Mellan spelet, taktiken och sakpolitiken - En uppsats om Decemberöverenskommelsens (o)försvarbarhet

Sammanfattning: The national Swedish election in 2014 resulted in The Sweden Democrats holding ultimate balance of power between the two major party-blocs. The party used its newfound power to strike the government’s budget proposition which caused the prime minister to call for an extra election. In order to restrain this political authority the red-green government and the Alliance established The December Agreement – regarding principles for government formation and acceptance of a minority government’s budget. Due to the agreement the government could stay in office and the extra election be avoided. This study aims to examine the controversy between broad political agreements and the idea of the representative democracy. This is done by answering the question of why The December Agreement is to be considered (un)democratic? The question is answered by comparing the premises of the agreement to established theories of democracy concerning democratic accountability, accurate representation of the people’s views and political stability. The thesis concludes that the agreement is to be considered democratic as it cured the parliamentary crisis by providing stability, but undemocratic as the agreement violate some of the basic democratic values – e.g. the ability of practicing rightful democratic accountability and allowing an inclusive representation of political views of the citizenry.