Dubbel legitimitet : Finland och annorstädes

Kirjoittajat

• Dag Anckar

Abstrakti

Besides France, Finland was in earlier writings about semipresidentialism often given as one of the best-established examples of this form of government. Since the adoption in 2000 of a new constitution, however, as the president has lost the most part of his/her considerable powers, Finland no longer fits a semipresidential pattern. Still, fragments of this pattern prevail, as the conduct of foreign affairs is now vested jointly in the directly elected president and the government, the implication being that two institutions which both derive their powers from the people share responsibility for a central policy sector. The Finnish solution to resolve the potential conflict in semipresidential politics between the presidency and government is to confer on parliament the right to act as arbitrator. This solution evidently contributes to a subsequent weakening of the position of the president in Finnish politics. Rather than investigating the extent to which cohabitation is inefficient and undesirable in day-to-day politics, research on semipresidentialism has dwelled upon the overarching question whether or not and in what circumstances the split authority is dangerous for democracy and regime stability. While certainly important and interesting, this line of inquiry offers limited guidance only for an understanding and management of the present Finnish situation.