Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T18:15:23.345Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Mapping ‘Militant Democracy’: Variation in Party Ban Practices in European Democracies (1945-2015)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 May 2017

Angela K. Bourne  and
Fernando Casal Bértoa
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Introduction – Explaining party bans, political and legal contexts – Banned parties and banning states in Europe, the political context – Nature of banned parties – Nature of banning states – Tolerant and intolerant democracies, the legal context – Evolving rationales for party bans and procedures for proscription – Contemporary rationales for banning parties – Anti-democratic ideology – Non-democratic internal organisation – Party names – Party orientation to violence – Protecting the present order – Evolving rationales for party bans – Weimar and legitimacy paradigms – Conclusions, directions for future research

Type
Articles
Information
European Constitutional Law Review , Volume 13 , Issue 2 , June 2017 , pp. 221 - 247
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Authors note: Both authors have contributed equally. This is one of several joint works and the ordering of names simply reflects a principle of rotation. Acknowledgements: We are grateful to Professor Omer Faruck Genckaya, Professor Susan Scarrow, Professor Nicole Bolleyer, Dr. Tom Mustily, Dr. Ilke Toygur, Dr. Stefanie Beyens and Dr. Juan Rodriguez Teruel and the three anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments and suggestions on a previous version of this paper.

References

1 E.g. Rensmann, T., ‘Procedural Fairness in a Militant Democracy: The “Uprising of the Decent” Fails before the Federal Constitutional Court’, 4 German Law Journal (2003) p. 1117 Google Scholar; Sajó, A. (ed.), Militant Democracy (Eleven International Publishing 2004)Google Scholar; Minkenberg, M., ‘Repression and Reaction: Militant Democracy and the Radical Right in Germany and France’, 40 Patterns of Prejudice (2006) p. 25 Google Scholar; Klamt, M., ‘Militant Democracy and the Democratic Dilemma: Different Ways of Protecting Democratic Institutions’, in F. Bruinsma and D. Nelken (eds.) Explorations in Legal Cultures (Reed Business 2007)Google Scholar; Thiel, M., The Militant Democracy Principle in Modern Democracies (Ashgate 2009)Google Scholar; Mareš, M., ‘Czech Militant Democracy in Action: Dissolution of the Workers’ Party and the Wider Context of This Act’, 26 East European Politics & Societies (2010) p. 33 Google Scholar; Bourne, A., ‘The Proscription of Political Parties and “Militant Democracy”’, 7 The Journal of Comparative Law (2012) p. 196 Google Scholar; Capoccia, G., ‘Militant Democracy: The Institutional Bases of Democratic Self-Preservation’, 9 Annual Review of Law and Social Sciences (2013) p. 207 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 Loewenstein, K., ‘Militant Democracy and Fundamental Rights I’, 31 The American Political Science Review (1937) p. 417 Google Scholar.

3 E.g. Klamt, , supra Google Scholar n. 1; Thiel, , supra Google Scholar n. 1.

4 Mudde, C., ‘Defending Democracy and the Extreme Right’, in R. Eatwell and C. Mudde (eds.) Western Democracies and the Extreme Right Challenge (Routledge 2004) p. 197 Google Scholar; Thiel, , supra n. 1, p. 384 Google Scholar.

5 Bligh, G., ‘Defending Democracy: A New Understanding of the Party-Banning Phenomenon’, 46 Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law (2013) p. 1335-1336 Google Scholar.

6 Bourne, , supra n. 1, p. 197 Google Scholar.

7 Rummens, S. and Abts, K., ‘Defending Democracy: The Concentric Containment of Political Extremism’, 58 Political Studies (2010) p. 649 Google Scholar; Capoccia, G., Defending Democracy: Reactions to Extremism in Interwar Europe (John Hopkins University Press 2005)Google Scholar; Pedahzur, A., ‘The defending democracy and the extreme right: A Comparative Analysis’, in Eatwell and Mudde (eds.), supra Google Scholar n. 4.

8 Sajó, A., ‘From Militant Democracy to the Preventive State’, 27 Cardozo Law Review (2012) p. 2255 Google Scholar.

9 Bligh, , supra Google Scholar n. 5.

10 For a critique see Capoccia, , supra Google Scholar n. 1.

11 We were not able to obtain sufficient data to include the micro-states Iceland, Luxembourg or Malta.

12 Capoccia, , supra n. 1, p. 209 Google Scholar; Capoccia, , supra Google Scholar n. 7; Downs, W., Political Extremism in Democracies: Combating Intolerance (Palgrave MacMillan 2012)Google Scholar.

13 Brems, E., ‘Freedom of Association and the Question of Party Closures’, in W. Sadurski (ed.) Political Parties Under Stress in the 21st Century (Oxford University Press 2006)Google Scholar; Rosenblum, N.L., ‘Multiculturalism and the Anti-discrimination Principle’, 1 Law and Ethics of Human Rights (2007) p. 1; Issacharoff, S., ‘Fragile Democracies’, 120 Harvard Law Review (2007) p. 1407 Google Scholar; Bligh, , supra Google Scholar n. 5.

14 Venice Commission, Compilation of Venice Commission Opinions and Reports Concerning Political Parties, Strasbourg, CDL (2013)Google Scholar 045, 2013.

15 Sartori, G., Parties and Party Systems (Cambridge University Press 1976) p. 117-118 Google Scholar; Capoccia, G., ‘Anti-system Parties: A Conceptual Reassessment’, 14 Journal of Theoretical Politics (2001) p. 9 Google Scholar.

16 E.g. Kirchheimer, O., Political Justice: The Use of Legal Procedure for Political Ends (Princeton University Press 1961) p. 159-160 Google Scholar; Gordon, A., ‘Limits on Extremist Political Parties: A Comparison of Israeli Jurisprudence with that of the United States and West Germany’, 10 Hastings International and Comparative Law Review (1987) p. 397 Google Scholar; Downs, , supra n. 12, p. 5 Google Scholar.

17 Bourne, A., ‘Democratization and the illegalization of political parties in Europe’, 19 Democratization (2012) p. 1065 Google Scholar; Karvonen, L., ‘Legislation on Political Parties: A Global Comparison’, 13 Party Politics (2007) p. 437 Google Scholar.

18 Bourne, , supra Google Scholar n. 17.

19 Bourne, , supra Google Scholar n. 17.

20 Linz, J. and Stepan, A., ‘Towards Consolidated Democracies’, 7 Journal of Democracy (1996) p. 15-16 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

21 Kirchheimer, , supra n. 16, p. 137-138 Google Scholar; Baches, U., ‘Limits of Political Freedom in Democratic Constitutional States: a Comparative Study on Germany, France and the USA’, 3 Totalitarismus and Demokratie (2006) p. 265-282 Google Scholar; Klamt, , supra Google Scholar n. 1; Karvonen, , supra Google Scholar n. 17; Downs, , supra Google Scholar n. 12; Bleich, E. and Lambert, F., ‘Why Are Racist Associations Free in Some States and Banned in Others? Evidence from 10 Liberal Democracies’, 36 West European Politics (2013) p. 122 Google Scholar.

22 Fox, G. and Nolte, G., ‘Intolerant Democracies’, in G. Fox and B. Roth (eds.), Democratic Governance and International Law (Cambridge University Press 2000) p. 389 Google Scholar; Thiel, , supra Google Scholar n. 1; Downs, , supra Google Scholar n. 12.

23 Fox, and Nolte, , supra n. 22, p. 406 Google Scholar.

24 Ibid., p. 406-408.

25 Ibid., p. 389.

26 Bourne, , supra Google Scholar n. 1; see also Thiel, , supra n. 1, p. 389 Google Scholar.

27 Capoccia, G. Google Scholar, ‘Repression, Incorporation, Lustration, Education: How Democracies React to Their Enemies: Towards a Theoretical Framework for Comparative Analysis of Defence of Democracy’, Paper presented to ECPR Joint Sessions of Workshop, Grenoble, 6-11 April 2001, p. 13; see also Mudde, , supra Google Scholar n. 4; Issacharof, , supra Google Scholar n. 13.

28 <www.partylaw.leidenuniv.nl/party-law>.

29 Ware, A., Political Parties and the Party System (Oxford University Press 1996)Google Scholar.

30 Corcuera, J. et al. (eds.), La Ilegalización de Partidos Políticos en las Democracias Occidentales [The Illegalisation of Political Parties in Western Democracies] (Dykinson 2008)Google Scholar.

31 Bale, T., ‘Are Bans on Political Parties Bound to Turn Out Badly?’, 5 Comparative European Politics (2007) p. 141 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Bligh, , supra Google Scholar n. 5; Rosenblum, , supra Google Scholar n. 13.

32 Bale, , supra n. 31, p. 144 Google Scholar; see also Downs, , supra n. 12, p. 95 Google Scholar.

33 Bale, , supra n. 31, p. 152 Google Scholar.

34 The 17 states in our survey that have not banned parties are Albania, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Cyprus, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Hungary, Ireland, Kosovo, Macedonia, Montenegro, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, Serbia, Sweden and Switzerland.

35 Collier, D. and Levitsky, S., ‘Democracy with Adjectives. Conceptual Innovation in Comparative Research’, 49 World Politics (1997) p. 430-451 Google Scholar.

36 Baches, U., Political Extremes: A Conceptual History from Antiquity to the Present (Routledge 2010) p. 189 Google Scholar.

37 Ibid., p. 170-172.

38 Casal Bértoa, F. and Bourne, A. Google Scholar, ‘Prescribing Democracy? Party Proscription and Party System Stability’, MPSA Annual Conference in Chicago, 16-19 April 2015.

39 Niesen, P., ‘Banning the Former Ruling Party’, 19 Constellations (2012) p. 545 Google Scholar.

40 For further details see Bourne, , supra n. 1, p. 1070 Google Scholar.

41 Bourne, , supra Google Scholar n. 1.

42 Bourne, , supra Google Scholar n. 1; Fox, and Nolte, , supra Google Scholar n. 22.

43 E.g. Buis, C.L., ‘France’ in M. Thiel (ed.), The ‘Militant Democracy’ Principle in Modern Democracies (Ashgate 2009) p. 82-84 and p. 89Google Scholar; Vidal, C., ‘Spain’ in ibid. p. 260 Google Scholar.

44 Mudde, , supra n. 4, p. 196 Google Scholar.

45 Issacharof, , supra n. 13, p. 1409 Google Scholar.

46 For more detailed discussion of some recent cases see Bourne, , supra Google Scholar n. 1.

47 E.g. Brems, , supra Google Scholar n. 13; Rosenblum, , supra Google Scholar n. 13; Issacharof, , supra Google Scholar n. 13; Niesen, P, ‘Anti-extremism, Negative Republicanism, Civil Society: Three Paradigms for Banning Political Parties’, (2002) 7 German Law Journal 249 Google Scholar and Niesen, , supra n. 39Google Scholar; Bligh, , supra n. 5Google Scholar.

48 Brems, , supra Google Scholar n. 13.

49 Stelzer, M., The Constitution of the Republic of Austria (Hart Publishing 2011) p. 50 Google Scholar.

50 During the case, it emerged that a large percentage of the National Democratic Party’s inner circle were in fact undercover agents or informants for the German security services and that the agents had influenced party activities. However, when the Constitutional Court called for names of agents and the security services refused to do so, the case against the party was closed.

51 Casal Bértoa, F. et al., ‘Party Laws in Comparative Perspective: Evidence and Implications’, in I. van Biezen and H.M. ten Napel (eds.) Regulating Political Parties: European Democracies in Comparative Perspective (Leiden University Press 2014) p. 357 Google Scholar.

52 In this context, and as the majority of the doctrine has maintained, the Constitution constitutes ‘a common program for all political parties’, Gençkaya, Ö.F., ‘Impact of Party Regulation on Small Parties and Independent Candidates in Turkey’, 41 The Legal Regulation of Political Parties Working Papers Series (2014) p. 6 Google Scholar.

53 Brems, , supra n. 13, p. 160 Google Scholar.

54 Ibid., p. 160 and 152.

55 Van Holsteyn, J. Google Scholar, ‘Beating a Dead Horse? The Dutch State and the Defence of Democracy against Right-wing Extremism’, ECPR Joint sessions, Edinburgh, 29 March-2 April 2003, p. 13-16.

56 Mareš, , supra n. 1, p. 39-44 Google Scholar.

57 Brems, , supra n. 13, p. 163 Google Scholar.

58 Ibid.

59 Brems, , supra n. 13, p. 166 Google Scholar.

60 Coogan, T.P., The IRA (Palgrave 2000) p. 283 Google Scholar.

61 Brems, , supra n. 13, p. 169 Google Scholar.

62 Mareš, , supra n. 1, p. 39-44 Google Scholar.

63 Brems, , supra n. 13, p. 172 Google Scholar.

64 E.g. Bligh, , supra Google Scholar n. 5; Niesen, , supra Google Scholar n. 47; Rosenblum, , supra n. 13, p. 23-24 Google Scholar.

65 Bligh, , supra n. 5, p. 1326 Google Scholar.

66 Ibid., p. 1330.

67 Ibid., p. 1326; see also Rosenblum, supra n. 13, p. 23-24 Google Scholar.

68 Bligh, , supra n. 5, p. 1326 and 1336Google Scholar.

69 Ibid., p. 1345.

70 Ibid., p. 1354.

71 Ibid., p. 1365.

72 Kemmerzell, J., ‘Why There is no Party Ban in the South African Constitution’, 17 Democratization (2010) p. 687 Google Scholar.

73 Niesen, , supra n. 39, p. 552 Google Scholar.

74 Bourne, , supra Google Scholar n. 17; Hartmann, C. and Kemmerzell, J., ‘Understanding Variation in Party Bans in Africa’, 17 Democratization (2010) p. 642 Google Scholar.

75 Schimmelfennig, F. and Sedelmeier, U. (eds.), The Europeanization of Central and Eastern Europe (Cornell University Press 2005)Google Scholar.

76 E.g. Kemmerzell, , supra Google Scholar n. 72 or on Spain, Ferreres, V., ‘The New Regulation of Political Parties in Spain, and the Decision to Outlaw Batasuna’, in Sajó, A. (ed.), Militant Democracy (Eleven International Publishing 2004) p. 141 Google Scholar.

77 Art, D., The Politics of the Nazi Past in Germany and Austria (Cambridge University Press 2006)Google Scholar.

78 Bourne, A., ‘Why Ban Batasuna? Terrorism, Political Parties and Democracy’, 13 Comparative European Politics (2015) p. 325 Google Scholar.

79 Buzan, B. et al., Security: A New Framework for Analysis (Lynne Rienner 1998) p. 23 Google Scholar.

80 van Donselaar, J., ‘Post-war Fascism in the Netherlands’, 19 Crime, Law and Social Change (1993) p. 95 Google Scholar.

81 Fleiner, T., et al., Swiss Constitutional Law (Kluwer 2005) p. 179 Google Scholar.