No abstract

No abstract

The context of European parties has been through a process of significant transformation in recent years, with the fall of traditional mainstream parties and the rise of challenger parties. Despite their significant differences, mainly at the ideological level, we argue that challenger parties share some common characteristics when they first enter parliament. Namely, we expect them to employ a similar strategy as regards their relationship with the other party actors and to attempt to send the same message to their electorate: that they represent the alternative to existing parties, be it in government or in opposition, and will behave accordingly in parliament. We test our expectations by analysing and comparing the cooperation attitudes of challenger parties vis-à-vis the other opposition parties, using legislative co-sponsorship during their first term in parliament as an indicator and Social Network Analysis as a method.

Recent scholarship assesses the impact of the European Union's conditionality on democracy in Central and Eastern Europe in a contradictory way. On one hand, the EU is perceived as a key agent of successful democratic consolidation and on other hand, the return of nationalist and populist politics in new member states has been explored in the context of the negative consequences of the hasty accession that undermined government accountability and constrained public debate over policy alternatives. This article explains this puzzle of the ambiguous effects of the EU's politics of conditionality, which promoted institutions stabilizing the horizontal division of powers, rule of law, human and minority rights protection, but which neglected norms and rules of participatory and/or popular democracy.

Deliberative democracy, as a dominant paradigm in contemporary democratic theory, offers a new, attractive conception of democratic legitimacy, which represents an alternative to a democracy that functions through the mechanism of political competition. A major problem with deliberation is the issue of its institutionalisation, as the theories of deliberative democracy have not produced a more specific institutional framework or form in which it could be used in political practice. Parliaments appear to be particularly suitable places for its potential implementation. Moreover, deliberative democracy could contribute to a change in discourse quality and the way decision-making is conducted in parliaments, which is often considered problematic. Due to its incompatibility with competitive democracy, the opportunities for introducing deliberative democracy into parliaments are very limited. The study also outlines three ways of reconciling deliberative democracy and parliaments.