Skip to main content

Part of the book series: Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft ((VGPO))

Abstract

Since its inception in 1990, the Croatian constitution has been amended six times. While constitutional politics served the purpose of maintaining autocratic rule in the 1990s, it subsequently served the purpose of adapting Croatia’s fundamental law in order to mark the country’s democratic restart and institutionalize the European Union. Overall, constitutional amendments have been sporadic rather than frequent and have more or less been the domain of the political leadership, which was willing to compromise on most of the issues for which changes were suggested. The most recent efforts to reform the constitution did, however, originate from a popular initiative and could potentially be a sign of the realm of constitutional politics opening up to a broader sphere of actors.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Beginning with data collection in 1991, Croatia was rated “partly free” by Freedom House (2014). It made a jump to the “free” category in the year 2000.

  2. 2.

    In the context of post-socialist constitution-making, Jon Elster has coined the term “‘tailor-made’ presidencies” (Elster 1997, 233) for constitutions that cater to the self-interests of either presidential candidates or incumbents rather than the common welfare.

  3. 3.

    In this regard, Article 4 as a general statement that the government of Croatia is organized on the principle of separation of powers was extended and clarified in the context of the 2000 constitutional amendment.

  4. 4.

    In the chapter on Basic Provisions, Article 53 on the National Bank was also slightly modified.

  5. 5.

    At the same time, a government working group was installed to stake out the political implications of constitutional reform. All six government parties were represented in the group. Originally, both groups were meant to cooperate on the reform project. However, a coordinated exchange between both committees never materialized (Interview with Branko Smerdel, Deputy Chair of the Working Group of the President in October 2013).

  6. 6.

    For instance, unlike Tuđman before him, Mesić had laid down his party membership upon assuming the presidency (Šenkyř 2000a, 81).

  7. 7.

    The new coalition government was composed of six parties, namely the Social Democratic Party of Croatia (Socijaldemokratska partija Hrvatske—SDP), the Croatian Social Liberal Party (Hrvatska socijalno liberalna stranka—HSLS), the Croatian Peasant Party (Hrvatska seljačka stranka—HSS), the Croatian People’s Party (Hrvatska narodna stranka—HNS), the Liberal Party (Liberalna stranka—LS), and the Istrian Democractic Assembly (Starski demokratski sabor—IDS).

  8. 8.

    The deletion of Article 81 in turn led to the decision to renumber all following articles, which was heavily criticized in hindsight as it unnecessarily brought about confusion.

  9. 9.

    The yes votes comprised the totality of coalition members’ votes as well as a few from smaller opposition parties.

  10. 10.

    Croatia’s accession to the European Union turned out to be a long and winding road with multiple obstacles and setbacks from the time the Stabilization and Association Agreement was signed in 2001 until Croatia’s entry to the Union on July 1, 2013. For a brief overview of the process, see Kušić (2013).

  11. 11.

    Not all of the minorities that had been deleted in the 1997 reform were inserted back into the constitution in 2010. However, quite a few new minorities were added to the list.

  12. 12.

    With regard to the referendum quorum, the new version of Article 87 no longer states that a majority of eligible voters has to participate in the referendum. Concerning the passage of the budget, a clause was added stipulating that the Sabor shall enact the central budget by a majority vote of all deputies.

  13. 13.

    Unfortunately, information on the contents of the amendment proposals and why they have been rejected could not be obtained before publication of this volume.

  14. 14.

    In order for a referendum to be valid, the approval of the majority of all eligible voters used to be required. This provision was changed in 2010 and since then stipulates that the majority of votes of all voters who participated in the referendum is now sufficient for it to be successful.

References

  • Bartlett, William. 2003. Croatia. Between Europe and the Balkans. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blondel, Jean, and Senada, Šelo-Šabić. 2001. Croatia. In Cabinets in Eastern Europe, ed. Jean Blondel and Ferdinand Müller-Rommel, 162–172. Basingstoke: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boduszyński, Mieczysław P. 2010. Regime change in the Yugoslav successor states. Divergent paths toward a New Europe. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, Lenard J. 1997. Embattled democracy: Postcommunist Croatia in transition. In Politics, power and the struggle for democracy in South-East Europe, ed. Karen Dawisha, and Bruce Parrott, 69–121. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Constitution Watch. 1998a. Country-by-country updates on constitutional politics in Eastern Europe and the ex-USSR. Croatia. East European Constitutional Review 7(1): 8–10

    Google Scholar 

  • Constitution Watch. 1998b. Country-by-country updates on constitutional politics in Eastern Europe and the ex-USSR. Croatia. East European Constitutional Review 7(4): 8–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Constitution Watch. 2001a. Country-by-country updates on Eastern Europe and the ex-USSR. Croatia. East European Constitutional Review 10(1): 10–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Constitution Watch. 2001b. Country-by-country updates on Eastern Europe and the ex-USSR. Croatia. East European Constitutional Review 10(2–3): 11–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Čular, Goran. 2000. Political development in Croatia 1990–2000: Fast transition—postponed consolidation. Politička Misao 37(5): 30–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Čular, Goran. 2003. The Croatian party system 1989–2002. In Between authoritarianism and democracy. Serbia, Montenegro, Croatia. Vol. 1: Institutional Framework, ed. Dragica Vujadinović, Lino Veljak, Vladimir Goati, and Veselin Pavićević, 197–224. Belgrad: Cedet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dolenec, Danijela. 2013. Democratic institutions and authoritarian rule in southeast europe. Essex: ECPR Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elster, Jon. 1997. Afterword: The making of postcommunist presidencies. In Postcommunist presidencies, ed. Ray Taras, 225–237. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freedom House. 2014. Country ratings and status, FIW 1973–2014. Last modified August 22. http://www.freedomhouse.org/report-types/freedom-world#.U_cjeiic6y0 (accessed August 22, 2014).

  • Grdešic, Ivan. 1997. Building the state: Actors and agenda. In The 1990 and 1992/93 sabor elections in Croatia. Analyses, documents and data, ed. Ivan Šiber, 103–134. Berlin: Edition Sigma.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grubisa, Damir. 2002. The political development. In Croatia on its way towards the EU, ed. Mladen Staničić, 33–45. Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helmerich, Antje. 2006. Kroatien unter Franjo Tuđman. Plebiszitärer Autoritarismus hinter demokratischer Fassade. In Zwischen Diktatur und Demokratie. Staatspräsidenten als Kapitäne des Systemwechsels in Osteuropa, ed. Ellen Bos and Antje Helmerich, 223–250. Berlin: LIT Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helmerich, Antje. 2008. Kroatien: Vom „faktischen“ Einparteiensystem zum polarisierten Pluralismus. In Osteuropäische Demokratien als Trendsetter? Parteien und Parteiensysteme nach dem Ende des Übergangsjahrzehnts, ed. Ellen Bos, and Dieter Segert, 167–186. Opladen/Farmington Hills: Verlag Barbara Budrich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kasapović, Mirjana. 1999. Die politische Entwicklung Kroatiens von 1990–1997. In Der Jugoslawien-Krieg. Handbuch zu Vorgeschichte, Verlauf und Konsequenzen, ed. Dunja Melčić, 455–462. Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kasapović, Mirjana. 2008. Semi-presidentialism in Croatia. In Semi-presidentialism in Central and Eastern Europe, ed. Robert Elgie, and Sophia Moestrup, 51–64. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kearns, Ian. 1996. Croatian politics: The new authoritarianism. The Political Quarterly 67(1): 26–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Križan, Mojmir. 1997. Kroatien unter Tuđman: Die mißverstandene Europäisierung. Osteuropa 47(10–11): 959–974.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kušić, Siniša. 2013. Kroatiens Weg in die EU. Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte 17: 8–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lalović, Dragutin. 2000. Crisis of the Croatian second republic (1990–1999): Transition to totalitarianism or to democracy? Politička Misao 37(5): 47–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ottaway, Marina, and Gideon Maltz. 2001. Croatia's second transition and the international community. Current History 100(649): 375–380.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oršolić Dalessio, Tina. 2014. The interplay of direct and indirect democracy at work—Croatia’s battle over the rights of same-sex couples, JURIST, January 23. http://jurist.org/forum/2014/01/tina-dalessio-croatia-referendum.php (accessed January 22, 2015).

  • Pintarić, Tomislav. 1998. Kroatien. Rechtsentwicklung in Osteuropa 1997. Jahrbuch für Ostrecht 39(1): 256–263.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pintarić, Tomislav. 2001. Kroatien. Rechtsentwicklung in Osteuropa 2000. Jahrbuch für Ostrecht 42(1): 217–221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pintarić, Tomislav. 2002. Kroatien. Rechtsentwicklung in Osteuropa 2001. Jahrbuch für Ostrecht 43(1): 330–337.

    Google Scholar 

  • Podolnjak, Robert. 2014. Constitutional reforms of the citizen initiated referendum: Causes of different outcomes in Slovenia and Croatia. Paper prepared for the IXth World Congress of IACL, Workshop 16: Direct Democracy. Oslo, June 16–20. www.jus.uio.no/english/…/w16-podolnjak.pdf (accessed April 24, 2015).

  • Ramet, Sabrina P. 2008. Politics in Croatia since 1990. In Croatia since independence. War, Politics, Society, Foreign Relations, ed. Sabrina P. Ramet, Konrad Clewing, and Reneo Lukić, 31–57. München: R. Oldenbourg Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rüb, Friedbert W. 2001. Schach dem Parlament! Regierungssysteme und Staatspräsidenten in den Demokratisierungsprozessen Osteuropas. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Šenkyř, Jan. 2000a. Hoffnung für den Balkan—Wahlsieg der Demokraten in Kroatien. KAS-Auslandsinformationen 2: 66–81. http://www.kas.de/wf/doc/kas_1722-544-1-30.pdf?040415175813 (accessed September 25, 2012).

  • Šenkyř, Jan. 2000b. Neue Regierung setzt auf Reformkurs. KAS-Länderberichte (April 25). http://www.kas.de/wf/de/33.2532/ (accessed September 25, 2012).

  • Szőke, Nóra. 2010. Erfolg und Scheitern schwieriger Transformationsprozesse auf dem Balkan: Ein Vergleich der Demokratisierungsprozesse in Kroatien und Serbien. PhD diss., Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin. http://edoc.hu-berlin.de/dissertationen/szoeke-nora-2010-02-02/PDF/szoeke.pdf (accessed March 13, 2012).

  • Uzelac, Alan. 2002. Ist eine Justizreform in Transitionsländern möglich? Das Beispiel Kroatien. Jahrbuch für Ostrecht 43: 175–206.

    Google Scholar 

  • Working Group of the President of the Republic of Croatia. 2000. The expert grounds for a proposal to amend the constitution. Zbornik Pravnog Fakulteta U Zagrebu 50(3): 451–473.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zakošek, Nenad. 2003. Wahlen in Kroatien 1990–2000. In Wahlen in postsozialistischen Staaten, ed. Klaus Ziemer, 111–154. Opladen: Leske + Budrich.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Zakošek, Nenad, and Tomislav Maršic. 2010. Das politische System Kroatiens. In Die politischen Systeme Osteuropas, ed. Wolfgang Ismayr, 773–835, 3rd ed. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.

    Google Scholar 

Sources

  • Croatia. 1990. The constitution of the republic of Croatia. Zagreb: Sabor Republike Hrvatske.

    Google Scholar 

  • Croatia. 2001. The constitution of the republic of Croatia with amendments through 2001. In Constitutions of the countries of the world: A series of updated texts, constitutional chronologies and annotated bibliographies, ed. Gisbert H. Flanz and Albert P. Blaustein, 1971ff. Dobbs Ferry, NY: Oceana Publications. Online Resource (accessed December 13, 2010).

    Google Scholar 

  • Croatia. 2010. The constitution of the republic of Croatia with amendments through 2010. http://www.sabor.hr/Default.aspx?art=2405 (accessed July 14, 2014).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Esther Seha .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Appendix: Constitutional Politics in Croatia 1990–2014

Appendix: Constitutional Politics in Croatia 1990–2014

Dates of amendment and implementation

Articles

Constitutional subfields

Short analysis of the reform process

12/12/1997/

12/15/1997

Preamble, Art. 2, 5, 7–9, 14–15, 17, 32–33, 35–37, 43–45, 47, 49–50, 52–53, 57, 59, 61–63, 68–76, 78–80, 84, 86, 92–93, 97–98, 100–101, 103, 110–111, 119–121, 123, 125, 129–130, 133–136, 139–142

• Preamble and basic provisions

• Human and civil rights

• Executive

• Foreign policy

• Final provisions

• Editorial changes

• Regular amendment initiated by president (final vote: 115-to-1 majority with 2 abstentions)

• Total number of deputies: 127

• Main actors: president

11/24/1999/

unclear

Art. 97

• Executive

• Regular amendment due to Tuđman falling terminally ill

• Amendment passed with votes from governing party and small opposition parties

• Total number of deputies: 127

• Main actors: members of the HDZ

11/09/2000

Art. 2–4, 6–7, 13, 15–17, 29, 31, 38, 42–43, 53, 66, 71, 73, 76–78, 80, 83, 86–90, 92, 94, 96–105, 105a (inserted), 106, 108–114, 116–118, 120, 122–126, 129–140

• Preamble and basic principles

• Human and civil rights

• Executive

• Legislative

• Executive-legislative relations

• Judiciary

• Constitutional Court

• Local self-administration

• Foreign policy

• Military

• Editorial changes

• Regular amendment passed with votes from coalition and small opposition parties (final vote: 106-to-35 majority)

• Total number of deputies: 151

• Main actors: president, government, governing majority in parliament

03/28/2001

Preamble, Art. 7, 14, 17, 26–27, 32, 35, 42–43, 45–47, 49, 53, 57–58, 69–75, 77–88, 91–92, 96, 98–101, 103–104, 109–116, 118–119, 121, 123–126, 128–132, 138–147

• Human and civil rights

• Legislature

• Executive-legislative relations

• Judiciary

• Final provisions

• Editorial changes

• Regular amendment passed with votes from coalition and small opposition parties (final vote: 103-to-25 majority without abstentions)

• Total number of deputies: 151

• Main actors: president, government, governing majority in parliament

06/16/2010

(partly 07/01/2013)

Preamble, Art. 5, 7, 9, 31, 38, 45, 53–54, 58, 65–66, 83, 87, 91, 93, 107, 118–119, 121–126, 133, 135, 142–146, 151–152

• Preamble and basic principles

• Human and civil rights

• Executive

• Legislature

• Judiciary

• Local self-administration

• Control/oversight agencies

• EU membership

• Editorial changes

• Regular amendment passed with votes from all political parties

• Joint elaboration of reform draft by means of an inter-party working group (final vote: 33-to-4 majority with 1 abstention)

• Total number of deputies: 153

• Main actors: government, parliament

12/01/2013/

unclear

Art. 62

• Human and civil rights

• Constitutional amendment referendum initiated by citizen’s group “In the Name of the Family” (final vote: 65.9 % “yes”, 37.90 % of the electorate took part)

• Main actors: citizens’ initiative, government, parliament, constitutional court

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Seha, E. (2016). Croatia. In: Fruhstorfer, A., Hein, M. (eds) Constitutional Politics in Central and Eastern Europe. Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-13762-5_9

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics