Comparing Organizational Structures of Political Parties in Central and Eastern European Countries

Beata Kosowska-Gąstoł Jagiellonian University Piotr Borowiec Jagiellonian University Katarzyna Sobolewska-Myślik Pedagogical University of Cracow Comparing Organizational Structures of Political Parties in Central and Eastern European Countries Some Determinants of Political Party Development in Emerging Democracies of CEE Democratic political parties have developed in the emerging democracies of Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) since the beginning of the 1990s, when political parties in well-established democracies were undergoing organizational transformation. The latter weakened their ties with society and strengthened their relations with the state using its resources. This influenced the development of parties in CEE countries, as they followed Western patterns to a certain degree. But whereas parties in developed democracies were usually well-rooted in society, represent ed social cleavages, had mass membership, were financed by membership fees, and changed only subsequently; parties in CEE did not manage to create strong relations with society before they took part in elections. There was a lack of clear social cleavages, and parties were created by political elites rather than social groups or movements, thus they often became a part of the state institutions even before they tried to establish roots in society.1 While in Western Europe mass po litical mobilization preceded the building of party structures and participation in Post-communist parties can be regarded as exceptional in this matter. 466 Beata Kosowska-Gąstoł, Piotr Borowiec, Katarzyna Sobolewska-Myślik elections, “party formation in newly established democracies generally followed a different trajectory, as parties engaged in mass electoral competition before developing their party organization” (van Biezen 2003: 30). Consequently, such parties gained representation in parliament, and sometimes even executive power, before creating extra-parliamentary organizations. This clearly weakened their structures to a large degree. Also important here is that parties from CEE countries have undergone some changes similar to their counterparts in Western Europe in terms of mediatization, personalization, and prezidentialization of party politics (Poguntke and Webb 2005). In well-developed democracies, these processes have altered the mechanisms of political communication, and strengthened the positions of party leaders at the expense of other party structures. In Central and Eastern European countries, such changes had occurred before the organizational structures of political parties were fully formed, thus their effects were even stronger, and the power of party leaders in relation to other party bodies has become very significant. The fact that some parties have not experienced alternation of leadership, and are still governed by their “founding fathers” is an additional incentive to strengthen the power of party chairmen. These parties are often perceived as “the property of the founder.” The adoption of Western solutions and experiences, together with a communist heritage and a culture of political elites, has had a formative effect on political party structures in CEE countries. Therefore, they are to some extent detached from society and rooted in the state with all positive and negative ramifications. Moreover, some solutions have been copied from Western parties and implemented not only under different circumstances, but also in a distorted way, thus the party structures in CEE states are overwhelmingly weak, and the deficit of intra-party democracy seems to be more severe than within their Western European counterparts. These and similar issues were the subject of discussion in this book. Our aim, stated in the introductory chapter, was to present the organizational structures of political parties from twenty CEE countries. We will draw some conclusions regarding similarities and differences between countries, indicate a number of features typical of party structures, and present several original solutions created by parties functioning in the region. We were especially interested in whether parties are committed to mass party structure, or whether they prefer to introduce new solutions that move away from this model. As we have said in the introduc tion, the mass party model and changes that have occurred in the development of political parties were used only as a point of departure to identify features and solutions used by parties in CEE. For example, it was important for us to determine whether parties have a well-developed, hierarchical network of party bodies corresponding to the administrative division of the state, or whether their structures are more horizontal. Therefore, we also addressed the question whether parties in CEE countries use traditional solutions based on the principle of repre sentation, or whether they tend to include all members (or even other citizens) in decision-making processes (direct democracy, primaries). Additionally, it became clear throughout the course of our research that we should inquire not only into which form of intra-party democracy is used (representative or direct), but into Comparing Organizational Structures of Political Parties in Central and Eastern European Countries 467 whether there is such a thing as intra-party democracy in CEE and whether it is even desired by parties. These last two questions were of special importance, as this volume com prises a wide range of political parties from twenty CEE states, which are in various stages of post-communist development. Some of them are considered as consolidated democracies while others are either unstable democracies or even authoritarian states. However, there are many differences not only between but also within individual countries, thus “generations” of political parties in CEE can be distinguished with respect to organizational structures. Essentially, there is no such thing as a dominant model of party organization in Central and Eastern Europe. Initially, parties deriving from the communist re gime demonstrated specific characteristics which to some extent can be described by the mass party model, while some newly established parties tried to copy their structures. Subsequently, several successive generations of parties appeared whose structures vary considerably. Parties from CEE countries also differ from one another in terms of both degree and attitude towards intra-party democracy. Remarkably, parties in which intra-party democracy has already reached a high level tend to perceive the ability to compete effectively against other parties as more important than internal democracy. In contrast, parties from underdevel oped democracies in which intra-party democracy is on a low level perceive such democracy as very important, since undemocratic practices within the party are transferred to state institutions when the party enters government. Key Legal Solutions Devoted to the Creation and Functioning of Political Parties What parties from CEE countries have in common is legal recognition. The constitutions of Western liberal democracies historically have typically refrained from mentioning political parties until the period following the Second World War (van Biezen 2012); whereas in Central and Eastern Europe, the constitution alization of parties and development of party legislation occurred simultaneously with the establishment of political parties, and in some cases even outpaced their creation. This was due to the fact that, after the collapse of communism, there was an urgent need to create democratic party systems. Legal rules were accepted to facilitate this process. An additional reason for the constitutionalization of political parties in Central and Eastern Europe is the fact that, when the transformation began and the new constitutions were being discussed, formal recognition of parties had become the standard in established democracies. The first countries to define the democratic role of political parties in their constitutions were Italy (1947) and Germany (1949) - states with undemocratic past. After that, other states followed these patterns and acknowledged the existence of political parties in their constitutions 468 Beata Kosowska-Gąstoł, Piotr Borowiec, Katarzyna Sobolewska-Myślik in one form or another. Thus for CEE states in the early 1990s, this also seemed to be a natural step. It was of special importance, because - as Ingrid van Biezen has aptly stated - “the very establishment of democratic procedures was often identified with the establishment of free competition between parties. Political parties were therefore often attributed with a pivotal role and given a privileged constitutional position as key instruments for the expression of political pluralism and as channels of participation” (van Biezen 2012: 188). Almost all states investigated in this volume (with the exception of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, and Montenegro), including authoritarian states, have some rules regarding political parties in their constitutions (Albania 1998, Belarus 1994, Bulgaria 1991, Croatia 1990, the Czech Republic 1993, Estonia 1992, Hungary 2011, Latvia 1922 with amendments from 1998, Lithuania 1992, Moldova 1997, Poland 1997, Romania 1991, Russia 1993, Serbia 2006, Slovakia 1992, Slovenia 1991, and Ukraine 1996). Many of these provisions draw on the German Basic Law of 1949, stating that parties may be freely established and that they shall participate in the formation of the political will of the people. Internal party

Load more