Deformace demokracie? Opoziční smlouva a česká politika 1998-2002
| Title in English | Deformation of Democracy? Opposition Agreement and Czech Politics in 1998–2002 |
|---|---|
| Authors | |
| Year of publication | 2015 |
| Type | Monograph |
| MU Faculty or unit | |
| Citation | |
| Attached files | |
| Description | The Opposition Agreement between two big formations, Czech Social Democratic Party (ČSSD) and Civic Democratic Party (ODS), represents the most controversial pact in the history of the Czech Republic. This pact enabled the ČSSD to govern. The ODS received certain positions in the parliament and elsewhere, and also a promise of big reforms of the political system, including an electoral reform. Despite the crisis at the end of 1999, the Opposition Agreement survived the whole four-year term. The Opposition Agreement was not a good political solution, but at the time of its origin after the 1998 elections it was a more rational solution than forming one of two possible majority coalition governments. These majority governments would inevitably be considerably affected by strong ideological and personal aversions. The strength of barriers preventing a majority coalition government was confirmed in the first year of the Opposition Agreement. At the same time, it also turned out to be very difficult to govern without secured majority (the agreement between the ČSSD and the ODS did not involve parliamentary cooperation of the parties). This resulted in extending the pact in a new agreement in January 2000. Until the new agreement, the political arrangement of the Opposition Agreement could be characterised as a minority government with protection against a vote of no confidence, while after the new agreement it was expanded with external support for the government, with crucial help from the ODS in approving state budgets. The big problem of the ODS was that it persistently continued to cling to the agreement even after it lost much of its purpose, i.e. after the idea of political reforms had failed. Moreover, the ČSSD was willing to fulfil further promises of economic and social policies only to a limited extent. Klaus’ party suffered the consequences of its position, which had been viewed by voters as semi-governmental, by its poor election results in 2002. |
| Related projects: |