Suchergebnisse

2.3 transplantation and standard lawmaking2.4 israel as a case study: a mixed and multilayered system; 2.5 moving from 'if' to 'how'; part i: european experiences; 3 the influence of comparative law on the portuguese parliament and the legislative process; 3.1 introduction; 3.2 the structure of the portuguese parliament in the country's evolving government system; 3.3 the internal subdivisions and the functioning of the portuguese parliament: an outline; 3.4 the ordinary legislative procedure; 3.5 conclusion; 4 'foreign influence' in eu lawmaking: the case of the european parliament*

Since parliamentary democracy in Bangladesh was restored in 1991, the reorganisation of parliament has become the centre of attention. Development partners have been keen on organisational and institutional reforms in parliament to make a meaningful shift to the parliamentary system that was put in place abruptly and without adequate preparations. This transformation called for a revision of rules and the modernisation of the parliamentary secretariat, rejuvenating the committee system. This article highlights the major steps taken in the reorganisation of the standing committees of the parliament in Bangladesh, in an attempt to increase the parliament's institutional/oversight capacity on the executive. It traces the weaknesses of the parliamentary standing committees of the early 1990s, findings and recommendations of the major reform measures and the state of affairs in the aftermath of reforms. However, strengthening parliamentary committees and their oversight capacity on the executive needs systemic and institutional changes, which calls for strong political commitment and strategic leadership on the part of senior parliament management and change in the mindset of the executive.

Frontmatter -- CONTENTS -- List of Illustrations -- List of Tables -- Acknowledgments -- Introduction -- Part I: Deliberative Design and Innovation -- Introduction -- 1 Origins of the First Citizens' Parliament -- 2 Putting Citizens in Charge: Comparing the Australian Citizens' Parliament and the Australia 2020 Summit -- 3 Choose Me: The Challenges of National Random Selection -- 4 Grafting an Online Parliament onto a Face-to-Face Process -- Part II: Exploring Deliberation -- Introduction -- 5 Listening Carefully to the Citizens' Parliament: A Narrative Account -- 6 Deliberative Design and Storytelling in the Australian Citizens' Parliament -- 7 What Counts as Deliberation? Comparing Participant and Observer Ratings -- 8 Hearing All Sides? Soliciting and Managing Different Viewpoints in Deliberation -- 9 Sit Down and Speak Up: Stability and Change in Group Participation -- Part III: The Flow of Beliefs and Ideas -- Introduction -- 10 Changing Orientations Toward Australian Democracy -- 11 Staying Focused: Tracing the Flow of Ideas from the Online Parliament to Canberra -- 12 Evidence of Peer Influence in the Citizens' Parliament -- Part IV: Facilitation and Organizer Effects -- Introduction -- 13 The Unsung Heroes of a Deliberative Process: Reflections on the Role of Facilitators at the Citizens' Parliament -- 14 Are They Doing What They Are Supposed to Do? Assessing the Facilitating Process of the Australian Citizens' Parliament -- 15 Supporting the Citizen Parliamentarians: Mobilizing Perspectives and Informing Discussion -- 16 Investigation of (and Introspection on) Organizer Bias 218 -- Part V: Impacts and Reflections -- Introduction -- 17 Participant Accounts of Political Transformation -- 18 Becoming Australian: Forging a National Identity Through Deliberation -- 19 Mediated Meta-deliberation: Making Sense of the Australian Citizens' Parliament -- 20 How Not to Introduce Deliberative Democracy: The 2010 Citizens' Assembly on Climate Change Proposal -- Conclusion: Theoretical and Practical Implications of the Citizens' Parliament Experience -- List of Contributors -- Index

In the aftermath of the 2019 European elections, the article tries to assess the efficiency and effectiveness of the European Parliament within the framework of the ordinary legislative procedure (co-decision). After defining and formulating the main indicators, the paper analyses the micro- and macro-performance of the European Parliament within the decision-making process from a quantitative-qualitative and a qualitative-quantitative perspective ; highlighting the relativizing factors and the responsiveness of the European decision-making process to the Europeans&rsquo ; needs.

This report analyses national parliament participation in the decision-making of the EU and evaluates how the national parliaments as a collective actor have performed thus far. It explains the collective scrutiny mechanisms introduced by the Lisbon Treaty. After that, it provides an analysis of the methods and mechanisms that exist in EU member states for collective parliamentary scrutiny and in more details looks at the praxis of this oversight in 5 EU member states. The fifth part of the study is devoted to the analysis of how collective scrutiny has functioned since the Lisbon Treaty came into force (1 January 2010) up to the end of 2014 (31 December 2014). It is based on the author's own dataset of EU legislative items which were sent to national parliaments and their chambers for scrutiny during the analysed period. The last section is devoted to a final summary of the results. Part of the conclusion is also a sub-chapter dealing with the dimension of policy advising. Its goal is to provide a recommendation for the future role of national parliaments as a collective actor in European integration.

Despite a sophisticated understanding of the impact of electoral institutions on macrolevel political behavior, little is known about the relationship between these institutions and microlevel legislative behavior. This article reviews existing claims about this relationship and develops a model for predicting how electoral institutions affect the relationship between parliamentarians and their party principals in the context of the European Parliament. The European Parliament is an ideal laboratory for investigating these effects, because in each European Union member state, different institutions are used to elect Members of European Parliament (MEPs). The results of this model, tested on four hundred thousand individual MEP vote decisions, show that candidate-centered electoral systems (such as open-list proportional representation or singletransferable-vote systems) and decentralized candidate-selection rules produce parliamentarians independent from their party principals. By contrast, party-centered electoral systems (such as closed-list proportional representation Systems) and centralized candidate-selection rules produce parliamentarians beholden to the parties that fight elections and choose candidates: in the case of the European Parliament, the national parties. (World Politics / SWP)

Despite a sophisticated understanding of the impact of electoral institutions on macrolevel political behavior, little is known about the relationship between these institutions and microlevel legislative behavior. This article reviews existing claims about this relationship and develops a model for predicting how electoral institutions affect the relationship between parliamentarians and their party principals in the context of the European Parliament. The European Parliament is an ideal laboratory for investigating these effects, because in each European Union member state, different institutions are used to elect Members of European Parliament (MEPs). The results of this model, tested on four hundred thousand individual MEP vote decisions, show that candidate-centered electoral systems (such as open-list proportional representation or single-transferable-vote systems) and decentralized candidate-selection rules produce parliamentarians independent from their party principals. By contrast, party-centered electoral systems (such as closed-list proportional representation systems) and centralized candidate-selection rules produce parliamentarians beholden to the parties that fight elections and choose candidates: in the case of the European Parliament, the national parties.

This article analyses the manner in which the Parliaments of France, the UK and Greece have reacted to the process of European integration. It is argued that their reactions display an incremental logic marked by slow, small and marginal changes based on existing institutional repertoires. In all three cases Parliaments have used familiar mechanisms and procedures which they have modified only marginally. This reaction was path dependent, i.e. it was consistent with long-established patterns reflecting the subordinate position of these Parliaments within national polities. (Journal of Common Market Studies / FUB)

The participation of EU citizens in the European Parliament elections is much lower than in the national elections and differs significantly across the EU member states. The article is aimed at finding out the factors that influence the participation of EU citizens in the elections to the European Parliament. The study outlines the theoretical approaches to understanding the phenomenon of the European Parliament elections and the assumptions of researchers about the factors that may influence the electoral activity of citizens. According to second-order elections theory by Karlheinz Reif and Hermann Schmitt citizens perceive European Parliament elections as less important than national elections that results in lower participation. However, the behavior of voters may also be affected by a number of factors which may be regarded as individual-level motivations (trust in national and European authorities, attitudes towards EU institutions etc.). With use of binary logistic regression method, it was defined which factors influenced the participation of citizens in the European Parliament election 2014 and explained the differences in the electoral activity of citizens of different EU countries. The nature of the identified factors that influence the participation of citizens in the elections to the European Parliament suggests that the second-order elections theory is still valid. The paper shows that feeling of political efficacy makes voting a sensible act for a per­son. Feeling close to certain political party motivates a person to support his or her party in all types of elections. The importance of factors related to the second-order elections paradigm is partly confirmed by the voter turnout in 2019 EP elections. More mobilization efforts by the parties and more visible election campaign made the topic of the EP elections more public and motivated the voter to turn out.