Suchergebnisse

From comparative research on the constitutional development in Central & Eastern Europe & also from the long-standing debate on whether parliamentarism or presidentialism best facilitates democracy, it is apparent that there has been & continues to be, a certain degree of confusion concerning the concepts of semi-presidentialism & presidentialism. Different scholars mean different things by the terms & therefore classify countries differently. In this article I argue that the conceptual dichotomy between pro-premiar (premier-presidentialism) & pro-president systems (president-parliamentary systems) provide the best solution to several of the problems related to categorizing constitutional types, most importantly perhaps to the presidential power dilemma. I, furthermore, employ these concepts on the post-communist constitutional systems & try to reveal patterns with regard to presidential power, geographical region & democratzsation. 6 Tables, 3 Figures, 51 References. Adapted from the source document.

Ukraine has repeatedly shifted between the two sub-types of semi-presidentialism, i.e. between premier-presidentialism and president-parliamentarism. The aim of this article is to discuss to what extent theoretical arguments against premier-presidential and president-parliamentary systems are relevant for understanding the shifting directions of the Ukrainian regime. As a point of departure, I formulate three main claims from the literature: 1) "President-parliamentarism is less conducive to democratization than premier-presidentialism."; 2) "Semi-presidentialism in both its variants have built-in incitements for intra-executive conflict between the president and the prime minister."; 3) "Semi-presidentialism in general, and president-parliamentarism in particular, encourages presidentialization of political parties." I conclude from the study's empirical overview that the president-parliamentary system– the constitutional arrangement with the most dismal record of democratization – has been instrumental in strengthening presidential dominance and authoritarian tendencies. The premier-presidential period 2006–2010 was by no means smooth and stable, but the presidential dominance weakened and the survival of the government was firmly anchored in the parliament. During this period, there were also indications of a gradual strengthening of institutional capacity among the main political parties and the parliament began to emerge as a significant political arena.

While authoritarian presidents prevail under heavily president-oriented constitutions throughout the post-Soviet region, democracy along parliamentary lines triumphs in Central Europe. This article discusses the constitutional pattern among the post-communist countries on the basis of two general questions: First, how can we explain why strong presidential constitutions dominate throughout the post-Soviet region whereas constrained presidencies and governments anchored in parliament have become the prevailing option in Central Europe? Second, and interlinked with the first question, why have so many post-communist countries (in the post-Soviet region as well as in Central Europe) chosen neither parliamentarism nor presidentialism, but instead semi-presidential arrangements whereby a directly elected president is provided with considerable powers and coexists with a prime minister? The analysis indicates that both historical-institutional and actor-oriented factors are relevant here. Key factors have been regime transition, pre-communist era constitutions and leaders, as well as short-term economic and political considerations. With differing strengths and in partly different ways, these factors seem to have affected the actors' preferences and final constitutional compromises.

A strategically weighed discussion on the reasoning, history and consequences of the Nordic balance. After the Second World War, large security and defense policy decisions were made that affected Scandinavia when the Soviet Union wanted a higher stake in Finland and Norway and Denmark sought to protect themselves against another occupation by joining NATO. In practice this came to mean that foreign policy in Finland was virtually dictated by the president, Sweden remained neutral but strongly defended, and the strategic importance of Denmark diminished. The balance remained functional as long as Norway kept permanent NATO bases and nuclear missiles outside its borders and Finland prepared a strong defense force against possible NATO and Soviet attacks. L. Pitkaniemi

This is a study of why a group of farmers in Swedish Ostrobothnia chose to sympathise with the Lapua Movement in the summer of 1930. The Lapua Movement, a right-wing movement, emerged in Lapua in Southern Ostrobothnia in November 1929. Initially, the only expressed aim of the movement was to achieve total prohibition of communism in the country through efficient legislation. The movement wanted Parliament to establish laws that banned all organised communist activities and propaganda and that limited communists' possibilities to enter candidates in public elections. In addition, the movement wanted expanded authority for the nation's President to, when needed, put a stop to organisations that were considered a threat to national security. The Lapua Movement used extra-parliamentary means of agitation to carry through their demands. The movement's biggest manifesto against communism was to become the so called Peasants' March (Sw. Bondetåget) to Helsinki on July 7, 1930.

Electoral autocracies have become the world's most common form of non-democratic rule. In hegemonic autocracies in particular, where the president, or his party, always wins by more than 70 percent of the vote, the electoral process comes across as mere window-dressing. Still, both the regime and the opposition take elections seriously. Why? What role do elections play? The article deals with this question while focusing on the Azerbaijani 2013 presidential election, and consists of three parts. The first is a theoretical introduction dedicated to electoral autocracies and authoritarian stability. The next summarizes the election, stressing its purpose for the opposition. The third part analyses whether and how the election contributed to strengthening the authoritarian regime. The study concludes that developments during and after the election year are an illustration of what in previous research is sometimes referred to as the politics of insecurity. Even though the opposition "lost", the relative success of their campaign indicated that change might, after all, be possible. The regime, depending on regular multi-party elections for its democratic alibi, did not appreciate the uncertainty and tried to minimize it by using the "three pillars" on which authoritarian states' stability can be said to rest: legitimacy, repression and cooptation.

U predgovoru prvog godišta "Jevrejskog almanaha" od 2. septembra 1925. (12. elula 5685) godine, predsednik Saveza Rabina Kraljevine Srba, Hrvata i Slovenaca dr Isak Alkalaj obrazlaže pokretanje ovog godišnjaka. Konstatuje da je Prvi svetski rat izmenio prilike u celoj Evropi i da je jugoslovenska država podnela ogromne žrtve. Iako se tragovi tog najstrašnijeg rata, još uvek osećaju u celom svetu, čine se ogromni napori da se nadoknadi sve što je izgubljeno. Sve zajednice, udruženja i grupe težile su ka duhovnoj obnovi, a svi ciljevi bili su posvećeni obnovi i napretku. I jevrejska zajednica koja je osetila značaj svoje uloge bila je veoma aktivna. Jevrejstvo Kraljevine organizovano kroz veliki broj lokalnih kulturnih i verskih udruženja, sastavljeno iz veroispovednih opština, ujedinilo se u jedinstvenu zajednicu. Iako su u tom procesu postojale određene poteškoće zbog specifičnosti pojedinačnih zajednica koje su pre ujedinjenja bile izložene različitim uticajima, postignut je značajan uspeh. Primer uspešnog načina obrazovnog rada pokazali su rabini kao duhovne vođe i učitelji, tumači božijih reči, nosioci jevrejskog duha i svesti. U periodu nakon rata rabini su posvetili svoje znanje i svoje vreme opštim stvarima zajednice, širenju religije i ljubavi čoveka prema bližnjem, vraćanju lepim tradicijama i etičkom i duhovnom vaspitanju. Jačanjem tradicije i oživljavanjem prošlosti, oni su vršili misionarski zadatak i vraćali pobožni svet starom poretku punom vrlina. Da bi što bolje i uspešnije postigli svoj zadatak, rabini Kraljevine su se organizovali u Savez, koji je imao dva uspešna i podsticajna kongresa u Zagrebu i Beogradu na kojima su se rešavala mnogobrojna važna pitanja iz duhovnog i verskog života. Jedna od inicijativa Saveza rabina bila je pokretanje ovog Almanaha kao prvog književno-naučnog dela koje će okupiti intelektualce i biti duhovni i kulturni vodič za sve važne pojave u jevrejskom verskom, socijalnom, istorijskom, književnom i političkom životu. Almanah je izlazio Vršcu u periodu od 1925 do 1930., odnosno od 5686 do 5690 godine po jevrejskom kalendaru u izdanju Saveza rabina Kraljevine SHS, na srpskohrvatskom, hebrejskom i nemačkom jeziku. Tekstovi su štampani latiničnim, ćirilićnim i hebrejskim pismom. Izašlo je ukupno pet godišta. Urednici prvog godišta bili su Leopold Fišer (Fischer), nadrabin u Vršcu i Mojsije Margel, rabin u Zagrebu. Ostala četiri godišta uređivao je Leopold Fišer. Štampan je u štampariji "Artistički zavod ud. J. E. Kiršner (Kirschner)" iz Vršca. Osim radova iz naučnih i verskih oblasti svako godište Almanaha sadržavalo je i jevrejski kalendar za tekuću jevrejsku godinu, književne preglede i statistiku jevrejstva u Kraljevini. ; In the preface to the first volume of the "Jewish Almanac" of September 2, 1925 (Elul 12, 5685), the president of the Federation of Rabbis of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes, Dr. Isak Alkalaj, explains the launch of this yearbook. He states that the First World War changed the situation in the whole of Europe and that the Yugoslav state suffered huge sacrifices. Although the traces of that most terrible war are still felt all over the world, huge efforts are being made to make up for everything that was lost. All communities, associations, and groups aspired to spiritual renewal, and all goals were dedicated to renewal and progress. The Jewish community, which felt the importance of its role, was also very active. The Jewry of the Kingdom, organized through a large number of local cultural and religious associations, composed of religious communities, united into a single community. Although there were some difficulties in this process due to the specifics of individual communities that were exposed to different influences before unification, significant success was achieved. The example of a successful way of educational work was shown by rabbis as spiritual leaders and teachers, interpreters of God's words, bearers of the Jewish spirit and consciousness. In the period after the war, the rabbis dedicated their knowledge and their time to the general affairs of the community, the spread of religion and human love, the return of beautiful traditions, and ethical and spiritual education. By strengthening the tradition and reviving the past, they performed a missionary task and returned the religious people to the old order full of virtues. In order to better and more successfully achieve their task, the rabbis of the Kingdom organized themselves into the Federation, which had two successful and stimulating congresses in Zagreb and Belgrade, at which many important issues from the spiritual and religious life were resolved. One of the initiatives of the Rabbinical Federation was the launch of this Almanac as the first literary-scientific work that will gather intellectuals and be a spiritual and cultural guide for all important phenomena in Jewish religious, social, historical, literary, and political life. The Almanac was published in Vršac in the period from 1925 to 1930, i.e. from 5686 to 5690 according to the Jewish calendar, published by the Federation of Rabbis of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes, in Serbo-Croatian, Hebrew and German. The texts are printed in Latin, Cyrillic, and Hebrew. Five volumes have been published. For the first year, the editors were Leopold Fischer, a senior rabbi in Vršac, and Mojsije Margel, a rabbi in Zagreb. The other four years were edited by Leopold Fischer. It was printed in the printing house "Artistički zavod ud. J. E. Kirschner" from Vršac. In addition to works from scientific and religious fields, each volume of the Almanac also contained the Jewish calendar for the current Jewish year, literary reviews and statistics of Judaism in the Kingdom. ; Tekstovi su štampani na srpskohrvatskom, hebrejskom i nemačkom jeziku, latiničnim, ćirilićnim i hebrejskim pismom (the texts were printed in Serbo-Croatian, Hebrew and German, in Latin, Cyrillic and Hebrew.)