Everyone agrees the world is changing. The question is in which direction? For such small actors within international arena, like Czech Republic, is of key importance to pay attention to evolution of ideas and proposals which are made by strong and influential actors, like Russia is.
Negative parliamentarism is a type of parliamentary regime, in which tolerance (not active support of parliamentary majority) is the key principle of government formation. It is applied in some European parliamentary monarchies (Great Britain, Denmark, Norway and Sweden), in some succession states, which inherited the parliamentary tradition (New Zealand, Canada, Australia, Iceland) and elsewhere (Austria, Portugal, the Netherlands, the Faroe Islands). In the past the negative parliamentarism was practiced in Finland (until 2000) or in Greece (until 1986). The key difference between the positive parliamentarism and negative one is the issue of government formation, but not in the issue of its termination, because both versions allow the parliament to recall the government through the vote of no confidence. Negative parliamentarism facilitate formation of (minority) governments and its existence correlates with relatively short post-election negotiations. Negative parliamentarism may be also conceived as one of the ways to improve the Czech parliamentary regime, even though this way is – in comparison to ideas of electoral system change – truly only theoretical.
This study deals with so far two European Parliament elections that took place in Poland in 2004 and 2009. It mainly focuses on two topics: 1) whether their course corresponds with so called second-order elections approach (Karlheinz Reif and Hermann Schmitt) and 2) on the influence of the voter turnout phenomenon. It finds out that whilst the first EP elections in Poland in 2004 basically correspond with the second-order elections approach, this year elections do not. That is why this study at its end tries to explain the causes of electoral behavior during last European elections in Poland and states that the research of European elections in post-communist countries calls for a more detailed investigation, even in a comparative perspective.
Text analyzes up to now existence of the coalition cabinet of Robert Fico that took the power after 2006 elections. It begins with the analysis of election results and follows with formation of the coalition cabinet. Text focuses on the question whether the fact that 2006 elections were the first conflict on classical left – right scale influenced somehow formation and activities of the government. It looks at conflicts and crisis that the cabinet had to face, how they were solved and was is the future perspective of the government survival. Existence of the government is set into a wider context of political situation in Slovakia.
Europe is not any homogeneous entity from many perspectives. If one ponders on the European countries’ local settlement structures, this statement is undoubtedly valid. In terms of features of local settlement structure, there are both the consolidated countries – e.g. Bulgaria, Denmark, Lithuania or the Netherlands – and the fragmented countries – e.g. the Czech Republic, France, Hungary or Spain – in Europe. Slovakia belongs to the second mentioned group and the Slovak municipalities (communities) must try to find suitable solutions to many problems arising from the fragmentation. A main goal of this article is to discuss on two selected European experience – the Czech one and the Danish one – centered on consolidation of fragmented local settlement structure from the Slovak perspective.