Suchergebnisse

AbstractThe elections to the Swiss Federal Council in December 2015 re‐established a system of party‐centred concordance, cherished in consociational theory, consisting of two representatives of the Swiss People's Party, two Radicals, two Social Democrats and one Christian Democrat. At the same time, the government has rarely been as unbalanced in terms of the representation of Switzerland's languages and regions. The article analyses the concept of concordance with regard to both aspects of governmental inclusiveness. It also highlights the crucial role of electoral rules used in governmental elections. It argues that they resemble the Alternative Vote, a majoritarian electoral system that has been criticized in consociational theory but prescribed by the rival, centripetalist approach to power sharing.

Selon le principe de territorialité linguistique (PTL), il peut y avoir une seule langue officielle dans un territoire donné : cuius regio, eius lingua. Une fois établies, les frontières linguistiques ne peuvent que difficilement être modifiées. Selon les défenseurs du PTL, il s'agit du meilleur moyen de protéger les langues menacées ; il offre également un « contexte de choix » aux individus. Ses adversaires, par contre, montrent du doigt les hauts coûts du PTL dans des sociétés multilingues, surtout en ce qui concerne la liberté et l'identité des individus qui parlent des langues non reconnues officiellement. Or la plupart de ces critiques peuvent être rejetées si nous adoptons une conception plus dynamique du PTL. Ainsi, le « territoire » pertinent ne doit pas forcément être l'État-nation ou un État fédéré et la modification des frontières linguistiques peut être explicitement admise et soumise à des procédures transparentes de la démocratie directe. La nouvelle loi sur les langues introduite dans le canton trilingue (allemand/romanche/italien) des Grisons, en Suisse, s'insère dans ce cas de figure et offre des solutions intéressantes afin de protéger le romanche, la langue menacée.

The linguistic territoriality principle (LTP) states that each territory can have only one official language: cuius regio, eius lingua. Once established, the linguistic borders can hardly be changed. Its advocates claim that the LTP is the best way to protect vulnerable languages & that it ensures a "context of choice" to individuals. Critics, however, stress the high costs of the LTP in multilingual settings, especially with regard to identity & freedom of individuals whose language has not been officially recognized. The article argues that most critiques can be tackled by adopting a more dynamic conception of the LTP. Thus the relevant "territory" must not be the nation-state & not even a federal unit & changes of linguistic borders can be explicitly permitted & submitted to transparent direct-democratic procedures. A recent language law introduced in the trilingual (German/Italian/Romansh) canton of the Grisons, Switzerland, nicely fits this model. It provides interesting solutions of protection for Romansh, a language whose survival is menaced. Adapted from the source document.

Does direct democracy tend to endanger or to protect minorities in multicultural countries? The response to this question has been controversial. Some scholars believe that direct democracy may result in "disregard of basic minority rights"; others think that it "serves to protect minorities". This paper explores the experience of Switzerland, a longstanding multilingual democracy and the country in which half of worldwide referendums and popular initiatives have been held. First, it points out some major methodological problems that research trying to quantify the cases of "minorisation" of linguistic groups needs to face. Second, it illustrates the relation between popular votes and the deepening of the linguistic cleavage in Switzerland in the 1990s. Finally, four case studies explore the experience of the multilingual cantons. In the vast majority of cases, the use of referendums and popular initiatives in the cantons has not caused particular problems for minorities, although from time to time one group or another is outvoted. Nevertheless, direct democracy has been a source of intergroup tensions and misunderstandings when the issues at stake were closely related to identity, culture, language, or balance of power between linguistic communities.