DOCSLIB.ORG

European Court of Human Rights

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
European Court of Human Rights EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS 191 9.4.2002 Press release issued by the Registrar CHAMBER JUDGMENT IN THE CASE OF YAZAR, KARATAŞ, AKSOY AND THE PEOPLE’S LABOUR PARTY (HEP) v. TURKEY The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing its judgment1 (which is in French only) in the case of Yazar, Karataş, Aksoy and the People’s Labour Party (HEP) v. Turkey (applications nos. 22723/93, 22724/93 and 22725/93). The Court held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights (freedom of assembly and association); that there was no need to determine whether there had been violations of Articles 9 (freedom of thought), 10 (freedom of expression) and 14 (prohibition of discrimination) of the Convention; that Article 6 (right to a fair hearing) was not applicable in the case. Under Article 41 of the Convention (just satisfaction), the Court awarded each of the three applicants 10,000 euros (EUR) for non-pecuniary damage, making EUR 30,000 in total, and EUR 10,000 to the applicants jointly for legal costs and expenses. 1. Principal facts The HEP (Halkin Emeği Partisi – the People’s Labour Party) was founded in 1990. At the material time, Feridun Yazar was its chairman, Ahmet Karataş its vice-chairman and Ibrahim Aksoy its secretary general. All three are Turkish nationals who live in Ankara. On 3 July 1992 Principal State Counsel at the Court of Cassation asked the Turkish Constitutional Court to dissolve the HEP on the ground that it had undermined the integrity of the State on account of statements made by its leaders and officers which were contrary to the Constitution and in breach of the legislation on political parties, but also on account of the fact that it had lent its protection and assistance to some of its members who had committed illegal acts. At the applicants’ request, the chairman of the HEP was allowed to make oral submissions to the Constitutional Court, which decided in a judgment of 14 July 1993 to dissolve the party on the ground that its activities were likely to undermine the territorial integrity of the State 1. Under Article 43 of the European Convention on Human Rights, within three months from the date of a Chamber judgment, any party to the case may, in exceptional cases, request that the case be referred to the 17-member Grand Chamber of the Court. In that event, a panel of five judges considers whether the case raises a serious question affecting the interpretation or application of the Convention or its Protocols, or a serious issue of general importance, in which case the Grand Chamber will deliver a final judgment. If no such question or issue arises, the panel will reject the request, at which point the judgment becomes final. Otherwise Chamber judgments become final on the expiry of the three-month period or earlier if the parties declare that they do not intend to make a request to refer. - 2 - and the unity of the nation. The Constitutional Court criticised the HEP in particular for “seeking to divide the Turkish nation in two, with Turks on one side and Kurds on the other, with the aim of setting up separate States” and for “seeking to destroy national and territorial integrity”. As various criminal trials were still pending, the Constitutional Court dismissed Principal State Counsel’s second argument that the HEP tolerated illegal acts by its members. 2. Procedure and composition of the Court The applications were lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 24 September 1993. Having declared the applications admissible, the Commission adopted a report on 1 March 1999 in which it expressed the unanimous opinion that there had been a violation of Article 11, that no separate issue arose under Articles 9 and 10 and that it was not necessary to examine separately the question whether there had been a violation of Article 14. It further concluded by 22 votes to 4 that there had been no violation of Article 6 § 1. The case was brought before the Court on 3 June 1999. Judgment was given by a Chamber of seven judges, composed as follows: Matti Pellonpää (Finnish), President, Antonio Pastor Ridruejo (Spanish), Viera Strážnická (Slovakian), Marc Fischbach (Luxemburger), Josep Casadevall (Andorran), Rait Maruste (Estonian), Feyyaz Gölcüklü (Turkish), ad hoc judge, and also Michael O’Boyle, Section Registrar. 3. Summary of the judgment1 Complaints The applicants alleged that the dissolution of the HEP had infringed their right to freedom of association, guaranteed by Article 11. They further complained of violations of Articles 9 and 10, and of Article 14 on account of the political opinions the HEP stood for. Lastly, they alleged the violation of Article 6, as the Constitutional Court had not heard their case at a public hearing. Decision of the Court Article 11 In the present case the Court’s task was to assess whether the dissolution of the HEP and the accessory sanctions imposed on the applicants corresponded to a “pressing social need”. The Court accepted that the principles the HEP stood for, such as the right of self- determination and recognition of language rights, were not, as such, contrary to the fundamental principles of democracy. Similarly, it accepted that if it were considered that merely by advocating those principles a political grouping was supporting acts of terrorism, 1. This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court. - 3 - this would diminish the possibility of dealing with related questions within the framework of democratic debate and allow armed movements to monopolise support for the principles concerned. That in turn would be very much at odds with the spirit of Article 11 and the democratic principles on which it was based. The Court further considered that even where proposals informed by such principles were likely to clash with the main strands of government policy or the convictions of a majority of the public, the proper functioning of democracy required political groupings to be able to introduce them into public debate in order to help to find solutions to problems of general interest concerning politicians of all persuasions. The Court took the view that it had not been established in the judgment of 14 July 1993 by which the HEP was dissolved that its policies were aimed at undermining the democratic regime in Turkey. Nor had it been argued before the Court that the HEP had any real chance of installing a type of regime which did not meet with the approval of everyone on the political stage. Moreover, the severe, hostile criticisms made by the HEP’s leaders about certain actions of the armed forces in their anti-terrorist campaign could not in themselves constitute evidence that the HEP was to be equated with the armed groups carrying out acts of violence. The Court reiterated in that connection that the limits of permissible criticism were wider with regard to the Government than in relation to a private citizen. In a democratic system the actions or omissions of the Government had to be subject to the close scrutiny of the legislative and judicial authorities, the press and public opinion. The Court was not persuaded that by criticising the actions of the armed forces the HEP’s MPs and officers were pursuing any other goal than that of discharging their duty to draw attention to their electors’ concerns. As the HEP had not advocated any policy which could have undermined the democratic regime in Turkey and had not urged or sought to justify recourse to force for political ends, its dissolution could not reasonably be considered to correspond to a “pressing social need”. Reiterating that the dissolution of a political party is a “drastic” measure, the Court considered that in a democratic society such interference with the applicants’ freedom of association was not necessary in the instant case. Consequently the dissolution of the HEP had breached Article 11. Articles 9, 10 and 14 Since the complaints under Articles 9, 10 and 14 concerned the same facts as those examined from the standpoint of Article 11, the Court considered that it was not necessary to examine them separately. Article 6 The Court observed that it had already held that similar complaints were incompatible ratione materiae with the provisions of Article 6. It could see no reason to depart from that finding in the present case. Consequently, Article 6 was not applicable in the case. *** The Court’s judgments are accessible on its Internet site (http://www.echr.coe.int). - 4 - Registry of the European Court of Human Rights F – 67075 Strasbourg Cedex Contacts: Roderick Liddell (telephone: (0)3 88 41 24 92) Emma Hellyer (telephone: (0)3 90 21 42 15) Fax: (0)3 88 41 27 91 The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights. On 1 November 1998 a full-time Court was established, replacing the original two-tier system of a part-time Commission and Court..
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • The Decline of the Military's Political Influence in Turkey
    The decline of the military’s political influence in Turkey By Anwaar Mohammed A thesis submitted to The University of Birmingham for the degree of Master of Philosophy Institute of Archaeology and Antiquity College of Arts and Law The University of Birmingham August 2014 University of Birmingham Research Archive e-theses repository This unpublished thesis/dissertation is copyright of the author and/or third parties. The intellectual property rights of the author or third parties in respect of this work are as defined by The Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 or as modified by any successor legislation. Any use made of information contained in this thesis/dissertation must be in accordance with that legislation and must be properly acknowledged. Further distribution or reproduction in any format is prohibited without the permission of the copyright holder. ABSTRACT The political role of Turkey’s military has been declining with the strengthening of the civilian institutions and the introduction of new political factors. Turkey’s political atmosphere has changed towards civilian control of the military. The research focuses on analysing the various political factors and their impact on the political role of the military. The military’s loss of political influence in handling political challenges will be assessed against the effectiveness of the military’s political ideology. The shift in civil-military relations will be detected through the AKP’s successful political economy and popular mandate. The EU as an external factor in dismantling the military’s political prerogatives will be assessed. Greece’s route toward democratization of its civil-military relations compared to Turkey.
    [Show full text]
  • Composition of the Common Assembly (10-13 September 1952)
    Composition of the Common Assembly (10-13 September 1952) Caption: Composition of the Assembly of the European Coal and Steel Community during its first sitting in Strasbourg in September 1952. Source: CVCE. Copyright: (c) CVCE.EU by UNI.LU All rights of reproduction, of public communication, of adaptation, of distribution or of dissemination via Internet, internal network or any other means are strictly reserved in all countries. Consult the legal notice and the terms and conditions of use regarding this site. URL: http://www.cvce.eu/obj/composition_of_the_common_assembly_10_13_september_ 1952-en-5dd0109a-0c6f-47a3-833a-1c482b599a89.html Last updated: 08/07/2016 1/7 Composition of the Common Assembly (10-13 September 1952) Belgium Name National political party Mr BERTRAND Social Christian Party Mr BUSET Belgian Socialist Party Mr DEHOUSSE Belgian Socialist Party Mr de SMET Social Christian Party Mr LEFÈVRE Social Christian Party Mr MOTZ Liberal Party Mr SPAAK Belgian Socialist Party Mr STRUYE Social Christian Party Mr VERMEYLEN Belgian Socialist Party Mr WIGNY Social Christian Party 2/7 Germany Name National political party Mr BERTRAM Federal Union Party Mr BIRKELBACH Social Democratic Party Mr BLANK Free Democratic Party Mr von BRENTANO Christian Democratic Union Party and Christian Social Union Party Mr GERSTENMAIER Christian Democratic Union Party and Christian Social Union Party Mr HENLE Christian Democratic Union Party and Christian Social Union Party Mr HENSSLER Social Democratic Party Mr IMIG Social Democratic Party Mr KOPF Christian
    [Show full text]
  • Party Code Label Party Name 11220 SWE VK Communist Party 11320
    Codes [this document was created by the History Data Service using information supplied by the depositor] Party Code Label Party Name 11220 SWE VK Communist Party 11320 SWE SSA Social Democrats 11420 SWE FP Peoples Party 11620 SWE MS Moderate Unity Party 11810 SWE CP Centre Party 12220 NOR NKP Communist Party 11221 NOR SLP Socialist Left Party 12320 NOR DNA Labour Party 12410 NOR DLF Liberal Peoples Party 12420 NOR Ven Liberals 12520 NOR KF Christian Peoples Party 12620 NOR Hoyre Conservatives 12810 NOR SP Centre Party 12951 NOR FP Progress Party 13210 DEN VS Left Socialist Party 13220 DEN DKP Communist Party 13230 DEN SF Socialist Peoples Party 13320 DEN Soc Social Democratic Party 13330 DEN CD Centre Democrats 13410 DEN RadVen Radical Liberal Party 13420 DEN Ven Liberal Party 13421 DEN IP Independent Party 13422 DEN LC Liberalt Centrum 13520 DEN KristFol Christian Peoples Party 13620 DEN Kons Conservative Peoples Party 13951 DEN Frem Progress Party 13952 DEN Rets Justice Party 13953 DEN DU Danish Unification 21320 BEL PSB-BSP Socialist Party 21321 BEL BSP,SP Flemish Socialist Party 21322 BEL PSB,PS Francophone Socialist Party 21420 BEL PLP-PVV Liberal Party 21421 BEL PVV Flemish Liberal Party' 21422 BEL PRL Francophone Liberal Party 21424 BEL PLDP Brussels Liberal Party' 21520 BEL PSC-CVP Christian Peoples Party 21521 BEL CVP Flemish Christian Peoples Party 21522 BEL PSC Francophone Christian Peoples Party 21523 BEL PSC Wallonie Christian Peoples Party' 21524 BEL PSC Brussels Christian Peoples Party 21911 BEL RW Walloon Rally 21912
    [Show full text]
  • Codebook: Government Composition, 1960-2019
    Codebook: Government Composition, 1960-2019 Codebook: SUPPLEMENT TO THE COMPARATIVE POLITICAL DATA SET – GOVERNMENT COMPOSITION 1960-2019 Klaus Armingeon, Sarah Engler and Lucas Leemann The Supplement to the Comparative Political Data Set provides detailed information on party composition, reshuffles, duration, reason for termination and on the type of government for 36 democratic OECD and/or EU-member countries. The data begins in 1959 for the 23 countries formerly included in the CPDS I, respectively, in 1966 for Malta, in 1976 for Cyprus, in 1990 for Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania and Slovakia, in 1991 for Poland, in 1992 for Estonia and Lithuania, in 1993 for Latvia and Slovenia and in 2000 for Croatia. In order to obtain information on both the change of ideological composition and the following gap between the new an old cabinet, the supplement contains alternative data for the year 1959. The government variables in the main Comparative Political Data Set are based upon the data presented in this supplement. When using data from this data set, please quote both the data set and, where appropriate, the original source. Please quote this data set as: Klaus Armingeon, Sarah Engler and Lucas Leemann. 2021. Supplement to the Comparative Political Data Set – Government Composition 1960-2019. Zurich: Institute of Political Science, University of Zurich. These (former) assistants have made major contributions to the dataset, without which CPDS would not exist. In chronological and descending order: Angela Odermatt, Virginia Wenger, Fiona Wiedemeier, Christian Isler, Laura Knöpfel, Sarah Engler, David Weisstanner, Panajotis Potolidis, Marlène Gerber, Philipp Leimgruber, Michelle Beyeler, and Sarah Menegal.
    [Show full text]
  • (HEP) V. TURKEY Freedom of Assembly – Violation Article 11
    [] YAZAR, KARATAS, AKSOY and THE PEOPLE’S LABOUR PARTY (HEP) v. TURKEY Freedom of assembly – violation Article 11 Even where proposals informed by democratic principles were likely to clash with the main strands of government policy or the convictions of a majority of the public, the proper functioning of democracy required political groupings to be able to introduce them into public debate in order to help to find solutions to problems of general interest concerning politicians of all persuasions. The dissolution of a political party is a “drastic” measure which should correspond to a “pressing social need”. In a judgment delivered on April in the case of Yazar, Karatas, Aksoy and the People’s Labour Party (HEP) v. Turkey, the European Court of Human Rights unani- mously held that: – there had been a violation of Article of the European Convention on Hu- man Rights (freedom of assembly and association); – that there was no need to determine whether there had been violations of Articles (freedom of thought), (freedom of expression) and (prohibi- tion of discrimination) of the Convention; and – that Article (right to a fair hearing) was not applicable in the case. Under Article (just satisfaction) of the Convention, the Court awarded each of the applicants , euros (EUR) for non-pecuniary damage and EUR , jointly for legal costs and expenses. This judgment is not final. Pursuant to Article , Section of the Convention, within three months from the date of the judgment of a Chamber, any party to the case may, in exceptional cases, request that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber.
    [Show full text]
  • THE RULE of LAW in TURKEY and the EUROPEAN CONVENTION on HUMAN RIGHTS a STAFF STUDY by the INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION of JURISTS (
    THE RULE OF LAW IN TURKEY AND THE EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS A STAFF STUDY by THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION OF JURISTS (to be published shortly in the ICJ Review) THE RULE OF LAW IN TURKEY AND THE EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS Preface The Staff of the International Commission of Jurists has undertaken a short study of the Rule of Law and administration of justice in Turkey since the events of March 1971. This has been done with particular reference to Turkey’s obligations as a party to the European Convention on Human Rights. The study is in three parts: Part I - Introduction, in which the events leading up to and following the introduction of martial law are briefly summarised. Part II - The Turkish Constitution, in which the principal provisions relating to human rights and the recent amendments to them are examined. Part III - Turkey and the European Convention, in which the proclamation of martial law, the measures taken under it, and the amendments and additions to the permanent law which have been made since its proclamation, are considered. Finally, certain conclusions are stated. The study does not pretend to be exhaustive. There are many other laws and judicial decisions which merit consideration in relation to the European Convention. The study has been confined to those provisions which appear to raise most sharply possible conflicts with Turkey's obligations under the Convention. Niall MacDermot Geneva, May 1973 Secretary-General -2- Part I - INTRODUCTION On March 12, 1971, a memorandum by the heads of the Armed Forces in Turkey demanding a ’’strong and credible government" to ’’neutralise the current anarchic situation", and threatening an army take-over if this were not quickly done, was delivered to President Sunay and to the presidents of the Senate and National Assembly.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 the Party Has a Life of Its Own: Labour's Ethos and Party
    The party has a life of its own: Labour’s ethos and party modernisation, 1983- 1997 Karl Pike Thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy January 2019 1 Appendix A: Required statement of originality for inclusion in research degree theses I, Karl Pike, confirm that the research included within this thesis is my own work or that where it has been carried out in collaboration with, or supported by others, that this is duly acknowledged below and my contribution indicated. Previously published material is also acknowledged below. I attest that I have exercised reasonable care to ensure that the work is original, and does not to the best of my knowledge break any UK law, infringe any third party’s copyright or other Intellectual Property Right, or contain any confidential material. I accept that the College has the right to use plagiarism detection software to check the electronic version of the thesis. I confirm that this thesis has not been previously submitted for the award of a degree by this or any other university. The copyright of this thesis rests with the author and no quotation from it or information derived from it may be published without the prior written consent of the author. Signature: Karl Pike Date: 14th January 2019 Details of collaboration and publications: K. Pike, ‘The Party has a Life of its Own: Labour’s Doctrine and Ethos’, Renewal, Vol.25, No.2, (Summer 2017), pp.74-87. K. Pike, ‘Deep religion: policy as faith in Kinnock’s Labour Party’, British Politics, (February 2018), https://doi-org.ezproxy.library.qmul.ac.uk/10.1057/s41293-018- 0074-z 2 Abstract This thesis makes a theoretical contribution to interpreting the Labour Party and an empirical contribution to our understanding of Labour’s ‘modernisation’, from 1983- 1997.
    [Show full text]
  • Britain's Labour Party and the EEC Decision
    W&M ScholarWorks Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects 1990 Britain's Labour Party and the EEC Decision Marcia Marie Lewandowski College of William & Mary - Arts & Sciences Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wm.edu/etd Part of the Eastern European Studies Commons, International Relations Commons, and the Public Administration Commons Recommended Citation Lewandowski, Marcia Marie, "Britain's Labour Party and the EEC Decision" (1990). Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects. Paper 1539625615. https://dx.doi.org/doi:10.21220/s2-4w70-3c60 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects at W&M ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects by an authorized administrator of W&M ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. BRITAIN'S LABOUR PARTY AND THE EEC DECISION A Thesis Presented to The Faculty of the Department of Government The College of William and Mary in Virginia In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts by Marcia Lewandowski 1990 APPROVAL SHEET This thesis is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Marcia Marie Lewandowski Approved, May 1990 Alan J. Ward Donald J. B Clayton M. Clemens TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................. .............. iv ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Parliamentary Threshold Brief Format
    National Security Program Foreign Policy Project ISSUE BRIEF: Turkish Baraj: The Parliamentary Threshold and the Constitutional Court DECEMBER 2014 Key Takeaways: Turkey’s Constitutional Court has announced that it is considering whether to hear a complaint about the country’s electoral threshold (baraj in Turkish). • In Turkey’s parliamentary system, a political party must achieve at least 10 percent of the national vote to win seats in the parliament. This is the highest barrier to parliamentary representation in the world. There is no clear precedent for the Court’s power in such a case, leading to confusion as to what would happen should it rule against the threshold. • Some believe that if the Court overturns the threshold, it will be automatically reset to zero. Others argue that the Court can only send the electoral law back to parliament for reconsideration, but it cannot change the threshold. • The Turkish Constitution mandates that changes to the electoral law be made at least one year before an election. This might mean that even if there were a new threshold, it would not go into effect in time for parliamentary elections slated for June 2015. Nor is it clear how the government would react to a Court decision against the threshold. • President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has ignored court orders in the past and called the head of the Constitutional Court a “donkey,” suggesting he might keep the electoral threshold unaltered, regardless of the judiciary’s opinion. • Such a move might lead opposition parties to boycott the election and/or declare its results illegitimate. It would also particularly anger the Kurds, who have long sought a lower threshold, and could spark renewed tensions.
    [Show full text]
  • New Forms of Political Party Membership Political Party Innovation Primer 5 New Forms of Political Party Membership
    New Forms of Political Party Membership Political Party Innovation Primer 5 New Forms of Political Party Membership Political Party Innovation Primer 5 © 2020 International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance International IDEA publications are independent of specific national or political interests. Views expressed in this publication do not necessarily represent the views of International IDEA, its Board or its Council members. The electronic version of this publication is available under a Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0) licence. You are free to copy, distribute and transmit the publication as well as to remix and adapt it, provided it is only for non-commercial purposes, that you appropriately attribute the publication, and that you distribute it under an identical licence. For more information visit the Creative Commons website: <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/>. International IDEA Strömsborg SE–103 34 Stockholm Sweden Telephone: +46 8 698 37 00 Email: [email protected] Website: <https://www.idea.int> DOI: <https://doi.org/10.31752/idea.2020.25> ISBN: 978-91-7671-315-0 (PDF) Created with Booktype: <https://www.booktype.pro> International IDEA Contents 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................ 5 2. What is the issue? .................................................................................................. 7 3. Perspectives on new forms of party membership .............................................
    [Show full text]
  • Approaches to the Study of Parties and Party Organization in Contemporary Democracies
    Beyond the Catch-All Party 137 as Ruud Koole (1992, 1994) has pointed out, the level of activity is reminiscent of a cadre party. 6 The existence of these two different kinds of parties, as well as a plethora of others, points to a problem in the parties literature: parties exist in a variety of different forms, but we have few effective ways of classifying Beyond the Catch-All Party: them. Some of the schema which we use to classify political parties are nearly a half-century old. Age is not necessarily a disadvantage (it should facilitate Approaches to the Study of Parties and Party comparison), but the claim that substantial changes have occurred in the Organization in Contemporary Democracies ways in which parties are organized or approach voters has been a persistent theme in the literature. Moreover, new parties have been established in some previously frozen party systems. Some, such as Silvio Berlusconi's Forza Steven B. Wolinetz Italia, built on the basis of a ownership of TV networks, their advertising arm, and a successful soccer team, are very different from the parties which they seek to replace. Categories devised to characterize parties in one time or place may not be suitable to differentiate them in another. Imagine two different kinds of political party. One is a skeletal organization, Of course, these schemata are not our only tools. Political scientists have intermittently active. Constituency associations exist throughout the country, devised new types to cope with change. Kirchheimer's (1966) catch-all party but most of the time the party outside of Parliament is barely visible.
    [Show full text]