What Women (Don’t) Want: Mechanisms to Improve Women's Political Representation in Slovakia¹

 

Dr Alexandra Bitusikova PhD

 

Research Institute of Matej Bel University, Banska Bystrica, Slovakia

alexandra.bitusikova@umb.sk

 

Introduction

 

The paper deals with women’s political representation in Slovakia. It is based on quantitative data with support of qualitative data collected in the interviews with female politicians and activists. The main attention is paid to the debate on introducing positive measures such as quotas and its reflection in the society.   

 

What do the numbers tell us?

 

During the socialist era, women’s emancipation and formal equality between women and men were proclaimed as an important victory of the communist regime. Media pictures of women tractor-drivers, soldiers or crane-operators were to demonstrate equal opportunities for women and men. Female factory workers or agricultural cooperative farm members were heroines of communist propaganda and their smiling faces appeared at all panels and posters celebrating a working woman. The ideal of a socialist woman was reflected in her heroic triple role of a worker, a political functionary and a mother.

 

Participation of women in the legislative power during socialism was secured by quotas (in the same way as it was in case of young people, ethnic minorities, and certain social groups, e.g. factory workers, co-operative farm workers, intelligentsia, army members, retired people, etc.). The proposed proportion of women on candidate’s lists to the Parliament of the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic was 30%. Majority of women were representing working class and agricultural sector, and a small symbolic number of women were representing so called ‘working intelligentsia’. All female and male candidates were chosen by the Communist Party and the elections only confirmed their candidature. The whole process was ideologically motivated, manipulated and forced from top-down. Despite a relatively high number of women in the legislative power, their participation in decision-making was formal as was the role of the Parliament or the Government which were expected to accept all proposals prepared by the Communist Party by 100%. The results of the elections were, however, always celebrated as a victory of ‘socialist democracy’ and compared to a low number of women’s political representation in Western countries. The quota system was totally discredited during socialism and shortly after 1989 abolished. The consequences of the historic experience with forced women’s representation during socialism have had a strong impact on the post-1989 development of equality discourse in the society. The number of women active in politics dropped drastically and has been only slowly increasing in recent years in almost all areas of political and civic life. Main obstacles and barriers of low representation of women in political structures in Slovakia can be divided into several categories:

1. Individual barriers (psychological barriers like lack of self-confidence; lack of assertive power; lack of women’s solidarity);

2. Systemic barriers (family; gender stereotypes; lack of political experience and awareness; traditionalism and conservatism in the society; religion; urban-rural divide; politics seen as a male domain and dirty business; distrust in politics generally);

3. Institutional barriers (electoral system; internal mechanisms within political parties; institutional hierarchical structures).

 

According to opinion polls made by the Institute of Public Affairs in 2002, 79% of women and 70% of men think that it is mainly family duties that prevent women from entering politics. 47% of women and 29% of men think that the main reason of low women’s representation is a systematic attempt by men to keep power and decision-making in their hands. 42% of women and 37% of men consider politics a dirty business, and therefore women prefer to avoid it. 7% of women and 15% of men are of an opinion that women do not have necessary skills for politics (Institute of Public Affairs, 2002; quoted from Filadelfiova – Butorova – Gyarfasova 2003: 256). 

 

Comparative statistical data on women’s representation in the National Council (Parliament) of the Slovak Republic demonstrate a big gap between pre- and after 1989 period (see Table 1). The number of women democratically elected as members of the new Parliament is low 1) because of the lower number of female candidates, and 2) because most political parties put women on lower positions on the candidates’ lists with a limited eligibility.

 

Statistical data on women in the Parliament (Table 1)

 

Year	Number of MPs	Number of women	%  of women
1976 - 1981	150	41	27%
1981 - 1986	150	44	29%
1986 - 1990	150	44	29%
1990 - 1992	150	18	12%
1992 - 1994	150	23	15,3%
1994 - 1998	150	22	14,7%
1998 - 2002	150	21	14%
2002 - 2006	150	22/29	14,7 / 19,3%٭

٭ After the election several male MPs became Ministers in the Cabinet and their seats in the Parliament were taken by the candidates next on the lists, which improved the ratio of women in the Assembly.

 

Electoral system in Slovakia is based on proportional representation with closed party-lists, which means that women have theoretically a better chance to be elected. Position of women on the candidates’ lists is crucial for their eligibility. The higher a woman is seeded on the list, the bigger chance she has to be elected. The reality is that even with an increase of the number and ratio of women candidates on party lists in the latest elections, their representation remained quite low. In the elections of 2002, the share of female candidates seeded in the top half of candidates’ lists was 20.9%, and the share in the top quarter was 17.9%. The higher the position and the higher the probability that the candidate would be elected were, the lower the proportion of women was (Filadelfiova – Butorova – Gyarfasova 2003: 251). Compared with the elections in 1998, most political parties in 2002 adopted a strategy of giving at least one important party post to a woman. Only three parties (Christian Democratic Movement - KDH, Hungarian Coalition Party – SMK and Slovak Communist Party – KSS) ignored this principle (Filadelfiova – Butorova – Gyarfasova 2003: 253). Several political parties, mainly centre-left parties (Social Democratic Alternative; Democratic Left Party) announced informal quotas within the parties. Centre-right parties, on the other hand, have been neglected gender equality principles and opposed any positive mechanisms.    

 

“Proportional electoral system is, I think, better for women. If the party follows some internal democratic principles, there is a higher chance for a woman to be elected. Legislation is as it is, there is no law supporting higher representation of women in politics. It all depends on culture and maturity of political party – whether it is internally ready and mature for these issues” (MEP, Socialist).

 

Political parties in Slovakia have relatively small numbers of members, but quite high ratio of women to men. However, high number of female membership is not reflected in women’s higher representation in top party positions or pro-equality policies. One of the ruling coalition parties Christian Democratic Movement, which has the highest percentage of female members (56%) according to the data from 2000 (Filadelfiova – Radicova – Pulis 2000: 41), has no woman in the party leadership and its policies are aimed strongly against gender equality and women’s rights. This tendency based on conservative values has strengthened since the last election in 2002 and has had a negative impact on the development of national equality policies. There have been only two female party leaders since the 1990s (Anna Malikova – Slovak National Party, 2001-2003; Zuzana Martinakova – Liberal Forum, 2004 - present). Having women in top party positions, however, does not mean that they bring gender equality agenda on the table. Most women politicians in Slovakia (and in other Central and Eastern European countries, too) are reluctant to associate themselves with gender issues. It is mostly evident during election campaigns. Women politicians fear that mentioning women’s rights and equality could decrease their chances to be elected. Women’s platforms within political parties or across political parties have not been developed either although they are often considered a very important force to promote women’s political representation and women’s agenda. Lack of women’s solidarity and rivalry instead of co-operation seem to be the main barrier to build women’s platforms.

 

“Solidarity among women in Slovak politics does not exist. I attended many seminars on this topic, especially before the elections in 2001 – 2002, and I have to say that there is even more rivalry and competition among women than among men. It is not true that they can unite through some women’s topics. It does not work this way” (MEP, Socialist).

 

Women’s solidarity is only intuitive or spontaneous, but not ambitious and conscious. It does not work as well as men’s solidarity. Maybe we, women do not have enough space and time to meet and talk… We do not go for a beer together after the Parliament meeting… More women’s movements and groups are needed to support women and to build consciousness of a common goal – to help successful women to enter politics. Every woman politician in our country fights just for herself. They are more like rivals, without realizing any common mission” (former Minister, centre-left, from a personal interview and quoted from Butorova 2001: 144).      

 

Women’s NGO Prospecta analysed the role and position of women in the 2002 parliamentary election campaign (www.feminet.sk). The results showed that political parties presented women politicians at their billboards as equal partners of male leaders, but in fact the pictures were used just a tool of ‘the emotional and intellectual manipulation of the voter’ (The Slovak Spectator, 24. 9.2002). No political party mentioned the problem of under-representation of women in politics. Paradoxically, even the Slovak National Party, the only political party at that time with a female leader, placed their second woman’s candidate on the ineligible 52nd position.

 

The situation has changed slightly in the election campaign in 2006. Several political parties (e.g. Alliance of New Citizen or Free Forum) presented women politicians on their posters with the slogan: “More women to Politics”. However, it is too early to analyse the results of the elections (the elections took place at the time of writing the paper). 

 

Lack of gender awareness among politicians in Slovakia is strongly manifested when it comes to forming the government. Women’s representation in the executive power is much worse than it is in the legislative assembly. The numbers of female cabinet members have varied since 1989, but unlike in the legislative bodies, there is no sign of an improvement and a slow increase of the number of women in the Slovak Government. The percentage of women Cabinet Ministers has varied from 0 (the present Cabinet) to 14% (highest percentage in 1994-98). When compared with the “old” EU Member States where ratio of women in most Cabinets exceeds one third, Slovakia lags behind dramatically. The data show that equal opportunities for women to reach top executive positions in the Government have been totally neglected, and it has been reflected in an absence of gender agenda in most state policies. We can even observe that after implementation of the EU gender equality directives into national legislation (but no enforcement) and joining the EU, Slovak politicians fell into a false euphoria that everything was done and gender agenda could be put aside ad acta.  

 

Quotas: Who wants them?

 

Positive mechanisms such as quotas are considered a legitimate equal opportunity measure in many countries. Quotas can be legally imposed or voluntarily adopted by political parties. Quotas should be understood as one of the tools that can improve imbalanced political representation.

 

In Slovakia, the topic of quotas for women and their legal enforcement appeared in a serious debate for the first time before the election 2002 as an initiative of several women’s NGOs and MPs. The female MP Eva Rusnakova introduced a proposal of 30% minimum quota for women on the candidates’ lists, but it was quickly and strongly rejected in the Parliament. Home Secretary Ivan Simko prepared the second proposal to amend the existing election law that would secure every third position on the candidates’ lists for a person of another sex. This initiative attracted wide attention of politicians, media and public. Vice-Chairman of the Christian Democratic Movement and the present Minister of Justice Daniel Lipsic critisised the proposal as anti-constitutional and discriminatory because ‘it strengthened stereotypes that some groups of population were not able to achieve success without a special legal protection’ (Rebrova, SME, 12. 2. 2002). His argument was supported by a number of politicians and journalists. Some male MPs in the parliamentary discussions argued that the proposal was ‘discriminatory against men’;‘there are enough women in the Parliament’; or ‘ we let women enter politics and some of them even proved their competence’ (Rusnakova, SME, 2.11.2001). The 3:1 proposal was supported by more than 50 women’s organisations in Slovakia as well as by the ‘Gremium tretieho sektora’ (The Third Sector Association – an umbrella association of non-governmental organisations), but in the end it was rejected by the Cabinet and did not even make it to the Parliament.

 

The issue has reappeared in media again in autumn 2003 thanks to the initiative of the chairman of the Committee for Equal Opportunities and Status of Women Jozef Heriban.² Heriban reintroduced the amendment to the Election Act by setting up support mechanism for women that would ensure every third place on a party list for a woman. The proposal was a common decision of the Committee and was supported by a number of women’s NGOs associated in Women’s Forum 2000. Several newspapers opened a discussion on this topic, but reactions were controversial and even women politicians and some women experts opposed the idea of quotas. There has been a prevailing view that women in Slovakia do not really want positive discrimination and that those who want can achieve their goals without quota. The influential daily SME brought several articles, written by male journalists, strengthening this view.

 

“The reason of low representation of women in political life is their lower interest in this kind of self-realisation. It is so easy, human and natural. Sexes differ because their biological and social determination is different. That is why they prefer different roles. Quotas that want to change it are not only an attack against democracy, but also an abusive violence against women themselves. Social engineering is a modern version of communism” (Schutz, SME, 1. 3. 2004).

 

The proposal was rejected in the Parliament again by the majority of MPs including most female members. During the parliamentary debate a woman MP openly presented her disapproval with the proposal: “I am not happy with the proposal and disagree with it. As a woman I feel completely equal in this Assembly. I do not feel like a protected species that need special legal conditions” (SITA, www.feminet.sk, 5. 3. 2004).

 

In most political and public debates men opposing quota argue that it would be humiliating for women to introduce quota system because ‘clever women can succeed themselves’, and it would be against basic human rights and equality of all. Women are skeptical mainly because of the experience of the socialist past, and because they believe that the society is not yet prepared to accept quotas, as it was expressed in interviews with female politicians:

 

“Quotas are double-edged weapon. Quotas work in the countries where the topic of gender equality has been perceived much more positively (like Nordic countries). I do support some kind of quotas, but only if they are accepted at all levels of the society. If I was to support the law on quotas of women on the candidates’ lists of political parties, I would expect that the law would be reflected vertically to all levels from the top to the bottom, but also horizontally – in the government. Why it has to work in the parliament, but not in the government? It requires a wider reform. I am afraid that in the present system of the Slovak Republic we are not able to introduce and implement such a reform. That is why I prefer working with the society; women’s agenda should be a natural part of it. I worry that if we introduce quotas in the parliament, we can discourage a part of the society that want more women representatives; some people could perceive it negatively that women need to win their seats by law. It is all about the readiness, maturity of the society (woman MEP, Socialist).

 

“I often travel all over Slovakia and ask women about it (positive discrimination and quotas). I even try to push them to fight for this idea. But I feel they look at it with a great reserve. They have different reasons. One feels offended, another thinks we can do it without it, the other thinks it is all feminism and that if she starts to support it, her husband will be angry and tell her off…I don’t know whether we can enforce it if it is not a bottom-up process. I am convinced that any law on positive discrimination or quotas will not be accepted if there is no pressure from the ground… I know that if this pressure increases, women start to support women more… I went through elections campaigns. Most women I met and talked to, in the end voted for men. They told me. Women in our society do not understand and feel the need for women’s view, they do not identify with female politicians. Many of my supporters are women, but in the elections – they vote for men” (woman MP, leader of a political party, center-right). 

 

“I am convinced that positive discrimination makes sense and it would help to increase women’s participation. There are examples from other countries where it works. Why it did not happen here, it is because men’s attitude has won. I remember the reaction of my male colleagues in the Parliament about it! Their reaction was very weird, on the edge of men’s vanity! I thought myself ‘they cannot be serious’, I expected they were more mature in this area. In the informal meetings they said: ‘Yes, yes, you women are amazing, you achieve a lot, you can do anything, but you know, we had it in socialism and how it ended up…” (former Minister, center-left).

 

“I am aware of the fact that quotas as a temporary solution are probably the only possible tool for increasing political participation of women, but I am not sure about their introduction in Slovakia. We all know cases when men managed to get their wives or lovers into the parliament, and quotas would only lead to increase of such cases. I support women entering political parties, building strong women’s basis in the party and introducing internal party mechanisms for increasing women’s representation in the party” (former Vice-chair of a political party, Socialist).

 

“Our Committee (on equal opportunities) proposed every third woman on the candidates’ lists, but it would have required changing the constitution, and there was no will to do that. We gave up fighting for quotas officially and we try other ways, empowering women and cooperating with political parties” (Deputy of the department, Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Family).

 

“To get on the candidates’ list, it all depends on the power of assertivity of a woman, and whether she really wants it…I had confusing opinions on quotas before 2002. I did not like very much that NGOs asked for quotas and for high financial incentives (fines) for political parties if they break the rule. I could not support quota system in which if we are not allowed somewhere, we will fine ‘them’. Now we have had a parliamentary debate on quotas again – without fines – and I am open to this debate because I take quotas as one of the temporary solutions (woman MP, liberal).  

 

“I stand for natural respect towards a woman, and not for quotas. In my political career I have never experienced any barriers, had no negative experience that would limit me as a woman. I am not aware of any barriers that would prevent women from being successful either in politics or other public or economic positions. In my political party all women have equal opportunities to all positions” (MP, center-left).

 

The opinions of interviewed women politicians reflect deep distrust towards quotas and in several cases also lack of gender awareness and sensitivity. Most women who achieve political positions agree that there are problems with women’s under-representation and there are obstacles on the road to a woman’s political career, but they do not admit that they themselves experienced them, and they do not see it as ‘their’ problem. A large aversion to introducing quotas, but also to any measures forced from above, is based on negative historic experience in socialism. Women still remember how they were forced to become formal members of the Communist Party, trade unions or an official women’s organisation that was considered a “lengthened arm of the Communist Party”, how they were forced to participate in meetings and demonstrations celebrating communism and how ideologically exploited quotas were. It takes time and new generations to forget.

 

It seems that an alternative way of implementing positive measures - voluntary adoption of quotas within political parties, has more chances to be introduced in Slovakia, as the 2002 elections already proved. Socialist parties were the first to come with informal quotas on the candidate lists and most parties took a decision to give at least one important party post to a woman. Although we cannot consider it a major improvement, it is a sign of a change within political party policies.       

 

In spite of the negative opinions towards quota in the society and negative results of legal proposals, the political and public debate has raised awareness of this issue. It has been clearly reflected in a slightly growing support for quotas among inhabitants (64% of women and 52% of men supported quota in the survey in 2002, compared with 60% of women and 37% of men in 1995; Gyarfasova – Pufkova 2002: 24). This trend shows that the society is slowly changing and is becoming more aware and sensitive of gender equality and women’s rights. 

 

Conclusion

 

Since the 1990s gender equality policies have got on the agenda of political and civic institutions’ programmes mainly as a result of the EU enlargement process. Slovakia signed and ratified all international documents regarding gender equality and formally improved legislation by implementing the EU equality directives. In spite of that, gender equality has not become a topic of a great political interest. Women’s groups and non-governmental organisations are and remain key players in bringing gender equality into a public discourse. Thanks to their lobbying activities several proposals introducing quota system for women have been presented in the Parliament, but were strongly opposed by both men and most women, and refused. In the society where feminist and women’s movement could not exist during state socialism and women and men were fed by tales on gender equality and forced to be politically active, it takes a long time to overcome stereotypes, obstacles and barriers to women’s political representation. Positive discrimination is only one of many ways leading to higher participation of women in politics. Education, awareness campaigns, women’s groups’ sustained pressure within political parties and at all levels of the society from the bottom-up are the most crucial everyday steps to real change.   

 

Footnotes

 

¹The study is based on the data from the research project “Enlargement, Gender and Governance: The Civic and Political Participation and Representation of Women in the EU Candidate Countries” (EU 5th Framework Programme Project, SERD 2003-00033), in which the author participated as a national coordinator for Slovakia. The author is thankful to her colleagues from the Research Institute of Matej Bel University in Banska Bystrica (Jolana Darulova, Slavomira Ocenasova, Katarina Kostialova and Ivan Chorvat) for their cooperation in collecting research data.

² The Committee is an advisory body to the parliamentary Committee for Human Rights, Minorities and Status of Women. It has 18 members representing political parties, NGOs

and expert groups.

 

References

 

Butorova, Z.,  Filadelfiova, J., Guran, P., Gyarfasova, O.  & Farkasova, J. (1999) ‘Rodova problematika na Slovensku’ [Gender in Slovakia.], in Slovensko 1998 – 1999. Suhrnna sprava o stave spolocnosti [Slovakia 1998 – 1999. A Global Report on the State of Society], eds. Meseznikov, G. & Ivantysin, M., IVO, Bratislava, pp. 653 – 706.

Butorova, Z., Filadelfiova, J., Cvikova, J., Gyarfasova, O. & Farkasova, K. (2002) ‘Zeny, muzi a rovnost prilezitosti’ [Women, Men and Gender Equality.], in Slovensko 2002. Suhrnna sprava o stave spolocnosti II. [Slovakia 2002. A Global Report on the State of Society], eds. Kollar, M.&– Meseznikov, G., IVO, Bratislava, pp. 405 – 441.

Filadelfiova, J., Guran, P. & Sutorova, D. (1999), Rodove statistiky na Slovensku [Gender Statistics in Slovakia.], S.P.A.C.E. – Ministerstvo prace, socialnych veci a rodiny – Medzinarodne stredisko pre studium rodiny, Bratislava.

Filadelfiova, J., Radicova, I.& Pulis, P. (2000), Zeny v politike [Women in Politics], S.P.A.C.E. – Ministerstvo prace, socialnych veci a rodiny SR, Bratislava.

Filadelfiova, J., Butorova, Z. & Gyarfasova, O. (2003), ‘Women and Men in Politics’, in Slovakia 2002. A Global Report on the State of Society, eds. Kollar, M. & Meseznikov, G., IVO, Bratislava, pp. 247 – 260.

Gyarfasova, O. & Pufkova, K. (2002) Potencial aktivnej ucasti zien vo verejnom zivote [Potential of Active Women’s Participation in Public Life], IVO, Bratislava, www.ivo.sk.

Kvapilova, E. & Porubanova, S. (eds.)  (2001) Nerovne cesty k rovnosti. Pohlady na ludske a obcianske prava zien na Slovensku  [Unequal Ways towards Equality. Looking at human and civil rights of women in Slovakia.], Medzinarodne stredisko pre studium rodiny, Bratislava.

Kvapilova, E. & Porubanova, S. (eds.)  (2003) Rodova rovnost: Preco ju potrebujeme? [Gender equality: Why Do We Need It?], Stredisko pre studium prace a rodiny, Bratislava.

Meseznikov, G., Kollar, M. & Nicholson, T. (eds.) Slovakia 2000. A Global Report on the State of Society, IVO - Institute for Public Affairs, Bratislava.

Rebrova, S. (2002) ‘V politike je malo zien, na vine je vsak ich nezaujem’ [There are not enough women in politics, but the problem is their lack of interest] Sme, 12. 2. 2002, www.sme.sl/clanok_tlac.asp?cl=236479.

Rusnakova, E. (2001) ‘Tema rovnosti muzov a zien zije dalej’ [The topic of equality between men and women still alive], Sme, 2. 11. 2001, p. 6.

Schutz, P. (2004) ‘Inzinieri ludskeho stastia’ [Engineers of human happiness], Sme, 1. 3. 2004, p. 6.

Zaujmove zdruzenie zien Aspekt (2002) Na ceste do Europskej unie [On the way to the EU], Aspekt, Bratislava.

____________________________________________________________________