course, mean that everyone is responsible in the sense that no one is responsible. On the contrary, the competences and responsibilities are clear. We have the National Assembly, which adopts laws, we have the Government, which must govern, and we have the judiciary, which must judge. And we are the citizens who choose whether to go to the elections or not. The establishment of an independent state should have been primarily a break from the old communist totalitarian system and the establishment of a new value system based on human dignity. It was clear that this was not going to happen overnight by making declarations, but that it was a process, a transition – a passage. Already in 1996, in a special Resolution called Measures to Dismantle the Heritage of Former Communist Totalitarian Systems, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe defined the objectives of transition, namely to create pluralist democracies based on the rule of law and respect for human rights and diversity. Honoured representatives of all branches of power, dear Slovenes! Let us ask ourselves whether we were successful at this task. Twenty-five years is already a time frame that allows us to make at least an interim assessment. The answers will certainly vary, unanimous answers cannot be expected. If I listen to the politicians, media, economists, artists, workers, farmers, retired people, young people etc., I hear different answers, but most of them are negative: No, we did not succeed, we have expected more. Since I am not a politician and also my current office obliges me to be reserved in my assessment, I will avail myself of the already mentioned Resolution that drew attention to and warned of the consequences of a failed transition. It states: “The dangers (the consequences) of a failed transition process are manifold. At best, oligarchy will reign instead of democracy, corruption instead of the rule of law, and organised crime instead of human rights. At worst, the result could be the ‘velvet restoration’ (a revolution) of a totalitarian regime, if not a violent overthrow of the fledgling democracy.” It is difficult to not concur with those who claim that all of the listed consequences have manifested themselves to a greater or lesser degree. However, honoured guests, our answer to this fact must not be the disappointment over our state or the thought that it would have been better if we had not established the state as we do not know how to manage it, what to do with it. We need to ask ourselves what are the causes, what was wrong, what it was that we have overlooked. But I emphasise once again, let us not seek fault outside of ourselves. This is immature and servile, as we are the masters in our state and thus responsible for all of this. Every time when I contemplate on these issues, I ask myself whether we have really accepted as ours all those basic values, the fundamental tenets of our society that we wrote in the Constitution, whether we have adopted and internalised them and thus have been implementing them all this time, or are they nothing but nice-sounding declarations and shiny ornaments.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Slovenia Before the Elections
    PERSPECTIVE Realignment of the party system – Slovenia before the elections ALEŠ MAVER AND UROŠ URBAS November 2011 The coalition government under Social Democrat Prime make people redundant. Nevertheless, the unemploy- Minister Borut Pahor lost the support it needed in Parlia- ment rate increased by 75 per cent to 107,000 over three ment and early elections had to be called for 4 Decem- years. This policy was financed by loans of 8 billion eu- ber, one year before completing its term of office. What ros, which doubled the public deficit. are the reasons for this development? Which parties are now seeking votes in the »political marketplace«? What However, Prime Minister Pahor overestimated his popu- coalitions are possible after 4 December? And what chal- larity in a situation in which everybody hoped that the lenges will the new government face? economic crisis would soon be over. The governing par- ties had completely different priorities: they were seek- ing economic rents; they could not resist the pressure of Why did the government of lobbies and made concessions; and they were too preoc- Prime Minister Borut Pahor fail? cupied with scandals and other affairs emerging from the ranks of the governing coalition. Although the governing coalition was homogeneously left-wing, it could not work together and registered no significant achievements. The next government will thus Electoral history and development be compelled to achieve something. Due to the deterio- of the party system rating economic situation – for 2012 1 per cent GDP growth, 1.3 per cent inflation, 8.4 per cent unemploy- Since the re-introduction of the multi-party system Slo- ment and a 5.3 per cent budget deficit are predicted – venia has held general elections in 1990, 1992, 1996, the goals will be economic.
    [Show full text]
  • The Case of Slovenia
    “A Short History of Quotas in Slovenia” Sonja Lokar Chair, Gender Task Force of the Stability Pact for South Eastern Europe A paper presented at the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA)/CEE Network for Gender Issues Conference The Implementation of Quotas: European Experiences Budapest, Hungary, 22–23 October 2004 The Communist-dominated Federal People’s Republic of Yugoslavia was formed after the Second World War. Slovenia became the most developed of its six federal republics, gaining independence in the early 1990s. This case study looks at the participation of women in Slovenia before and after the break-up of the Former Yugoslavia, and examines the evolution of quota provisions that have been implemented to secure women’s participation in decision-making. Background Women in Slovenia were granted the universal right to vote for the first time in 1945, along with equality with men. At the beginning of the 1970s, some of Yugoslavia’s strongest Communist women leaders were deeply involved in the preparations for the first United Nations (UN) World Conference on Women in Mexico. They were clever enough to persuade old Communist Party leaders, Josip Broz Tito and his right-hand man Edvard Kardelj, that the introduction of the quota for women—with respect to the decision-making bodies of all political organizations and delegate lists—had implications for Yugoslavia’s international reputation.1 Communist women leaders worked hard to make Socialist Yugoslavia a role model (in terms of the emancipation of
    [Show full text]
  • The Far Right in Slovenia
    MASARYK UNIVERSITY FACULTY OF SOCIAL STUDIES DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE The Far Right in Slovenia Master‟s thesis Bc. Lucie Chládková Supervisor: doc. JUDr. PhDr. Miroslav Mareš, Ph.D. UČO: 333105 Field of Study: Security and Strategic Studies Matriculation Year: 2012 Brno 2014 Declaration of authorship of the thesis Hereby I confirm that this master‟s thesis “The Far Right in Slovenia” is an outcome of my own elaboration and work and I used only sources here mentioned. Brno, 10 May 2014 ……………………………………… Lucie Chládková 2 Acknowledgments I would like to express my gratitude to doc. JUDr. PhDr. Miroslav Mareš, Ph.D., who supervised this thesis and contributed with a lot of valuable remarks and advice. I would like to also thank to all respondents from interviews for their help and information they shared with me. 3 Annotation This master‟s thesis deals with the far right in Slovenia after 1991 until today. The main aim of this case study is the description and analysis of far-right political parties, informal and formal organisations and subcultures. Special emphasis is put on the organisational structure of the far-right scene and on the ideological affiliation of individual far-right organisations. Keywords far right, Slovenia, political party, organisation, ideology, nationalism, extremism, Blood and Honour, patriotic, neo-Nazi, populism. 4 Contents 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 7 2. Methodology .........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Slovenia Country Report BTI 2018
    BTI 2018 Country Report Slovenia This report is part of the Bertelsmann Stiftung’s Transformation Index (BTI) 2018. It covers the period from February 1, 2015 to January 31, 2017. The BTI assesses the transformation toward democracy and a market economy as well as the quality of political management in 129 countries. More on the BTI at http://www.bti-project.org. Please cite as follows: Bertelsmann Stiftung, BTI 2018 Country Report — Slovenia. Gütersloh: Bertelsmann Stiftung, 2018. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Contact Bertelsmann Stiftung Carl-Bertelsmann-Strasse 256 33111 Gütersloh Germany Sabine Donner Phone +49 5241 81 81501 [email protected] Hauke Hartmann Phone +49 5241 81 81389 [email protected] Robert Schwarz Phone +49 5241 81 81402 [email protected] Sabine Steinkamp Phone +49 5241 81 81507 [email protected] BTI 2018 | Slovenia 3 Key Indicators Population M 2.1 HDI 0.890 GDP p.c., PPP $ 32885 Pop. growth1 % p.a. 0.1 HDI rank of 188 25 Gini Index 25.7 Life expectancy years 81.1 UN Education Index 0.915 Poverty3 % 0.0 Urban population % 49.6 Gender inequality2 0.053 Aid per capita $ - Sources (as of October 2017): The World Bank, World Development Indicators 2017 | UNDP, Human Development Report 2016. Footnotes: (1) Average annual growth rate. (2) Gender Inequality Index (GII). (3) Percentage of population living on less than $3.20 a day at 2011 international prices. Executive Summary From January 2015 to January 2017, the political situation in Slovenia began to stabilize, although heated debates occurred and several ministers resigned or were replaced.
    [Show full text]
  • A History of Yugoslavia Marie-Janine Calic
    Purdue University Purdue e-Pubs Purdue University Press Book Previews Purdue University Press 2-2019 A History of Yugoslavia Marie-Janine Calic Follow this and additional works at: https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/purduepress_previews Part of the European History Commons Recommended Citation Calic, Marie-Janine, "A History of Yugoslavia" (2019). Purdue University Press Book Previews. 24. https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/purduepress_previews/24 This document has been made available through Purdue e-Pubs, a service of the Purdue University Libraries. Please contact [email protected] for additional information. A History of Yugoslavia Central European Studies Charles W. Ingrao, founding editor Paul Hanebrink, editor Maureen Healy, editor Howard Louthan, editor Dominique Reill, editor Daniel L. Unowsky, editor A History of Yugoslavia Marie-Janine Calic Translated by Dona Geyer Purdue University Press ♦ West Lafayette, Indiana Copyright 2019 by Purdue University. Printed in the United States of America. Cataloging-in-Publication data is on file at the Library of Congress. Paperback ISBN: 978-1-55753-838-3 ePub: ISBN 978-1-61249-564-4 ePDF ISBN: 978-1-61249-563-7 An electronic version of this book is freely available, thanks to the support of libraries working with Knowledge Unlatched. KU is a collaborative initiative designed to make high-quality books Open Access for the public good. The Open Access ISBN for this book is 978-1-55753-849-9. Originally published in German as Geschichte Jugoslawiens im 20. Jahrhundert by Marie-Janine Calic. © Verlag C.H.Beck oHG, München 2014. The translation of this work was funded by Geisteswissenschaften International–Translation Funding for Humanities and Social Sciences from Germany, a joint initiative of the Fritz Thyssen Foundation, the German Federal Foreign Office, the collecting society VG WORT and the Börsenverein des Deutschen Buchhandels (German Publishers & Booksellers Association).
    [Show full text]
  • Unidem Seminar from the Electoral System
    Strasbourg, 19 May 2004 CDL-UD(2004)008 Engl. only EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR DEMOCRACY THROUGH LAW (VENICE COMMISSION) in co-operation with THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF THE REPUBLIC OF BULGARIA UNIDEM SEMINAR “EUROPEAN STANDARDS OF ELECTORAL LAW IN THE CONTEMPORARY CONSTITUTIONALISM” Sofia, 28-29 May 2004 FROM THE ELECTORAL SYSTEM REFERENDUM TO CONSTITUTIONAL CHANGES IN SLOVENIA (1996-2000) Report by Prof. dr. Ciril RIBI ČIČ (Judge, Constitutional Court of Slovenia) CDL-UD(2004)008 - 2 - 1. Characteristics of the Electoral System Referendum A referendum was held at the end of 1996 to decide whether to change the electoral system in Slovenia and replace it with one of the three proposals put forward. It was neither the first nor the last time that the fate of a country's electoral system was being decided at a referendum. Let me mention two examples that I have a special appreciation for. The first was the introduction of a combined double-vote electoral system based on the German system 1, introduced in New Zealand in a 1993 referendum. The second example is a set of two attempts to repeal the proportional electoral system by means of a single transferable vote in Ireland. Both attempts failed, which is surprising since the single transferable vote system is considered a system in which the division of votes is very complex to understand; it is appreciated in theory but unpopular with voters. I believe that its success at the Irish referendums - quite tight the first time and convincing the second time 2 - has to do with the fact that the extended use of a system can reduce its shortcomings.
    [Show full text]
  • Presidents and Their Speeches at National Commemorations
    PRESIDENTS AND THEIR SPEECHES AT NATIONAL COMMEMORATIONS SAšA BABIČ AND JURIJ FIKFAK Presidents, prime ministers, and similar leaders occupy a Med heroji in slavnimi osebnostmi imajo posebno mesto special place among heroes and celebrities. They are special in predsedniki držav, vlad ipd. Posebni so na več načinov, npr. many ways, not least because their privileged position, attained s tem, da jih že njihov privilegirani položaj, na katerega so through a general or parliamentary elections, already places prišli po splošnih volitvah ali volitvah v parlamentu posta- them at the center of public discourse. This allows them—and vlja v središče javnih diskurzov. Na ta način jim omogoča in at the same time requires them—to express their opinions on hkrati od njih zahteva izjavljanje o najrazličnejših temah, a broad range of topics, events, and other issues. A previously dogodkih ipd. Včerajšnji “navadni” posameznik naenkrat “ordinary” individual suddenly becomes a central figure that postane osrednja figura, ki določa, katere teme so priori- determines which topics take priority, which discourses are tetne, kateri diskurzi so politično korektni itd. Osrednji politically correct, and so on. This article mainly focuses on fokus besedila avtorjev je analiza konceptualnih metafor v analyzing the conceptual metaphors found in the speeches of govorih nekaterih tujih in štirih slovenskih predsednikov ob four Slovenian presidents and selected leaders of other countri- različnih, predvsem državotvornih ritualih. es at various events, especially those involving state-building. Ključne besede: predsednik, govor, diskurz, konceptualna Keywords: president, speech, discourse, conceptual metaphor metafora Presidents, prime ministers, and other leaders have a special place among the heroes and celebrities discussed in three publications (Jezernik 2013, Fikfak 2014, and Dan Podjed in this issue) issued as part of the Heroes and Celebrities1 research project.
    [Show full text]
  • Development Processes for Changing the Party System in Slovenia and Montenegro
    Development Processes for Changing the Party System in Slovenia and Montenegro ELENA NACEVSKA AND NEMANJA STANKOV Politics in Central Europe (ISSN: 1801-3422) Vol. 16, No. 3 DOI: 10.2478/pce-2020-0028 Abstract: This paper explores differences in the party system development of two former Yugoslav republics: Slovenia and Montenegro. Despite sharing a communist institutional system, after that disintegrated Slovenia had a much faster pace of democratic consoli‑ dation and economic development than Montenegro. Similarly, the nature of the party competition and party system structure are also quite different. Using a quantitative and descriptive approach applied to the period between 1990 and 2018, we outline patterns of party competition and party system development and explore how they complement the stages of democratisation. We investigate how the comparatively faster democratisation in Slovenia is reflected in the competitive party system with a focus on the ideological divide as the chief source of electoral competition. In contrast, we look at how the prolonged transition in Montenegro is reflected in the closed party system with party competition occurring mainly along ethnic lines. Keywords: political parties, party system, democratic change, typology, Slovenia, Montenegro Introduction Democratisation has captured the minds of many scholars, while much room remains to fully explore the complex processes unravelling in countries in transition. Without analysing the democratisation processes per se, we revisit this general idea by spotlighting the development of party systems across vari‑ ous stages of democratisation in two former Yugoslav republics: Slovenia and Montenegro (for a similar approach, see Pridham 2003; Jungerstam Mulders POLITICS IN CENTRAL EUROPE 16 (2020) 3 623 2006).
    [Show full text]
  • The Devil Is in the Demos: the Identification of European Citizens with Europe
    The Devil is in the Demos: The Identification of European Citizens with Europe Kimberly Twist Center for European Studies New York University Abstract The European public’s identification with Europe, or more specifically, the European Union, is necessary for furthering both legitimacy of EU institutions and integration of the political and social sectors. Their support for and perceived benefits from the EU do strongly correlate with their identification, but this fails to answer the larger question of why. Any European identity requires mass support, which can be fostered with by the EU with the help of the member states. While initiatives like the single currency and SOCRATES are indeed useful, they will be negated if national identification-inducing factors are stronger. It is possible, and even desirable, for the two levels to work together to enhance this European identification, through avenues like the creation of trans-European political parties and mass media. However, the likelihood that a widespread European identity will form is small, because of the vastly diverse histories and structures of the member states and the identities of their citizens. 2 Introduction In 2004, 56 percent of residents in Europe identified themselves, to some extent, as “European.” Of those surveyed, six percent considered themselves to feel European first, and secondly, their own nationality; four percent considered themselves exclusively European.1 While at first glance the latter two numbers may not be staggeringly high, they represent a departure from the traditional identification to the nation-state. In this paper, identifying with “Europe” is used to mean identifying with the European Union, though the varied meanings of the word are discussed below.
    [Show full text]
  • Slovenian Democratic Evolution and Praxis
    SLOVENIAN DEMOCRATIC EVOLUTION AND PRAXIS Miro Haček Marjan Brezovšek Simona Kukovič SLOVENIAN DEMOCRATIC EVOLUTION AND PRAXIS by Miro Haček, Marjan Brezovšek and Simona Kukovič Publishers: Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, Zagreb, Croatia and Faculty of Social Sciences, Ljubljana, Slovenia Zagreb and Ljubljana 2013 Rewiever: Prof. Drago Zajc Copyright © Authors Copying and duplicating in entirety or in part is not permitted without written permission of the authors and the publisher. All rights reserved. Book design: B&V Co. Accessible at: www.fdv.uni-lj.si/zalozba CIP - Kataložni zapis o publikaciji Narodna in univerzitetna knjižnica, Ljubljana 342.5(497.4)(0.034.2) HAČEK, Miro Slovenian democratic evolution and praxis [Elektronski vir] / Miro Haček, Marjan Brezovšek, Simona Kukovič. - El. knjiga. - Ljubljana : Faculty of Social Sciences ; Zagreb : Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, 2013 ISBN 978-961-235-632-3 (ePub, Faculty of Social Sciences) 1. Brezovšek, Marjan 2. Kukovič, Simona 266221312 CONTENTS FOREWORD . 5 ■ CHAPTER ONE PROCESSES OF DEMOCRATIC TRANSITION AND CONSOLIDATION . 9 HISTORICAL LEGACIES AND GAINING OF INDEPENDENCE . 10 PROCESSES OF SOCIAL AND POLITICAL MODERNISATION . 17 THE CONSOLIDATION OF SLOVENIAN DEMOCRACY . 21 ■ CHAPTER TWO THE INSTITUTIONALISATION OF SLOVENIAN DEMOCRACY . 29. THE CONSTITUTION AND DIVISION OF POWER . .30 Structure and significance of the new Constitution of the Republic of Slovenia (1991) . 30 General characteristics of the Slovenian Constitution . 32 Structure and contents of the Slovenian Constitution . 35 Constitutional Changes . 39 PARLIAMENT IN THE SLOVENIAN STATE REGULATION . 43 Characteristics and doubtfulness of the current regulation . 43 The National Assembly of the Republic of Slovenia . 44 The National Council of the Republic of Slovenia . 61 EXECUTIVE POWER . 68 Structure and functions of the Government of the Republic of Slovenia .
    [Show full text]
  • Cleavages and Government in Slovenia and Montenegro
    Cleavages and Government in Slovenia and Montenegro ALENKA KRAŠOVEC AND NEMANJA BATRIĆEVIĆ Politics in Central Europe (ISSN: 1801-3422) Vol. 16, No. 3 DOI: 10.2478/pce-2020-0027 Abstract: In this article we identify the factors that contribute to the formation and especially the durability/stability of governments in both Slovenia and Montenegro after they formally introduced multiparty systems and following their democratic transi‑ tion, with a focus on the effect of cleavages and party system characteristics generally. Although these two polities share several important similarities (small size, common institutional setting during Yugoslav era, aspirations for membership in international organisations etc.), the nature of governments’ durability/stability in the democratic era entails distinct differences. While Montenegro stands out in post ‑socialist Europe as the only case where the ruling party has not been overthrown, Slovenia has been led by many governments composed of different political parties. While it seems that in neither country are the ideological characteristics of the governments able to explain their duration/stability to any important extent, it is obvious that the cleavage structure in the two countries has varied, as has the importance of particular cleavages. Keywords: cleavage, government, duration, political party, democratisation Introduction In a typical modern representative democracy, the government is a branch of power. Discussions about governments often raise issues involving the forma‑ tion of governments as well as their duration/survival. Government formation lies at the heart of representative politics because it provides the essential connections between ordinary individuals’ preferences and the ambitions of politicians, between elections and party competition, and between legislative POLITICS IN CENTRAL EUROPE 16 (2020) 3 593 politics, policymaking and governance of the country.
    [Show full text]
  • European Identity-Building and the Democratic Deficit – a Europe in Search of Its ‘Demos’
    J ÖNKÖPING I NTERNATIONAL B USINESS S CHOOL JÖNKÖPING UNIVERSITY European Identity-building and the Democratic Deficit – a Europe in search of its ‘Demos’ Author: Åsa Bruhagen 831022-6900 Tutor: Prof. Benny Hjern Course: Master Thesis in Political Science Jönköping September 2006 Master Thesis in Political Science Title: European Identity-building and the Democratic Deficit – a Europe in search of its ‘Demos’ Author: Åsa Bruhagen Tutor: Prof. Benny Hjern Date: September 2006 Subject terms: European identity, European myths, identity-building, democratic deficit, European culture, European society, European citizenship Abstract Background and problem The popularity of the European Union among its citizens has during the last decades decreased. It has been argued that the Union lacks a demos, i.e. there is no clear picture of who constitutes ‘the people’. This has resulted in a legitimacy problem which has shown itself hard to overcome for the Union. In overcoming problems of legitimacy, or in creating a demos, identity-building is crucial. It seems as if the very idea of a ‘European’ identity causes problems for the Union however. Thus, the basis of this thesis will be ‘European’ identity- building. Aim The aim of this thesis is to study ‘European’ identity-building in an impartial way. By impartial it is meant to present theories and facts which both see ‘European identity-building as possible and not possible. The main questions of the thesis are what makes the Union united, and why the idea of a ‘European’ identity is a source of anxiety. Method A research method of textual analysis has been used where different texts relating to identity- building and the EU has been compared.
    [Show full text]