Female Suffrage |
Switzerland's Long Way toWomen's Right to Vote(In a direct democracy change takes a little longer) Introduction of women's right to vote in some European / North American nations:
Timeline
Cantonal LevelWhile the majority of cantons introduced women's right to vote shortly before or shortly after the confederation did in 1971, two conservative half-cantons in eastern Switzerland, Appenzell Ausserrhoden and Appenzell Innerrhoden refused to do so for a long time. During the 1980's pressure of public opinion increased. The men of Appenzell Ausserrhoden thought it might be better to change their laws themselves and they did so in 1989. But in Appenzell Innerrhoden nothing changed. Neither the first written constitution (Helvetic Republic (1798)) nor the 1848 Federal Constitution had been really explicit about the question whether the word "citizen" was to be interpreted only concerning men or whether it would include women too (as it obviously did in other fields). For a long time it was generally accepted, that the tradition should be changed only after an explicit referendum. But when the men of Appenzell Innerrhoden gave signs that they would still not accept what was long overdue some women filed suit for their right to vote and they succeeded. The Federal Supreme Court decided on November, 27th, 1990 that the introduction of women's right to vote in Appenzell Innerroden would not need a change of the cantonal constitution. The judges declared that it would be sufficient to interpret the existing constitution in a way that the women were included in the term citizens. The Federal Supreme Court refered in its argumentation to article 8 of the Federal Constitution that had been altered in a 1981 national referendum so that it now grants equal rights not only to all citizens (as in the 1848 original version), but expressly to men and women. CommentIt seems that the introduction of major changes in society is easier when the system is changed altogether: The Soviet Union, Austria and Germany (1917-1919) introduced women's right to vote together with the abolition of monarchy, while it took longer to modify an established and functioning democratic tradition (UK 1928, France 1944, Switzerland 1971). The example of women's right to vote shows that democracy is not generally more progressive as other forms of government. If a majority of the population is well accustomed to certain basic rules and if these rules work reasonably well common people even tend to stick more to these reliable rules than members of parliament and government would do - even if these rules are very unjust for some individuals or even major groups. On the other hand, changing rules alone is only the one half of the process of change - the new rules must be known and accepted by a broad majority of the population to become effective. Direct Democracy does help to raise a discussion on rules in the families, at work and in other places ordinary people meet each other. Experts are forced to explain the necessity for change not only to a small number of people (members of government and parliament) but to everybody. This is very helpful to ensure that (almost) everybody will understand the need for change. |
Disclaimer
|
GESCHICHTE-SCHWEIZ.CH © Copyright 2004 All Rights Reserved
|
Imprint
|