What is it about?
Within federal frameworks, the second chamber is deliberately structured to facilitate shared rule, enabling territorial minorities¬—whether based on geographical, ethnic, or cultural lines—to engage in national policy making and safeguard their local autonomy against federal overreach. In light of this, the second chamber serves as the principal guardian of such a structure. Thus, this article seeks to investigate this key consideration and probes an overview of these alternatives based on Swiss and Belgium as a case for shared rule aspect which helps clarify conceptual and empirical possibility
Featured Image
Photo by Rogelio Gonzalez on Unsplash
Why is it important?
The article evokes certain implications that could be drawn and a lesson to be taken by other federations on their institutional design by way of conclusion.
Perspectives
I hereby declare that the publication is entirely the result of my own work and effort and that it has only been published in this prestigious journal.
Wondwossen Mengistu
Hawassa University
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: Shared Rule Federalism for Airing the Voice of Minorities in Policy Making Processes: An Inquiry in to Cases of Switzerland and Belgium, International Journal on Minority and Group Rights, April 2026, De Gruyter,
DOI: 10.1163/15718115-bja10281.
You can read the full text:
Resources
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
