Introduction of quotas or specific measures for promoting balanced representation of women and men in political decision-making is a hot issue among Slovenian members of parliament for the whole decade. Although they are generally aware of the problem of unbalanced representation of both sexes, they rarely use the term "quota". This goes for both, opponents and advocates of measures, which would reduce differences between women and men in political decision-making. The author analyses parliamentary debates in the period from 1994 to 2002, when the Act on equal opportunities for women and men and changes in the Act on political parties were discussed. The proposed changes in the Act on political parties would bind political parties to definein their statutes the procedures and measures for promoting equal opportunities of both sexes when preparing a list of candidates for elections. However, the proposal was rejected in 2000. The Act on equal opportunities of women and men adopted in 2000, defines special measures and a balanced representation (at least 40% representation of one sex), however these special measures are introduced as recommended and not obligatory. On the basis of analysis of discussion in Slovenian parliament and conducted survey with some members of the parliament, the author states the main arguments for and against quotas as positive measure, and main reasons for not succeeding in promoting legally obligatory measures for increasing the share of women in political decision-making.
|