Some aspects of the constitutional position of parliaments in the post-Yugoslav area: Comparative analysis

In the states that emerged from the dissolution of Yugoslavia, with the exception of Bosnia and Herzegovina, comparable systems of government have been established, which at a more general level show similarities with other countries of the former socialist bloc. Liberal-democratic concepts, essentially of a parliamentary type, with a more or less strengthened role of the president of the Republic, constitute the fundamental framework of government organization in these countries. In Bosnia and Herzegovina, however, the (con)federal and consociational arrangement, as a result of an international peace agreement, has produced an atypical system of government with numerous (semi)presidential elements. This paper will analyze the constitutional position of parliaments in these states, focusing on their structure and composition, competences, and mandates. While constitutional standards and significant similarities can be observed regarding competences - comparable to other parliamentary systems - specific solutions or deviations from standard models often define the character or functionality of a given system and therefore deserve special analysis. Furthermore, there is a noticeable predominance of unicameralism, but also a unique form of bicameralism in Bosnia and Herzegovina and quasi-bicameralism in Slovenia, along with certain differences in terms of composition, election, and dissolution procedures. Through comparative analysis, with appropriate references to standards or solutions in other European countries, we will indicate the degree of similarity in the issues analyzed, their functionality, as well as the specific determinism of those solutions that are unique.