Parliamentary inquiries as minority rights: are legal transplants possible?

• Published in: Theory and practice of legislation (Oxford, England) Vol. 12; no. 1; pp. 55 - 72
• Main Author: Szabó, Zsolt
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United Kingdom Routledge 02.01.2024; Taylor & Francis; Taylor & Francis Ltd
• Subjects: Committee of inquiry; Committees; Governmental investigations; legal transplants; Legislative bodies; Legislators; Minorities; opposition; Opposition (Political science); parliament; Parliamentary practice; Parliamentary procedure; parliamentary procedure parliamentary scrutiny; Rights; Rules; Transplants; KOSOVO; LITHUANIA; ALBANIA; GERMANY; HUNGARY; AUSTRIA; Austria
• DOI: 10.1080/20508840.2024.2311467
• ISSN: 2050-8840

Committees of inquiry, in related literature, are often called as 'sharpest sword' of the opposition. However, this sharpness is highly dependent on how much rights the opposition is effectively provided by the fine details of the procedural rules, and whether these rights are justiciable. According to the German model, the inquiry must be launched if a quarter of the MPs require it, and the opposition enjoys minority rights also during the inquiry. Many countries implemented the first, but not the second element in their parliamentary procedures (Hungary, Kosovo, Albania, Lithuania), which led to ineffective inquiries. The only positive example for a successful transplant of the mandatory minority initiative for launching an inquiry is the neighbouring country, Austria. In most of the other countries, the majority is more effective in conducting inquiries, and, lacking judicial remedies, the opposition cannot put its right to inquiry in practice effectively. It seems that the mandatory minority initiative hardly works properly outside its original home country, Germany, and the only successful transplant country, Austria. Another evidence that legal transplants cannot survive if the legal environment and culture is not fertile and developed enough.