Have democratization processes been a catalyst for the Europeanization of party politics in Slovenia?

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size

Notes

¹ D. Fink-Hafner, ‘Development of a party system’, in D. Fink-Hafner and J. R. Robbins (eds), Making a New Nation: The Formation of Slovenia, Dartmouth, Aldershot, 1997, p. 135.

² Legally speaking, this occurred within the framework of the old socio-political organizations such as the League of Socialist Youth of Slovenia and the Slovenian League of Working People.

³ Fink-Hafner, ‘Development of a Party System’, op. cit., p. 142.

⁴ Fink-Hafner, Development of a Party System, p. 142.

⁵ U. Vehovar, ‘Socialdemokracija, sindikati, korporativizem?’, Družboslovne razprave, 10(17–18), 1994, pp. 50–63.

⁶ See A. Panebianco, Political Parties: Organization and Power, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York, New Rochelle, Melbourne, Sydney, 1988; F. L. Wilson, ‘The sources of party change: the social democratic parties of Britain, France, Germany and Spain’, in K. Lawson (ed.), How Political Parties Work: Perspectives from Within, Praeger, Westport, CT and London, 1994, pp. 263–283; K. Strøm and L. Svåsand, ‘Political parties in Norway: facing the challenges of a new society’, in K. Strøm and L. Svåsand (ed.), Challenges to Political Parties: The Case of Norway, The University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, 1997a, pp. 1–32; K. Strøm and L. Svåsand, ‘Conclusion: the limits of entrepreneurship’, in K. Strøm and L. Svåsand, op. cit., pp. 343–360.

⁷ A. Panebianco, op. cit.

⁸ B. Laffan, ‘The European Union polity: a union of regulative, normative and cognitive pillars’, Journal of European Public Policy, 8(5), 2001, p. 709.

⁹ The fifth ‘constitutional’ reform (the EU Reform Treaty) is currently on the way.

¹⁰ D. Fink-Hafner, ‘Strankarski sistem v Sloveniji: Od prikrite k transparentni bipolarnosti’, in Z. Lutovac (ed.), Političke stranke i birači u državama bivše Jugoslavije, Friderich Ebert Stiftung, Beograd, 2006b, pp. 363–384.

¹¹ A. Krašovec, ‘Eksperimentiranje s selekcijo kandidatov za volitve? Selekcija kandidatov za volitve v Evropski parlament in državni zbor leta 2004’, in A. Krašovec (ed.), Volitve v Evropski parlament: Res drugorazredne volitve?, Fakulteta za družbene vede, Ljubljana, 2006, pp. 131–150.

¹² A. Krašovec and U. Štremfel, ‘Does the institutional context matter for candidate selection? Some evidence from Slovenia’, Politologicky časopis [Czech Journal of Political Science], XIV(3), 2007, pp. 187–204.

¹³ D. Fink-Hafner and A. Krašovec, ‘Konsolidacija slovenske strankarske arene v primerjalni perspektivi’, in D. Fink-Hafner and M. Haček (eds.), Demokratični prehodi I, Fakulteta za družbene vede, Ljubljana, 2000, pp. 155–176.

¹⁴ There were only a few changes made in the proportional electoral system used in Slovenia. The two most important were: a change in the legally defined dynamic threshold of three mandates to the constitutionally defined fixed threshold of 4 per cent, and a change in the electoral formula for the distribution of seats on the level of electoral units (up until the elections of 2000 the Hare quota was used, while at subsequent elections the Droop quota has been introduced).In relation to reform of the electoral system a long and intensive conflict among parties has to be mentioned. In the mid-1990s three referendums were organized (the referendums were organized simultaneously but as three separate questions): on the majority system, on the mixed system and on the proportional system. Since there were some disputes about the results of the referendums (the question of whether any proposal had received enough support), the Constitutional Court had to intervene. But in 2000 a constitutional law was passed by Parliament and several minor changes (not even directly related to questions of referendums) were made.

¹⁵ D. Fink-Hafner, D. Lajh and A. Krašovec, Politika na območju nekdanje Jugoslavije, Fakulteta za družbene vede, Ljubljana, 2005.

¹⁶ EU membership became a formal and strategic goal of Slovenian foreign policy even before formal independence in 1991.

¹⁷ D. Fink-Hafner, ‘Strankarski sistem v Sloveniji’, op. cit., pp. 363–384.

¹⁸ Fink-Hafner, Strankarski sistem v Sloveniji, pp. 363–384.

¹⁹ D. Fink-Hafner, ‘Struktura i karakteristike razvoja političkog pluralizma u Sloveniji 1989–2004’, in D. Fink-Hafner and M. Pejanović (eds), Razvoj političkog pluralizma u Sloveniji i Bosni i Hercegovini, Promocult, Fakulteta za družbene vede, Sarajevo, Ljubljana, 2006a, pp. 13–44.

²⁰ At least three extreme right parties alongside the Slovenian National Party emerged in the 1990s, but they individually received between 0.3 and 0.5 per cent of votes at the elections in 1992 and 1996 while at the elections in 2000 and 2004 none of them competed (it is still necessary to mention that even 20 per cent of respondents in a longitudinal public opinion poll had in the mid-1990s described the Slovenian National Right as an extreme right party and there was also the fact that the party illegally established its own protective forces (Slovenian Sokol) for a short period of time).On the other hand, up until the 2004 elections there was some kind of informal consensus among parties on the economic and value part of the ideological spectrum, which can be described as a mixture of Bobbio's liberal socialism, traditionalism and catholic ethos (Fink-Hafner and Krašovec, 2006, p. 93). Such circumstances effectively diminish the space for the development and survival of extreme left parties (Fink-Hafner and Krašovec, 2006).

²¹ As longitudinal public opinion polls indicated, voters perceived this parliamentary party as an extreme right party in the first half of the 1990s, while afterwards the party was seen as a more extreme left than an extreme right party.

²² For example, the very high inflation (between 1.300 and 100 per cent) and unemployment (between 11.5 and 14 per cent) rates and the drop in GDP per capita. Also the subjective perceptions of citizens, revealed in longitudinal public opinion polls, indicated poor living conditions of an important part of the population.We can add to this unfavourable economic data the relatively high number of refugees in Slovenia due to the war in the territory of the former Yugoslavia; in 1993 there were 45,000 refugees, in 1994 there were almost 30,000 refugees and in 1995 22,000, while afterwards the number of refugees started to drop (UNHCR, 2007).Contrary to the situation in Croatia, Serbia and Montenegro as well as Bosnia and Herzegovina, Slovenia experienced a short 10-day war in 1991 with ‘only’ 19 victims among soldiers, policemen and the civilian population on the Slovenian side. Mainly due to the short duration of the war and low number of victims, veteran organizations—two veteran organizations have been formed—have not been influential in political life of Slovenia).

²³ During the whole period only a small percentage of voters positioned themselves on the ideological spectrum on the extreme, either on the left or right (it is interesting to note that among this small share of voters who positioned themselves on the extreme, ever more are self-positioned on the extreme left than on the extreme right).

²⁴ Kropivnik (2002) found that only the Liberal Democracy of Slovenia had from the mid-1990s till the first years of the new century been up to date with modest changes of the self-position of an electoral body on the ideological spectrum—the party was the only one to explicitly follow the move of the electoral body to an even more centre position on the ideological spectrum.

²⁵ In the 2000–2004 legislative period, the Slovenian Youth Party only signed a special agreement with the Liberal Democracy of Slovenia on cooperation in government.

²⁶ J. Blondel, F. Müller Rommel, D. Malova, et al., Governing New European Democracies, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke and New York, 2007.

²⁷ D. Fink-Hafner, ‘Strankarski sistem v Sloveniji’, op. cit., p. 379.

²⁸ D. Fink-Hafner, Politične stranke, Fakulteta za družbene vede, Ljubljana, 2001.

²⁹ D. Fink-Hafner, Politične stranke, op. cit.

³⁰ A. Panebianco, op. cit.

³¹ D. Fink-Hafner, ‘Struktura i karakteristike razvoja političkog pluralizma u Sloveniji 1989–2004’, op. cit., pp. 13–44.

³² A. Panebianco, op. cit.

³³ A. Krašovec, Moč v političnih strankah: Odnosi med parlamentarnimi in centralnimi deli političnih strank, Fakulteta za družbene vede, Ljubljana, 2000.

³⁴ D. Fink-Hafner, Politične stranke, op. cit., p. 186.

³⁵ A. Krašovec, op. cit.

³⁶ Despite the greater formal concentration of power, some parties have since the mid-1990s experimentally introduced some elements of a higher level of internal democracy especially in processes of candidate selection for presidential and parliamentary elections as well as in the selection of the party leader, but as a rule such activities in parties were soon abolished (Krašovec, op. cit., 2006).

³⁷ D. Fink-Hafner, Politične stranke, op. cit., p. 186.

³⁸ At the moment 55 parties are formally established in Slovenia.

³⁹ D. Fink-Hafner, ‘Struktura i karakteristike razvoja političkog pluralizma u Sloveniji 1989–2004’, op. cit., pp. 13–44.

⁴⁰ An analysis of the annual financial reports of parliamentary parties shows they have been receiving at least 50 per cent (some parties also between 70 and 80 per cent) of their annual budget in the form of direct public subsidies. In 1994 Slovenia introduced formal control over the financial activities of parties but some analysts have pointed out the problem of the implementation of legal stipulations while others have exposed the lack of formal jurisdiction of a special control body (A. Krašovec, op. cit., 2006).

⁴¹ A. Krašovec, ‘Ali so slovenske parlamentarne stranke kartelne stranke?’, in Z. Lutovac (ed.), Političke stranke i birači u državama bivše Jugoslavije, Friderich Ebert Stiftung, Beograd, 2006, pp. 385–421.

⁴² M. Balažic, ‘Evropa zdaj’, Teorija in praksa, 39(4), 2002, pp. 559–578; D. Fink-Hafner and D. Lajh, Managing Europe from Home: The Europeanisation of the Slovenian Core Executive, Faculty of Social Sciences, Ljubljana, 2003.

⁴³ D. Fink-Hafner, ‘Dilemmas in managing the expanding EU: the EU and applicant-states’ point of view', Journal of European Public Policy, 6(5), 1999, pp. 789, 793.

⁴⁴ D. Fink-Hafner, ‘Dilemmas in managing the expanding EU’, op. cit., p. 789.

⁴⁵ I. Brinar and M. Svetličič, ‘Enlargement of the European Union: the case of Slovenia’, Journal of European Public Policy, 6(5), 1999, p. 819.

⁴⁶ Fink-Hafner and Lajh, Managing Europe from Home, op. cit., pp. 76–77.

⁴⁷ This coordination remained intact until the end of 2000.

⁴⁸ D. Fink-Hafner and D. Lajh, ‘The case of Slovenia’, Workshop Organising for EU Enlargement. Managing Europe from Home, Budapest, 29–31 August 2002, p. 15.

⁴⁹ P. Lucardie, ‘Prophets, purifiers and prolocutors: towards a theory on the emergence of new parties’, Party Politics, 6(2), 2000, p. 175.

⁵⁰ G. Pridham, ‘Patterns of Europeanization and transnational party cooperation: party development in Central and Eastern Europe’, in P. G. Lewis (ed.), Party Development and Democratic Change in Post-Communist Europe, Frank Cass, London, 2001, pp. 178–198; Z. Enyedi and P. G. Lewis, ‘The impact of the European Union on party politics in Central and Eastern Europe’, in P. G. Lewis and Z. Mansfeldová (eds), The European Union and Party Politics in Central and Eastern Europe (Palgrave Studies in European Union Politics), Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke and New York, 2006, pp. 231–249.

⁵¹ A. Krašovec, D. Lajh and S. Kustec-Lipicer, ‘The European Union and party politics in Slovenia: an apparent or real impact?’, in P. G. Lewis and Z. Mansfeldová (eds), The European Union and Party Politics in Central and Eastern Europe (Palgrave Studies in European Union Politics), Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke and New York, 2006, pp. 169–189.

⁵² For more on the reasons for simultaneously held referendums, see A. Krašovec and D. Lajh, ‘The Slovenian EU accession referendum: a cat-and-mouse game’, West European Politics, 27(4), 2004, pp. 603–623.

⁵³ A. Krašovec and D. Lajh, op. cit., pp. 603–623.

⁵⁴ This was also one of the most prominent impacts of NATO referendum on EU accession referendum—the latter was almost completely in the shadow of the former.

⁵⁵ A. Krašovec and D. Lajh, op. cit., p. 612.

⁵⁶ Krašovec and Lajh, ‘The Slovenian EU accession referendum’, pp. 603–623.

⁵⁷ R. Ladrech, ‘Europeanization and political parties: towards a framework for analysis’, Party Politics, 8(4), 2002, p. 389.

⁵⁸ D. Lajh and A. Krašovec, ‘Co-operation between Slovenian Parliamentary political parties and European party federations’, in L. Cabada and A. Krašovec (eds), Europeanisation of National Political Parties, Fakulta Humanitnich Studii ZČU, Plzen, 2004, pp. 161–177.

⁵⁹ A. Krašovec, D. Lajh and S. Kustec-Lipicer, op. cit., pp. 169–189.

⁶⁰ R. Ladrech, op. cit., p. 389.

⁶¹ Ladrech, ‘Europeanization and political parties’, pp. 389–403.

⁶² A. Krašovec and D. Lajh, op. cit., pp. 603–623.

⁶³ D. Lajh and A. Krašovec, op. cit., pp. 161–177.

⁶⁴ All other parties, expect the LDS, use the emblems of their European counterparts where appropriate—in various kinds of materials, official letters, etc.

⁶⁵ A. Krašovec, D. Lajh and S. Kustec-Lipicer, op. cit., p. 180.

⁶⁶ Krašovec, Lajh and Kustec-Lipicer, ‘The European Union and party politics in Slovenia’, p. 183.

⁶⁷ Krašovec, Lajh and Kustec-Lipicer, ‘The European Union and party politics in Slovenia’, p. 183.

⁶⁸ The party had for the European Parliament elections in 2004 proposed a common candidate list with the Liberal Democracy of Slovenia and the list received two MEPs.

⁶⁹ A. Krašovec, D. Lajh and S. Kustec-Lipicer, op. cit., pp. 169–189.

⁷⁰ Z. Enyedi and P. G. Lewis, op. cit., p. 247.

⁷¹ P. Mair, ‘The limited impact of Europe on national party systems’, West European Politics, 23(4), 2000, pp. 7–15.

⁷² Standard Eurobarometer 66—Autumn 2006. National Report—Slovenia. European Commission.

⁷³ Flash Eurobarometer 205—General public survey after the introduction of the euro in Slovenia. Summary. Fieldwork: January–February 2007. Report: March 2007. The Gallup Organization, Hungary.