Direkte Demokratie und Sprachminderheiten in der Schweiz und in Sudtirol - Ein Vergleich = Direct democracy and minority language in Switzerland and South Tyrol - a comparison. EDAP 2/2010
Do procedures of direct democracy involve fundamental dangers with regard to social, ethno-linguistic and religious minorities? Is there even a conflict between popular decision-making by initiative and referendum and the requirement of interethnic consociational democratic procedures? The article focuses on the existing tension and supposed contradictions between procedures of direct democracy (initiative and referendum) and the protection of rights and interests of minorities in multilingual areas. Drawing upon some recent examples of such kind in four Swiss bi- or multilingual cantons and in South Tyrol the author compares these experiences and discusses the crucial issue whether such a conflict can be solved and which special precautions should be established when it comes to apply direct democracy in multilingual areas. Eventually he presents a new approach about how civil rights to direct political participation, enshrined in Italy's constitution and South Tyrol's autonomy statute, could be brought into concordance with the need to respect the equality of fundamental rights of linguistic groups within a multilingual polity, which is currently debated in South Tyrol's politics.
The headscarf as a symbol of non-integration?: integration of Muslims in Austria. EDAP paper, 3/2006
A debate is raging in Europe about what kind of policies states should adopt regarding the integration of Muslims. On one hand, policies are pursued which ask Muslims to “assimilate” and give up features of their (religious) traditions, on the other hand policies are promoted which encourage minorities to celebrate their “difference”. In Austria, the debate heated up again at the occasion of the widely debated study titled “Perspectives and Challenges Regarding the Integration of Muslims in Austria” in May 2006. This paper investigates the headscarf as a religious symbol in a Western state. Although there has not been a case before the Austrian courts on religious neutrality of public schools with regard to the limits of religious freedom evident in the headscarf cases all over Europe, the debate on religious practices in the public realm has also reached Austria, which makes a glance at the debate in Germany even more interesting. In Germany, a vibrant debate has been going on for years. Only recently, on the 7th of July 2006, a decision by the VG Stuttgart turned the debate into a different direction. To give an overview, the main strands of the German discussion will be outlined. This debate will be described against the background of the recent decisions of the ECtHR, which have set the guiding posts of the debate.
Same Same But Different - also in Europe! A New Methodological Approach in Cross-Country Analysis of Communication Structuresapplied to five EU member states
The EU still lacks a truly European public sphere. On this level, there is still a clear lack of integration between individual member states. This means that national public spheres and cultures are still of great importance for European communication and media professionals. Comparative research into the similarities and differences between different nations is therefore valuable for cross-border PR communication activities. This paper lays out the methodological foundation for such research, discussing possible approaches and difficulties associated with comparative research. The author then introduces a potential heuristic framework for comparative analysis: the International Corporate Communication Compass. This framework is applied to five case-study EU countries (Denmark, Germany, France, Poland and the UK), showing the differences and similarities in a range of different contexts that affect public communication in all its forms. The conclusion examines how the results of such studies could be used in order to compare communication identities of different countries. This can potentially help in the development of a European public identity on the long run and in a first step can led towards a better, more adapted communication structure about European citizenship. Ultimately, communication structures within the EU might become more Europeanized than they