Skip to content
  • Verfassungs
    blog
  • Verfassungs
    debate
  • Verfassungs
    podcast
  • Verfassungs
    editorial
  • Support ♥︎
  • About
    • What we do
    • Who we are
    • Jobs
    • Authors
    • Funding
  • Submissions
  • Projects
    • Thüringen-Projekt
    • OZOR
    • 9/119/11 jährt sich zum 20. Mal. Welche Spuren hat dieses Ereignis in der globalen und nationalen Verfassungs- und Menschenrechtsarchitektur hinterlassen? Dieser Frage wollen wir in einer Folge von Online-Symposien nachgehen. Gefördert von der Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung bringen wir Rechtswissenschaftler_innen aus verschiedenen Regionen und Rechtskulturen darüber ins Gespräch, was aus den Erfahrungen der vergangenen zwei Jahrzehnte in Hinblick auf Völkerrecht und internationale Menschenrechte, Asyl und Migration, Überwachung im öffentlichen und privaten Raum, Presse- und Informationsfreiheit, Menschenwürde sowie Rechtsstaatlichkeit und Justiz zu lernen ist.
    • Books
    • Journal
  • Libraries
    • DE
    • EN

Search

Search

Results for {phrase} ({results_count} of {results_count_total})

Displaying {results_count} results of {results_count_total}

Generic filters
Support us ♥︎
  • About
    • Who we are
    • What we do
    • Jobs
    • Authors
    • Funding
  • Submissions
  • Projects
    • Thüringen-Projekt
    • OZOR
    • 9/11
    • Books
    • Blatt
  • Libraries
    • DE
    • EN
Search

Results for {phrase} ({results_count} of {results_count_total})

Displaying {results_count} results of {results_count_total}

Generic filters
12 Mai 2023
Mariana Velasco Rivera

Can the Mexican Supreme Court Save Constitutional Democracy?

The last week of the legislative term in Mexico was just another showcase of the clear government's disdain for democratic institutions and the rule of law. At the end of April, MORENA, the party in government, used its legislative majorities to hastily pass a series of laws in violation of different procedural rules, including quorum rules. The episode described above isn’t uncommon in Mexico’s legislative politics. The quality of the political-constitutional discourse is in great need of improvement to prevent such episodes from happening. It seems that the Supreme Court is the only institution that could contribute (and has been trying to contribute) to repair it. However, in the current political environment, Supreme Court interventions in political processes are becoming increasingly dangerous to the extent that its survival is at stake. Continue reading >>
0
31 August 2022
Cheryl Saunders

What Makes Responsible Government Responsible?

How important is it for a Parliament to know which Ministers are appointed to administer which departments? This odd question has been at the centre of a furore in Australia in recent weeks. It has focussed attention on the legal and political requirements for ‘responsible government’, to use the characterisation of the relationship between Crown, Ministers and Parliament that is in common use in parliamentary systems in the British tradition, including those in Australia. It raises some intriguing questions for the construction of the executive chapter of the Australian Constitution, which are all the more important in times of global concern about democratic decline. Continue reading >>
0
09 Oktober 2020
Amal Sethi, Prannv Dhawan

Abusing Parliamentary Procedures

Unlike the post-world-war era, democracies are no longer subverted via coups. Would-be autocrats pursue anti-democratic agendas through laws to imbue them with a veneer of legitimacy. This renaissance in authoritarianism has thrown into focus the institution of the legislature, which becomes the primary site for what Javier Corrales terms ‘Autocratic Legalism’. India is no stranger to the trend of Autocratic Legalism, and the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (“BJP”) has often taken the aid of the presiding officers in both Houses of the Parliament, to push forward its anti-democratic agendas. Considering how central a role presiding officers have played in eroding democracy inIndia, a radical shakeup to the way presiding officers are appointed and function is needed to ensure Indian democracy’s long-term sustainability. Continue reading >>
1
09 September 2020
Marco Goldoni

Constitutional Dullness

Should the number of Italy’s Members of Parliament (MPs) be reduced from 945 to 600? Italian citizens will decide on that question in a constitutional referendum that will take place in less than two weeks. While other referendums in Italian history have been vectors of remarkable civic mobilisation, this one fails to capture the constitutional imagination of Italian citizens. What could – and should – be a radical public debate about Italy’s political system and the current order, in fact revolves around pettiness and trivial constitutional engineering. Continue reading >>
1
24 August 2020
Mathias Möschel

The Italian Government Enforces Gender Parity in Regional Elections

On 23 July 2020, the Italian government formally warned Apulia that if the region did not introduce gender parity election rules by 28 July 2020, it would do so in its place. Apulia failed to adopt a regional statute in that time frame. Thus, on 31 July 2020, the Italian government adopted Decree Law 86/2020 which essentially introduced a mechanism of “double gender preference” for the regional Parliament elections to be held on 20-21 September 2020. What is clear is that this summer’s events around the Apulia election are yet another example of the “irresistible rise of gender quotas in Europe”, where Germany increasingly stands out as the proverbial exception. Continue reading >>
0
01 August 2020
Eirik Holmøyvik

Strasbourg slams old democracies on elections

On July 10 this year, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights delivered a seminal judgement in the field of elections in the case of Mugemangango v. Belgium. Beyond its implications for Belgium in particular and the interpretation of Article 3 of Protocol 1 of the ECHR in general, the judgement rocks the long-standing distinction in Strasbourg case-law between old and new democracies. The message from Strasbourg is as clear as it is timely: The rule of law applies equally for all. Continue reading >>
0
30 Juli 2020
Louise K. Davidson-Schmich

Parity Laws in Germany

Recently, the Thüringian State Constitutional Court struck down a new law requiring parity with regard to party lists for state elections in response to a challenge brought by the populist far-right Alternative for Deutschland. Many of the AfD’s and the male-dominated court’s arguments against the law are common worldwide in debates about quotas. In an increasing number of democracies around the globe, however, quotas have not only survived constitutional challenges but have come to be seen as an essential mechanism for achieving political equality. Empirical research has determined many common concerns about quotas are unfounded. Here I provide some responses to the AfD’s and the Court’s worries about the law, drawn from the extensive political science literature on gender quotas. Continue reading >>
2
27 Juli 2020
José Manuel Díaz de Valdés

Electoral Quotas for Women

Electoral quotas for women (‘EQW’) have become a world trend, raising questions about their constitutionality in different legal systems. This short piece attempts to summarize some of the main issues involved in this debate and the courts’ approach to it. The text concludes by offering some general criteria to assess the constitutionality of EQW. Continue reading >>
0
26 Juli 2020
Micaela Alterio

Mexico as an example of Gender Parity in Parliaments?

I would like to participate in the debate on gender parity in Parliaments with the experience of Mexico. Mexico for the first time in its history has 48,2% of women in the Deputies Chamber and 49,2% in the Senate. The parity achieved in the Mexican Congress was the result of successive legislative and constitutional reforms which were supported by the Supreme Court of Justice. Continue reading >>
0
22 Juli 2020
Julie Suk

Gender Quotas and the Injuries to Electoral Freedom

Last week’s decision by the Thuringia state constitutional court to invalidate parity legislation destabilizes a widespread understanding of the German constitutional law of sex equality as seen from outside. Because Article 3.2 of the German Basic Law (GG) since 1994 has explicitly stated that “the state shall promote the actual implementation of equal rights for women and men, and eradicating disadvantages that now exist,” it was long assumed by jurists and scholars throughout the world that gender parity measures to overcome women’s disadvantage or underrepresentation in positions of power were permitted, if not encouraged, by German constitutional law. By invalidating the parity legislation, the Thuringia constitutional court calls this understanding into question. Continue reading >>
0
  • 1
  • 2
  • Next

Verfassungsblog is a journalistic and academic forum of debate on topical events and developments in constitutional law and politics in Germany, the emerging common European constitutional space and beyond.

Newsletter

Email
GE EN I hereby subscribe to receive information about new articles and services of verfassungsblog.de. I know that I may withdraw my consent at any time. More information in the privacy policy.
Imprint Privacy