Authors

Bohdan Bernatskyi¹;  ¹ European University Institute, Italy

Discussion

Historically, the prohibition of political parties was considered a mauvais ton for healthy liberal democracies in Europe. Rare exceptions to this rule, such as the ban against the German Communist Party in 1956, only confirms a long-existing consensus that a truly pluralistic system can accommodate all ideas and movements.

In 1998, the first cases on dissolution of political parties appeared before the European Court of Human Rights. The Court’s consideration of these initial cases determined that the prohibition of political parties must be underpinned by a legitimate political or legal justification. The Strasbourg Court thus interpreted the Convention primarily in the spirit of militant democracy. Subsequent case law served to strengthen the notion of militant democracy (Welfare Party).

Notwithstanding the vision of the Strasbourg Court, the approaches of various national courts in cases concerning the prohibition of political parties are far from uniform. Experiences in Spain, Ukraine, the United Kingdom and, eventually, Germany demonstrate significant discrepancies as to the political theory and legal rationale sufficient to support prohibition. My research is focused on the exploration of the legal and political motives applied by national courts in cases concerning the prohibition of political parties.