Judicialisation and Direct Democracy. Switzerland's Ban on Minaret Construction

Launched by representatives from the Union démocratique du centre (UDC) with the aim of circumventing political and judicial decisions made at both local and national levels, the 2009 federal popular initiative calling for a ban on the construction of minarets rekindled the stigmatisation of Muslims living in Switzerland. Within the prevalent institutional configuration it moreover revived controversies surrounding issues such as direct democracy versus fundamental rights, or "the will of the people" versus "the power of the judges", whether national or international. "Judicialisation" is a polysemous concept. It is not understood here as the transfer to the courts of matters of political significance - in this instance the public regulation of religion - but as a process of juridification (or juridicalisation) in which court rulings were constantly anticipated in the political debate provoked by the popular initiative.

Post-conventional Political Cultures via Processes of Direct Democracy: Theoretical Considerations Based on Jurgen Habermas and Lawrence Kohlberg

In this article, it is proposed to differentiate political cultures in two dimensions. First, inspired by Habermas' distinction of the contents of discourse, a distinction is suggested between moral, ethical-political and pragmatic elements of political culture as well as of an element of culture of balancing interests. Second, inspired by Kohlberg's stage models for the development of the individual moral consciousness and for moral culture, a distinction is similarly suggested between two pre-conventional, two conventional and two post-conventional collective stages of political culture. It can be shown that from a normative point of view, only deliberations made in a post-conventional political culture can produce reasonable or at least fair results. Conceptual considerations indicate processes of direct democracy as the method for promoting post-conventional political cultures. The more liberty that the citizens have to formulate and trigger processes of direct democracy, the more one can expect from them to generate post-conventional political cultures.

The Influence of Direct Democracy on Agency Costs: Lessons from Corporate Governance

This dissertation seeks to improve the usage of direct democracy in order to minimize agency cost. It first explains why insights from corporate governance can help to improve constitutional law and then identifies relevant insights from corporate governance that can make direct democracy more efficient. To accomplish this, the dissertation examines a number of questions. What are the key similarities in corporate and constitutional law? Do these similarities create agency problems that are similar enough for a comparative analysis to yield valuable insights? Once the utility of corporate governance insights is established, the dissertation answers two questions. Are initiatives necessary to minimize agency cost if referendums are already provided for? And, must the results of direct democracy be binding in order for agency cost to be minimized?

Does Satisfaction with Democracy really increase Happiness? Direct Democracy and Individual Satisfaction in Switzerland

This paper takes the influential “direct democracy makes people happy”-research as a starting point and asks whether direct democracy impacts individual satisfaction. Unlike former studies we distinguish two aspects of individual satisfaction, namely satisfaction with life (“happiness”) and with how democracy works. Based on multilevel analysis of the 26 Swiss cantons we show that the theoretical assumption on which the happiness hypothesis is based has to be questioned, as there is very little evidence for a robust relationship between satisfaction with democracy and life satisfaction. Furthermore, we do not find a substantive positive effect of direct democracy on happiness. However, with respect to satisfaction with democracy, our analysis shows some evidence for a procedural effect of direct democracy, i.e. positive effects related to using direct democratic rights, rather than these rights per se.