Democratic Legitimation of Trade Policy Tomorrow: TTIP, Democracy and Market in the Swiss Constitution

Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) are increasingly more concerned with regulatory convergence, rather than trade liberalisation through elimination of tariffs. This appears to result more often in so-called dynamic trade agreements, which still evolve after adoption. Further economic integration in democracies, however, depends on the support of the constituency. This article takes a closer look at the democratic legitimation of global economic integration in a case study on Switzerland. It finds that the current principles and institutions of democracy in Switzerland are unlikely to fully accommodate the new regulatory challenges of dynamic FTAs.

Consensus and democracy in Indonesia : Musyawarah-Mufakat revisited

This paper analyzes customary practices of consensus decision making, called musyawarah-mufakat, as a basis of democratic stability in Indonesia. Musyawarah and mufakat (deliberation and consensus) are a traditional decision-making rule in Indonesia which has often been observed in village meetings. This paper argues that this traditional decision-making rule is still employed even in a modernized and democratized Indonesia, not only at rural assemblies but in the national parliament as well. Furthermore, this consensus way of decision making provides an institutional basis for democratic stability by giving every parliamentary player, whether big or small, an equal opportunity to express his/her interests. On the other hand, this system of musyawarah‐mufakat decreases political efficiency in the sense that it takes a long time to deliberate drafted laws in the parliament.

A group decision-making methodology with incomplete individual beliefs applied to e-Democracy

We consider the situation where there are several alternatives for investing a quantity of money to achieve a set of objectives. The choice of which alternative to apply depends on how citizens and political representatives perceive that such objectives should be achieved. All citizens with the right to vote can express their preferences in the decision-making process. These preferences may be incomplete. Political representatives represent the citizens who have not taken part in the decision-making process. The weight corresponding to political representatives depends on the number of citizens that have intervened in the decision-making process. The methodology we propose needs the participants to specify for each alternative how they rate the different attributes and the relative importance of attributes. On the basis of this information an expected utility interval is output for each alternative. To do this, an evidential reasoning approach is applied. This approach improves the insightfulness and rationality of the decision-making process using a belief decision matrix for problem modeling and the Dempster?Shafer theory of evidence for attribute aggregation. Finally, we propose using the distances of each expected utility interval from the maximum and the minimum utilities to rank the alternative set. The basic idea is that an alternative is ranked first if its distance to the maximum utility is the smallest, and its distance to the minimum utility is the greatest. If only one of these conditions is satisfied, a distance ratio is then used.

Religion, Democracy and the Public Sphere

Throughout the development and maturation of the American democratic experience, religiously inspired conduct has contributed significantly to democratically progressive political concerns such as the abolition of slavery and campaigns for civil rights, but also the encouragement and perpetuation pf anti-democratic practices such as the institution of slavery and policies of racial segregation. It may be rarely admitted, but there is no essential conceptual affinity between conduct proper to democratic political association. It may, therefore, be useful in our own political circumstances to try to determine boundaries for conduct that expresses and satisfies compatibly both religious and democratic commitments. Perhaps most Americans do recognize – if not in their own cases, at least in reference to the beliefs and actions of others – that religiously inspired conduct is neither thereby justified morally or legally nor absolved from further critical appraisal. Certainly, the history of American legal practice shows that religious belief or inspiration does not serve as acceptable legal defense for conduct charged as criminal infraction. The U.S. Constitution contains only two references to religion: the non-establishment clause prohibits governmental institutionalization of religious beliefs or liberty rights – is limited in scope and application both by other constitutional rights of individuals and by constitutionally authorized powers of government. As the U.S.S.C. has repeatedly held, individual constitutional features must be understood in a manner that harmonizes all stated and implied constitutional features, not by unbridled abstractions of selected phrases. Under the American legal system, there is no absolute or unlimited right to free exercise of religion: not everything done publicly under religious inspiration is legally permissible; what is otherwise illegal conduct is not legalized by religious inspiration. In important respects, general features of the legal boundaries concerning religiously inspired conduct in public life are reasonably clear; nevertheless, broader issues concerning further moral or ethical constraints upon religiously inspired conduct remain unresolved and rarely addressed explicitly.

El salto virtual del debate colectivo: potencialidades y limitaciones de las nuevas plataformas para la deliberación y la toma de decisiones ciudadanas

Las nuevas Tecnologías de la Información y la Comunicación han emergido en los últimos años como el principal cambio en la conformación de redes de acción colectiva y en la mutación de los canales que sustentan el debate público. En este ámbito, la reciente aparición de plataformas virtuales para la deliberación ha contribuido a transformar profundamente la naturaleza de la acción participativa, tanto en su concepción expresiva como instrumental. Dichas nuevas herramientas se caracterizan esencialmente por proporcionar un soporte que aúna la posibilidad del debate plural en torno a asuntos políticos y cambio social, y a la vez integra en él (en grados muy diversos como se comprobará) la toma de decisiones como fruto de la deliberación colectiva. Estas propiedades les dotan de una naturaleza que no es asimilable a aplicaciones virtuales de comunicación política netamente discursivas, y perfilan un objetivo expreso de simular las características propias de un ágora presencial, ofreciendo un incentivo participativo a través de su intento por solventar las limitaciones y condicionantes espacio-temporales o de amplitud poblacional propios de la interacción comunicativa tradicional. La integración del componente expresivo e instrumental de la participación ciudadana que abordan este tipo de plataformas y aplicaciones, plantea sin duda un reto en el ya amplio debate académico en torno al alcance real de Internet como esfera significativa para conformación de voluntad colectiva y cambio político, que hasta ahora quedaba escindido entre escépticos y partidarios. La propuesta se articula a partir de la exploración y análisis comparativo de las principales plataformas y aplicaciones virtuales en español para la deliberación y la toma de decisiones colectivas. A efectos de análisis se establecen criterios evaluativos combinando las propuestas dimensionales desarrolladas por Coleman y Gøtze (2001) y Dahlgren (2005) para cuestiones relativas a Internet, comunicación y deliberación política, con especial énfasis en el análisis diferencial de las capacidades estructurales e interactivas de cada una de las herramientas.