Veto Rights and Vital Interests: Formal and Informal Veto Rules for Minority Representation in Deeply Divided Societies

References

• Addis, A. (2009). Deliberative democracy in severely fractured societies. Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, 16(1), 59–83. doi: 10.2979/gls.2009.16.1.59
   Google Scholar
• Assembly of the Republic of North Macedonia. (n.d). Inter-Community Relations Committee. Available at: https://www.sanie.mk/inter-community-relations-committee.nspx.
   Google Scholar
• Bahtić-Kunrath, B. (2011). Of veto players and Entity voting: Institutional gridlock in the Bosnian reform process. Nationalities Papers, 39(6), 899–923. doi: 10.1080/00905992.2011.614224
   Google Scholar
• Balkan Insight. (2015). Macedonia Albanians may block parliament over ID law. Available at: https://balkaninsight.com/2015/03/25/macedonia-albanians-to-block-parliament-over-id-law/.
   Google Scholar
• Belloni, R., & Deane, S. (2005). From Belfast to Bosnia: Piecemeal peacemaking and the role of institutional learning. Civil Wars, 7(3), 219–243. doi: 10.1080/13698280500423874
   Google Scholar
• Bieber, F. (2005). Power-sharing after Yugoslavia: Functionality and dysfunctionality of power-sharing institutions in post-war Bosnia, Macedonia, and Kosovo. In S. Noel (Ed.), From power-sharing to democracy: Post-conflict institutions in ethnically divided societies (pp. 85–103). Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bieber, F. (2006). After Dayton, Dayton? The evolution of an unpopular peace. Ethnopolitics, 5(1), 15–31. doi: 10.1080/17449050600576324
   Google Scholar
• Bieber, F. (2020). Moving the power-sharing debate forward. Ethnopolitics, 19(1), 96–99. doi: 10.1080/17449057.2019.1569861
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bildt, C. (1998). Misija mir [Peace Mission]. Sarajevo: Zid.
   Google Scholar
• Bosnia & Herzegovina. (2018). Ustavni sud [Constitutional Court rulings].
   Google Scholar
• Bosnia & Herzegovina. (n.d.). Poslovnik Doma naroda [Rules of procedure for the House of Peoples].
   Google Scholar
• Bosnia & Herzegovina. (n.d.). Poslovnik o radu Predsedništva BiH [Rules of procedure for the Presidency].
   Google Scholar
• Cekik, A. (2014). Power-sharing and informal autonomy in the Republic of Macedonia. In L. Salat, S. Constantin, A. Osipov, & I. G. Székely (Eds.), Autonomy arrangements around the world: A collection of well and lesser-known cases (pp. 223–245). Cluj-Napoca: Romanian Institute for Research on National Minorities.
   Google Scholar
• Choudhry, S. (2008). Bridging comparative politics and comparative constitutional law: Constitutional design in divided societies. In S. Choudhry (Ed.), Constitutional design for divided societies: Integration or Accommodation (pp. 3–40). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Conley, R. S., & Dahan, C. (2013). Legislative behaviour in the Northern Ireland Assembly, 2007–11: Conflict and consensus in a developing consociational democracy. Political Studies, 61(1_suppl), 179–197. doi: 10.1111/1467-9248.12007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Emerson, N. (2017). For powersharing to work, the veto must go. Irish Times, 5 October.
   Google Scholar
• (2019). EU Delegation to the Republic of North Macedonia (2019). Interview with A. Zdeb, Skopje, 29 May.
   Google Scholar
• Gordon, G. (2013). Petitions of Concern: Is Stormont’s safeguard being abused? BBC News 9 July.
   Google Scholar
• Gray, A. M. & Birrell, D. (2011). Coalition government in Northern Ireland: Social policy and the lowest common denominator thesis. Social Policy and Society 11(1), 15–25. doi: 10.1017/S1474746411000376
   Google Scholar
• Gryzmala-Busse, A. (2010). The best laid plans: The impact of informal rules on formal institutions in transitional regimes. Studies in Comparative International Development, 45(3), 311–333. doi: 10.1007/s12116-010-9071-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayden, R. M. (2005). ‘Democracy’ without a demos? The Bosnian constitutional experiment and the intentional construction of non-functioning states. East European Politics and Societies, 19(2), 226–259. doi: 10.1177/0888325404272679
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• International Crisis Group. (2010). Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina: A parallel crisis, ICG Report No. 209.
   Google Scholar
• Kelleher, S. (2005). Minority veto rights in power sharing systems: Lessons from Macedonia, Northern Ireland and Belgium. Adalah’s Newsletter, 13, 1–8.
   Google Scholar
• Koneska, C. (2014). After ethnic conflict: Policy-making in post-conflict Bosnia and Macedonia. Farham: Ashgate.
   Google Scholar
• Lijphart, A. (1977). Democracy in plural societies: A comparative exploration. New Haven: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lijphart, A. (2008). Thinking about democracy: Power sharing and majority rule in theory and practice. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Lyon, A. (2012). Municipal decentralization in the Republic of Macedonia: Preserving a multi-ethnic state? Federal Governance, 8(3), 28–49.
   Google Scholar
• Maleska, M. (2013). Why did the Social Democratic Alliance of Macedonia (SDSM) lose the national elections in 2006, 2008 and 2011, and the local elections in 2013? New Balkan Politics 15.
   Google Scholar
• Marko, J. (2005). Post-conflict reconstruction through state- and nation-building: The case of Bosnia and Herzegovina. European Diversity and Autonomy Papers EDAP, 4, 1–21.
   Google Scholar
• McCulloch, A. (2018). The use and abuse of veto rights: Northern Ireland in comparative perspective. Government and Opposition, 53(4), 735–756. doi: 10.1017/gov.2017.6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCulloch, A., & Vandeginste, S. (2019). Veto power and power-sharing: Insights from Burundi (2000-2018). Democratization, 26(7), 1176–1193. doi: 10.1080/13510347.2019.1611781
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McEvoy, J. (2013). ‘We forbid!’ The mutual veto and power-sharing democracy. In J. McEvoy & B. O’Leary (Eds.), Power-sharing in deeply divided places (pp. 232–252). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
   Google Scholar
• McEvoy, J. (2017). Power-sharing and the pursuit of good governance: Evidence from Northern Ireland. In A. McCulloch & J. McGarry (Eds.), Power-sharing: Empirical and normative challenges (pp. 211–228). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• McGarry, J., & O’Leary, B. (2007). Iraq’s Constitution of 2005: Liberal consociation as political prescription. International Journal of Constitutional Law, 5(4), 670–698. doi: 10.1093/icon/mom026
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McGarry, J., & O’Leary, B. (2017). Power-sharing executives: Consociational and centripetal formulae and the case of Northern Ireland. In A. McCulloch & J. McGarry (Eds.), Power-sharing: Empirical and normative challenges (pp. 63–86). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Northern Ireland Office. (2020). New decade, new approach. Belfast. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/deal-to-see-restored-government-in-northern-ireland-tomorrow.
   Google Scholar
• Sahadžić, M. (2012). Veto mehanizmi” u parlamentima na državnoj i entitetskoj razini u BiH [veto mechanisms in state and entity parliaments in BiH]. In S. Gavrić & D. Banović (Eds.), Parlamentarizam u BiH (pp. 293–320). Sarajevo: Sarajevski otvoreni centar, Fondacija Friedrich Ebert.
   Google Scholar
• Schwartz, A. (2015). The problem with Petitions of Concern. QPOL. http://qpol.qub.ac.uk/the-problem-with-petitions-of-concern/.
   Google Scholar
• Sisk, T. (2003). Power-sharing after civil wars: Matching problems to solutions. In J. Darby & R. Mac Ginty (Eds.), Contemporary peace making: Conflict, violence and peace processes (pp. 139–150). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Stroschein, S. (2007). Politics is local: Ethnoreligious dynamics under the microscope. In S. Stroschein (Ed.), Governance in ethnically mixed cities (pp. 1–4). New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Taylor, R. (2009). The promise of consociational theory. In R. Taylor (Ed.), Consociational theory: McGarry and O’Leary and the Northern Ireland conflict (pp. 1–12). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Venice Commission. (2005). Opinion on the constitutional situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the power of the High Representative. European Commission for Democracy Through Law.
   Google Scholar
• Walsh, D. (2018). Territorial self-government as a conflict management tool. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.
   Google Scholar
• Yakinthou, C. (2009). Political settlements in divided societies. Basingstoke: Palgrave McMillan.
   Google Scholar
• Zahar, M. J. (2005). The dichotomy of international mediation and leader intransigence: The case of Bosnia and Herzegovina. In I. O’Flynn & D. Russell (Eds.), Power sharing: New challenges for divided societies (pp. 123–137). London: Pluto Press.
   Google Scholar
• Zdeb, A. (2016). The need to have something ‘of their own’: Croat parallel institutions in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Swiss Political Science Review, 22(4), 545–564. doi: 10.1111/spsr.12231
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar