ABSTRACT
The low levels of confidence vested by citizens in the legislature and the effective loss of its competencies in favor of executive agencies (Mishler and Rose 1994; Newton and Norris 2000; Loewenberg et al. 2002; Mezey 2008) do not alter the importance of parliamentary representation for democracy. Following the breakdown of communism, most of the countries of CEE placed Parliaments at the core of their institutional setting (Lijphart 1992; Elster et al. 1998). In this sense, previous studies reveal the dominance held by the legislature relative to other state actors (Elgie and Moestrup 2008). The post-communist legislatures have several particular features. They started as transitional bodies: except in Poland, they were in place before the drafting of constitutions. They lacked regulations on internal procedures and their effects on behavior and policy occurred at a later stage. As a consequence of the central role played by Parliaments in the institutional design, legislatures in CEE became the major stage where politicians met and where political parties made their presence visible (Olson 1998b). Polsby (1975) differentiates between Parliaments as transformative institutions and as arenas; the newly emerged CEE legislatures appear to fall into the latter category. Whereas transformative legislatures are taken to be ones in which the internal institutional structures and procedures influence MPs' behavior and the legislative outcomes, Parliaments as arenas offer platforms for governments and political parties to exert their influence.
