1Volume 12- Issue 72
/ December 2023
205
http:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
DOI: https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2023.72.12.18
How to Cite:
Gadimaliyev, A.R. (2023). Evolution of parliamentarism in Azerbaijan: from the 20th century to the present. Amazonia
Investiga, 12(72), 205-215. https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2023.72.12.18
Evolution of parliamentarism in Azerbaijan: from the 20th century to
the present
Azərbaycanda parlamentarizmin təkamülü: 20-ci əsrdən bu günə qədər
Received: November 5, 2023 Accepted: December 29, 2023
Written by:
Araz Raquf Gadimaliyev1
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9437-8466
Abstract
The study aims to examine information about the
first Azerbaijani Parliament, its activities,
composition, and the measures it implemented in
practice during the period of its existence. In order
to achieve its aim and objectives, the study used the
methods of analysis and synthesis, induction and
deduction, as well as historical and comparative
methods. The main conclusion of the study is the
substantiation of the position that the people of
Azerbaijan, which regained its independence, used
the rich traditions of the short-term activities of the
Azerbaijan Democratic Republic and, on this
historical continuity, created a national and people's
republic, the sovereign state of Azerbaijan. The
author also argues that the Parliament established
during this period played a major role in the
formation of the statehood based on democratic
principles since 1918–1920 was a period of
formation of the political consciousness of the
Azerbaijani people, a high level of formation and
activity of the processes of national identity of the
Azerbaijani people. This study is one of the first to
examine the origins of the practice of
parliamentarism in Azerbaijan in the early
twentieth century and its peculiarities.
Keywords: parliamentarism, legislative power,
mediation democracy, power of the people.
Introduction
In exploring the nuanced landscape of
democracy, the contemporary conceptualization
hinges on the pivotal role of parliamentarism as
an essential cornerstone within the governance
framework. Widely acknowledged by
politicians, political scientists, and the public
alike, the institution of parliamentarism is
1
PhD in Law, Assistant Professor, The Academy of Public Administration under the President of the Republic of Azerbaijan, Baku,
Republic of Azerbaijan.
deemed indispensable for the manifestation of
democratic principles. Whether structured as a
unicameral or bicameral entity and referred to by
various names such as people's assembly,
national assembly, or federal assembly, the
parliament stands as the representative branch of
government. It plays a critical role in formulating
206
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
the norms and codes that shape social life
through the creation of constitutions and
legislative acts, thereby laying the foundation for
a minimally democratic state system.
This study delves into the Evolution of
Parliamentarism in Azerbaijan: From the 20th
Century to the Present, acknowledging the
constitutional principles that underscore the
democratic organization of state power. Aligning
with global practices, the Constitution of the
Republic of Azerbaijan articulates the imperative
of dividing state power into distinct branches. To
delve deeper into this principle, the country's
foundational law delineates the dynamics of
interaction and concurrent independence among
these branches within their designated spheres of
influence. However, in a state governed by the
rule of law, the absolute independence of each
body, particularly the executive branch, is
inherently circumscribed by the legal framework.
To comprehensively grasp the significance of the
study, it becomes imperative to contextualize it
within the historical and political backdrop of
Azerbaijan. This exploration aims to address
critical research questions, elucidating the
evolution of parliamentarism in Azerbaijan and
its intrinsic connection to the broader discourse
on democracy. By undertaking this research, we
seek to unravel the complexities embedded in the
historical trajectory, recognizing the imperative
of understanding why investigating the issue of
parliamentarism in Azerbaijan is both timely and
indispensable. Therefore, the aim of this research
is is to comprehensively explore and analyze the
historical development of parliamentarism in
Azerbaijan from the 20th century to the present.
Therefore, the main sections of the research will
consist of the following tasks:
1. Determine the meaning of parliamentarism
through the prism of analysis from the
historical and theoretical aspect of legal
institutions.
2. To describe the historical evolution and
national features of parliamentarianism in
Azerbaijan.
3. To discuss the peculiarities of Azerbaijani
parliamentarism against the background of
the analysis of the influence of the Soviet
political heritage and modern challenges
4. To investigate the influence of the
Azerbaijan Democratic Republic on the
development of democratic movements in
the East.
This study aims to answer the following
question:
How has the concept of parliamentarism evolved
historically and theoretically within the
framework of legal institutions and what are its
national features in Azerbaijan?
What role has the historical evolution of
parliamentarianism in Azerbaijan played in
shaping its current state, considering the impact
of the Soviet political heritage and contemporary
challenges?
Literature review
The study of various facets of parliamentarism
has garnered attention from foreign scholars,
leading to a rich body of literature. Cheibub and
Rasch (2022) identified two overarching trends
through an analysis of constitutional texts across
European countries spanning from 1800 to 2019.
Firstly, they highlighted the constitutionalization
of parliamentary practices, originating from
strategic interactions between the government
and parliament. Secondly, there emerged a
tendency to safeguard both the executive and
parliament from mutual interference. This
constitutional evolution, influenced by the
stabilization of parliamentarism post-World War
II, demonstrates the adaptability of the system,
emphasizing that contemporary regimes differ
significantly from their nineteenth-century
counterparts. Motos (2019) observed an
"empirical turn" in research at the onset of the
twentieth century, with a notable scholarly focus
on evaluating the centrality of parliament in the
democracy discourse of the 1920s and 1930s.
The scholar emphasized how the early twentieth
century witnessed transformative changes in
classical parliamentarism. Post-World War II,
European parliaments became battlegrounds for
partisan conflicts, leading to a shift in focus for
political scientists and lawyers. This shift
reduced the significance of parliaments to arenas
of partisan confrontations, diminishing the
institution's role to mere displays of conflicts,
negotiations, and vote counting. Dahlen and
Skirbekk (2021) marked the late nineteenth
century as a pivotal point for modernity in
Europe and the early twentieth century as a
period marked by conflict fueled by nationalism
and class struggles. Democracy, according to the
scholars, necessitates a particular skepticism
about politics, with democratic processes serving
as crucial guarantors of social integration in
modern society. In response to the challenges of
the first crisis of their time, Scandinavian
countries adopted policies to fortify social
democratic or social liberal welfare states with
robust parliamentary traditions, aiming to uphold
Gadimaliyev, A.R. / Volume 12 - Issue 72: 205-215 / December, 2023
1Volume 12- Issue 72
/ December 2023
207
http:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
credibility and trust between governments and
citizens.
Jagodzińska's (2022) work appears to focus on
the legal analysis of the Declaration of
Independence of the Democratic Republic of
Azerbaijan from 1918 to 1920. This work
provides valuable insights into the legal aspects
surrounding the declaration, offering a deeper
understanding of the legal foundations of the
democratic republic during that period. The
collaborative work by Ihalainen et al. (2016)
explores the conceptual nexus of parliament.
Given the collaborative effort and its inclusion in
a book on the comparative history of the
European concept of parliaments and
parliamentarism, it offers a broader theoretical
framework for understanding parliamentary
systems, which could be useful for
contextualizing the specific case of Azerbaijan.
At the same time, the work by Alieva (2014)
explores the relationship between Azerbaijan and
the European Union (EU) with a focus on the
impact of the country's democratization process.
The author delves into how the absence or
limitations of democratic practices in Azerbaijan
may have influenced its diplomatic and political
ties with the EU. The study likely examines the
challenges and implications of democratization
(or the lack thereof) on Azerbaijan's broader
international relations. Gadimaliyev's (2020)
work is a study that concentrates on the
organizational aspects of parliamentary
institutions during the Azerbaijan Democratic
Republic period. The focus includes the
structure, functioning, and possibly the
challenges faced by these institutions during the
early years of the republic. The study contributes
to a better understanding of the historical
development of parliamentary systems in
Azerbaijan. Moreover, Gahramanova's (2009)
work was centred on the democratization process
in Azerbaijan. The study examines both internal
and external factors that have played a role in
shaping the democratization trajectory of
Azerbaijan. The author explores the complexities
and influences that have affected the country's
path towards democratization, offering insights
into the broader dynamics at play. Malikli's
(2020) work concentrates on the election process
for regional representatives to the parliament
during the period of the Democratic Republic of
Azerbaijan. The study delves into the electoral
mechanisms, procedures, and perhaps the
significance of regional representation in the
democratic governance of Azerbaijan during that
specific historical period. In addition, Rasizade
(2003) provides an analysis of Azerbaijan's
transition towards democracy during a specific
period. The study explores the political and
societal changes that occurred during this
transitional phase, shedding light on the
challenges and opportunities faced by Azerbaijan
as it moved towards a "New Age of Democracy.
Hui (2019) delved into the revolutionary
beginnings of the early twentieth century in
Asian countries, asserting that the origins are not
to be found in geopolitical competitions but
rather in the "awakening of Asia" triggered by
imperialist wars. The scholar highlighted the
multifaceted impact of this awakening on
globalization and its enduring influence on
parliamentary institutions.
Kaya's (2022) work explores parliamentarism
and rationalized parliamentarism with a focus on
its applicability in Turkey. It provides a
comparative perspective that might offer insights
applicable to your study. Understanding how
different countries, in this case, Turkey, engage
with parliamentarism could contribute to a
broader understanding of the subject. In addition,
Balampanidis and Rezola (2023) proposed that
the transition from authoritarianism to
democracy culminates when a country
establishes parliamentary traditions. They
emphasized that democratization initiates with
the downfall of an authoritarian regime and
concludes with the inaugural democratic
parliamentary elections. The path towards
democracy becoming the "only game in town"
involves a myriad of formal and informal actions,
symbolic gestures, political decisions, social
mobilization, and institutional arrangements,
regardless of whether the focus is on transition or
consolidation.
Hence, the reviewed literature presents a
multifaceted exploration of parliamentarism,
ranging from legal analyses of historical
documents, such as Azerbaijan's Declaration of
Independence, to conceptual frameworks that
define the nature of parliamentary systems in
Europe. The works collectively emphasize the
historical significance of the Azerbaijani
parliament, positioning it as a crucial element in
the democratic fabric of the East. Additionally,
insights into the applicability of parliamentarism
in Turkey contribute to a comparative
understanding of diverse political landscapes.
However, there is a noticeable gap in global
comparative analysis, with a focus on
Azerbaijan. A broader examination of
parliamentary systems across this country could
enrich the contextualization of the study.
Moreover, a shift towards more contemporary
perspectives on parliamentarism in Azerbaijan
and a more in-depth exploration of the legal
208
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
aspects could enhance the completeness of the
existing literature. On the other hand, the current
study endeavors to contribute significantly to the
existing body of literature on parliamentarism in
Azerbaijan by addressing crucial gaps identified
in prior research. Several key works have been
considered to offer a comprehensive
understanding of the historical, theoretical, and
practical dimensions of the parliamentary system
in Azerbaijan. The existing literature on
parliamentarism in Azerbaijan reveals certain
gaps that the current study seeks to address.
Notably, prior research has touched upon the
impact of the lack of democratization on
Azerbaijan's relations with the European Union,
yet a comprehensive analysis integrating
historical, theoretical, and practical dimensions
of the parliamentary system in this context is
lacking. Additionally, while there are studies
exploring the organization of parliamentary
institutes in the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic,
a more nuanced understanding of the evolution
and national features of parliamentarianism in
Azerbaijan is needed. The examination of
internal and external factors in the
democratization process provides valuable
insights, but a focused exploration of their
specific influence on parliamentary structures is
notably absent. The election process of regional
representatives to the parliament of the
Azerbaijan Democratic Republic has been
explored, but there is a need for a more integrated
analysis connecting electoral mechanisms with
broader parliamentary developments.
Furthermore, while Azerbaijan's transition to a
"New Age of Democracy" has been studied, a
comprehensive synthesis of its impact on
contemporary parliamentary structures is
lacking. The current study aims to bridge these
gaps by offering a cohesive and in-depth analysis
of parliamentarism in Azerbaijan.
Methodology
Research design
The study is aimed at a comparative analysis of
parliamentary practice in the early 20th century
in the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic (ADR)
and modern parliaments. This study is of a
qualitative type, as the analysis is based on a
critical review of legislative acts and historical
documents.
Data collection
Qualitative data was collected through a critical
review of historical documents and primary
sources, such as legislation. The main selected
legal acts and historical documents constitute the
research materials:
1. The Constitution of the Republic of
Azerbaijan (1995): this key document
defined the basic democratic principles,
separation of powers, and individual rights
in a format that determined the country's
further development (Azerbaijan, 1995).
2. The Declaration of Independence (28 May
1918): a fundamental document that
declared the establishment of the
independent Democratic Republic of
Azerbaijan (Jagodzińska, 2022).
Modern scientific and metric databases were
used for the literature search, including Google
Scholar, Web of Science, Index Copernicus,
Taylor and Francis, etc. Only modern literature
was selected - the date range was from 2016-
2023. The keywords used to search for sources
are as follows: parliamentarism, the Democratic
Republic of Azerbaijan, laws, documents,
modern practice of parliamentarism. Based on
the selected literature, a critical analysis was
carried out and further used as a methodological
basis for the study.
Data analysis
The qualitative analysis is focused on identifying
the main principles and innovations in the ADR
legislation and their impact on the development
of democracy. The methods of analysis and
synthesis were used to analyse scientific papers
and legal acts. The work uses several specific
analysis techniques, such as coding,
categorization, and content analysis (See Table
1).
1Volume 12- Issue 72
/ December 2023
209
http:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
Table 1.
The specific research techniques
Coding
Description
involves systematically labeling and categorizing specific elements The coding process
within the collected data.
Application
Relevant sections of legislative acts and scientific literature are assigned unique codes based
tion of recurring patterns, themes, and on thematic content. This facilitates the identifica
legislative trends.
Categorization
Description
Categorization involves grouping coded data into broader categories based on shared
characteristics or themes.
Application
principles, separation of powers, and individual rights are Codes related to democratic
categorized to discern overarching patterns and thematic clusters in the legislative landscape.
Content Analysis
Description
documents to extract meaningful Content analysis systematically examines the content of
insights, uncovering implicit and explicit meanings.
Application
Historical documents, such as the Declaration of Independence, undergo content analysis to
shaping parliamentary identify key statements, principles, and ideological underpinnings
practices during the ADR era.
Thematic Analysis
Description
Thematic analysis involves identifying, analyzing, and reporting patterns or themes within
qualitative data.
Application
parliamentarism is subjected to thematic analysis to extract key ideas, Modern literature on
theoretical frameworks, and contemporary perspectives relevant to the study's focus.
Comparative Analysis
Description
differences between different sources, Comparative analysis examines similarities and
periods, or contexts.
Application
The study employs comparative analysis to juxtapose parliamentary practices in the
with modern frameworks, highlighting changes, Azerbaijan Democratic Republic
continuities, and the evolution of democratic principles.
Source: Author’s development
Ensuring rigor
1. Data triangulation
Reliability is bolstered through data
triangulation, involving the use of multiple
sources, perspectives, and methods. In this study,
historical documents, legislative acts, and
modern literature are cross-referenced to
corroborate findings and enhance the credibility
of the analysis. By comparing legal provisions in
the Constitution of 1995 with historical
documents like the Declaration of Independence,
1918, data triangulation ensures consistency and
reliability in capturing the evolution of
parliamentary practices.
2. Theoretical saturation
The study achieves theoretical saturation by
thoroughly exploring and analyzing existing
theoretical frameworks related to parliamentary
practices. This exhaustive examination ensures
that the study captures the depth and complexity
of the subject matter, leaving no critical aspect
unexplored. By delving into diverse theoretical
perspectives on parliamentarism, the study
attains theoretical saturation, offering a
comprehensive understanding of the contextual
and theoretical underpinnings of the research.
Intersubjective Audit
To enhance validity, an intersubjective audit is
employed, involving peer reviews and
consultations to assess the interpretative rigor of
the study.
Results and discussion
Effective management of the parliamentary
practice that is developed in a particular country
and has its own traditions, as well as its
successful implementation in practice, is crucial
for successful representation in modern
democracies. The world history of
parliamentarism as social (class) representation
in the highest authorities dates back to the
activities of the English Parliament of the 13th
century: the establishment of the House of Lords
and the House of Commons of England, as well
as the first bicameral parliament in this country
in the mid-14th century, From the end of the
same century, the English Parliament received
the right of legislative initiative and became the
prototype of modern legislative assemblies, but
only after the adoption of the Bill of Rights in
210
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
1689, which deprived the king of the right to
repeal or suspend laws without the consent of
elected representatives, did it become a full-
fledged supreme legislative body. This classic
parliament gave birth to the principles of
opposition to the supreme state power, the two-
party system, and lobbying, which have become
integral attributes of modern European political
culture.
The representative function of the parliament as
a key democratic institution necessarily brings to
the fore the election procedure designed to ensure
genuine and most favourable representation of
social, ethnic, professional, and other strata and
groups of the population, which is possible to
implement in certain specific conditions.
Therefore, the so-called electoral democracy,
democracy in the form of general elections, is the
minimum necessary precondition for the
democratic nature of the social order.
Minimal because at the time of its inception and
approval (late eighteenth - first half of the
nineteenth century), it was criticised due to the
illegality of universal suffrage, which was
extended to more and more categories of the
population in Europe and America gradually
over decades. Moreover, the adoption of the
relevant laws did not guarantee only the actual
participation of these categories in political
decision-making but even their involvement in
the political process. In other words, electoral
democracy does not become a mechanical
participatory democracy, a social and
participatory form of democracy.
These basics of democratic practice were
repeatedly reminded throughout the twentieth
century when the notorious “waves of
democratisation” described by dozens of
contemporary researchers rose. Over the past
decade and a half, states that emerged from the
ruins of a system that was called communist
totalitarianism or authoritarianism have been
trying to learn the lessons of democracy. In
assessing their experience, we should first of all
proceed from the unequal starting conditions for
overcoming the past in which they were. Even
though they were united by belonging to a
common system (the Soviet type), these states
were not homogeneous and equally developed
according to the criteria of the system; after its
collapse, their political, economic, and socio-
cultural heterogeneity (of course, with many
homogeneous characteristics) became fully
apparent.
The theory of state and law distinguishes
between two main ways in which people exercise
their power:
1. direct exercise of power (direct
democracy);
2. exercise of power through representation
(representative democracy).
When describing the countries of Central and
Eastern Europe, it should be noted that the
democratic institutions created in them after the
collapse of the Soviet Union are in the process of
adjustment and development, and in its middle
stage. This is fully consistent with the notion that
post-communist societies are going through a
stage of transit before the complete formation of
new social systems, in which liberal democratic
institutions and Western values form a stable
unity with the socio-historical practice of a
certain region located to the east of the nuclear
countries of European civilisation. One of the
key issues in the EU is to prevent relapses of
authoritarian rule, and the main factor in solving
this problem is the problem of the optimal
combination of parliamentary (potentially
democratic) and presidential (potentially
authoritarian) power. Thus, the European
Parliament has expanded its powers in relation to
other EU institutions, strategically using the
powers it already possesses and appealing to its
contribution to democratic legitimacy (Crum,
2023).
The greatest advocate of the first mentioned
method of exercising power by the people was
Jean Jacques Rousseau, who believed that direct
democracy is a political ideal. According to his
theory, it is necessary that the legislative power
belongs directly to the people's assembly, in
which all citizens should participate, and all other
authorities should be fully subordinated to it and
responsible to it. According to Montesquieu,
from the perspective of the idea of representative
democracy, the direct exercise of power by the
people is impossible in large states and
problematic in small ones, so there is a need for
popular representation. According to the thinker,
elected representatives are the ones who can best
conduct discussions on public issues. In this case,
representative assemblies should not be
convened to make decisions or take active action,
tasks they cannot handle, but to create new laws
or monitor compliance with those already
adopted. Another group of thinkers, obsessed
with the protection of individual freedoms,
developed a framework of parliamentarism as an
alternative to Montesquieu's separation of
powers, from Burke to Weber, some of whom
1Volume 12- Issue 72
/ December 2023
211
http:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
were often parliamentarians themselves,
preferring a central and powerful representative
assembly to a system of checks and balances
(Plassart, 2021).
For centuries, parliament has been the central
European political institution for expressing
dissent and holding debates between citizens'
representatives in a spirit of fair play, while the
modern parliament controls the government and
bureaucracy, and claims the right to make
unquestioned sovereign decisions (Ihalainen et
al., 2016). The role of the parliament in the state
system of the Republic of Azerbaijan is assessed
from various historical, legal, and political
perspectives, and in general, it is assigned a
special role in the process of state-building.
However, in order to fully understand the place
of the Azerbaijani parliament in society and its
role in public administration, it is necessary to
consider the development of the country's
parliamentarism.
Azerbaijan's parliamentarism is not limited to a
single constitutional provision. The history of
real parliamentarism in the Republic of
Azerbaijan is much broader than the
parliamentarism defined by constitutional norms.
The history of parliamentarism in Azerbaijan
does not go back several centuries, as in a number
of European countries, but has been enriched by
its national characteristics and political diversity
during the twentieth century. At the present
stage, European countries are experiencing the
following processes of interaction between the
legislative and executive branches of
government: the executive takes on a dominant
role in lawmaking, which is why parliaments are
increasingly marginalised (Griglio, 2020).
The emergence of the tradition of national
parliamentarism and its comprehensive
formation, such as statehood and patriotism, can
be traced back to the early twentieth century.
Parliaments operating in European countries are
the epicentres of European democracies, where
policies are discussed and potentially shaped
(Kiss & Sebők, 2022; Palieieva et al., 2022). The
parliaments that were elected and established in
Azerbaijan have gone through a somewhat
different path of formation compared to other
countries and have managed to occupy a special
place among Muslim states. Having formed and
benefited from its historical experience, the
Azerbaijani parliament was able to strengthen its
influence in terms of integration with the
parliaments of other countries.Despite the fact
that Azerbaijani parliamentarism emerged in the
historical dimension, it would be wrong to
assume that it was created without a well-
thought-out strategy. Certainly, it is not worth
talking about the real independence of the
legislative and representative body that existed in
the Soviet period, during which the country's
party-state elite resolved all important issues,
“bourgeois parliamentarism” was rejected, and
such values as Western democracy and the theory
of the separation of powers were denied. At the
same time, the principles of the modern state and
law, especially the principle of historicity, direct
the study of any problem in the period of its
development.
After the end of the Civil War and the transition
to a new economic policy, a new stage in Soviet
state-building began. During the Civil War,
relations between the Soviet republics took the
form of a military alliance, which was later
supplemented by an economic union, bringing
them closer together and leading to the need to
create a single state. On 30 December 1922, a
congress of representatives of the Soviet
republics - the RSFSR, Ukraine, Belarus, and the
Transcaucasian Federation (consisting of
Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia, and Abkhazia) -
approved the Declaration and Treaty on the
Establishment of the Union of Soviet Socialist
Republics. The main provisions of the
Constitution of the RSFSR were based on the
Constitution of the Union State of 1924. The
Congress of Soviets of the USSR, which
convened once a year, and from 1927 - once
every two years, was proclaimed the supreme
authority; in the period between the congresses,
the Central Executive Committee of the USSR
met three times a year.
Delegates to the Congresses of Soviets of the
USSR regularly listened to reports from the
government and People's Commissariats and
made decisions on issues of socialist
construction, such as industrialisation,
collectivisation, tasks from the five-year plans,
and the development of Soviet legislation. From
the early 1930s, a specific procedure was
established at the sessions of the Central
Executive Committee: the deputies approved
resolutions adopted by the Presidium without
discussion. The composition of the delegates to
the congresses was systematically renewed,
which allowed for the involvement of workers'
representatives in the activities of the highest
authorities (Rahimli, 2021). However, this
practice also had a downside - weak continuity.
The Congresses of soviets were short-term
representative institutions, and each Congress of
soviets adopted its own rules of procedure. The
work of the congresses was open and widely
212
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
covered in the press. The congresses were
convened for 1-3 days and were more like the
Zemsky Sobors of the Moscow state. Real power
was increasingly concentrated in the top party-
state apparatus, which increasingly controlled the
process of forming the congresses of the Soviets
and its bodies. In fact, however, the Supreme
Soviet of the USSR was both a facade and a
pseudo-parliament, often appealing to popular
sovereignty (Sablin, 2020).
A brief history of the importance of parliament in
the system of state bodies shows that the
Republic of Azerbaijan has some experience in
studying the basic principles of parliamentarism
and a number of special issues. Thus, during the
Soviet period, Azerbaijan and other Soviet
republics partially took into account the
peculiarities of modern parliamentarism, and
stabilised traditions related to such issues as the
functioning of collegial legislative bodies, the
organisation of their work, the legislative
process, and others. Despite the fact that a class
approach to political and legal issues was
mandatory, one cannot dismiss all studies of the
constitutional order and law of this period based
on ideological considerations alone.
The proclamation of the Democratic Republic of
Azerbaijan on 28 May 1918 was a significant
event in world history. For the first time in the
practice of the Muslim East, a republic was
established and the foundation of
parliamentarism was laid based on a multi-party
system and pluralism of political positions: a
wide range of political currents was represented
in the Parliament, which was reflected in the
formation of eleven parliamentary factions.
The contemporary public consciousness is
awakening a deep interest in the true history of
Azerbaijan, in understanding the most difficult,
full of heroism, but also drama and irreparable
losses, the time when the Azerbaijan Democratic
Republic functioned, despite the fact that it
existed for only 23 months - from 28 May 1918
to 27 April 1920, but its influence on the future
fate of the Azerbaijani people is undeniable. A
new stage began - the national revival and the
formation of the national statehood of the
Azerbaijani people. For the first time in the
history of the Muslim world, a republic emerged
whose state structures influenced the
development of republican ideas and democratic
movements in the countries of the East. The
Parliament of the Republic of Azerbaijan and the
legislation regulating its activities carry out their
functions in accordance with the requirements,
goals, and objectives of a democratic state with
the rule of law. It is impossible to create a modern
institution of parliamentarism and determine its
further development without analysing the
activities of representative, advisory, and
legislative bodies that previously operated in
Azerbaijan and the norms that regulated these
activities. In addition, as Palonen (2020)
correctly notes, parliaments themselves form
their own concepts based on debates, decisions,
precedents, and agreements collected in the
Rules of Procedure and procedural
commentaries.
Until recently, however, the history of the
Azerbaijan Democratic Republic and its
development in 1918-1920 have been interpreted
one-sidedly, with no attempts to understand the
positions of various political parties and
movements of that period, to assess the activities
of the parliament and government impartially, or
to identify those features of historical experience
that had a positive impact on the development of
the republic and are therefore valuable and
applicable at the present stage of state-building in
sovereign Azerbaijan. Recreating in full the
dramatic and at the same time significant page of
national history became possible only with the
restoration of the independence of the Republic
of Azerbaijan.
Hence, the results obtained indicate that
parliamentarism in Azerbaijan is not only a
reflection of one constitutional provision but has
deep historical roots. The results emphasise that
the proclamation of the Democratic Republic of
Azerbaijan in 1918 was defined as an important
event in world history, as it was the first
emergence of a republic in the Muslim East.
During this period, the foundations for
parliamentarism based on the multi-party system
and pluralism of political positions were laid.
Modern scholars agree with these statements, in
particular Norden (2021) and Christiansen et al.
(2021). A wide range of political currents was
represented in the Parliament, which
demonstrates the diversity and openness of the
political process. The eleven parliamentary
factions mentioned in the results indicate that
there was a diversity of ideologies and views in
the political life of the country. The results
confirm the opinion of Ceyhun qızı Qasımova
(2021) that the current interest in the history of
Azerbaijan, in particular in the period of the
existence of the Azerbaijan Democratic
Republic, indicates a desire to understand the
difficult moments of national revival and the
formation of national statehood. Despite the fact
that the republic existed for only 23 months, its
influence on the further development of the
1Volume 12- Issue 72
/ December 2023
213
http:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
Azerbaijani people is recognised as extremely
important, which is also confirmed in the study
by Gurbanalieva (2021) and Ismayilova et al.
(2022).
It is worth agreeing with Norden (2021) that
parliamentarism, its history, and development
depended on a number of internal and external
factors in a particular state. Thus, the success of
democratic transformation in a particular region
had different reasons: a) whether the country had
democratic experience in its past; b) the
conditions for the political and economic
development of this country to develop
representative institutions in the future; c) the
importance of parties in the development and
adoption of political decisions.
The results of the study do not contradict the
opinion of Kaya (2022), who notes that many
explanations and interpretations of the origin,
history, and nature of the separation of powers
doctrine indicate that the democratic value of the
parliamentary system of government is high.
According to the scholar, the incentives created
by the parliamentary system can undermine
democracy, as well as strengthen the mechanism
of checks and balances between different
branches of government. In addition, the study
notes that modern parliamentary systems are
undergoing changes, which are described in more
detail in Almoatasm (2020), first, at the present
stage, there is a need to introduce appropriate
amendments to the constitutions to enable
parliaments to play a more effective and
influential role, taking into account the historical
experience of parliamentary practice in a
particular country; and second, the internal rules
of procedure of the parliament of democratic
states should respond to the moods and
aspirations of the parliament and its members,
providing adequate coverage for the
implementation of new.
However, the findings somewhat contradict
Christiansen et al. (2021), who argue that the
study of parliaments tends to focus on the
activities of elected members or individual
political parties, as well as the formal procedures
and informal arrangements that govern their
interactions with each other, as well as with
governments, interest groups, or citizens.
Instead, we believe that there is research that is
already expanding the study of parliaments to
include aspects of governance that go beyond the
activities of elected members and political
parties. For example, some studies may examine
parliamentary engagement with civil society, the
role of committees in policy-making, or the
impact of parliamentary decisions on socio-
economic development (Mineur, 2020).
Thus, the scientific novelty of this study is a
comprehensive study and comparison of the
parliamentary practice of the Azerbaijan
Democratic Republic in the early 20th century
and modern legislatures. An important aspect is
to determine the impact of those times on the
development of democracy and the formation of
modern institutions. The results of the study
reveal similarities and differences in the structure
and functioning of parliamentary bodies. The
knowledge gained can serve as a basis for further
research in the field of parliamentarism and
democracy development. The recommendations
based on the analysis can be used to improve
parliamentary practice in the current context.
Therefore, this study is important in the context
of understanding the evolution of parliamentary
systems and contributes to the improvement of
democratic institutions both nationally and
internationally.
However, like any study, this paper has certain
limitations, in particular, not all historical
documents may be taken into account, as access
to them may be limited. This may affect the
completeness and accuracy of the historical
analysis. There are also language limitations. The
focus is on sources available in Russian,
Azerbaijani, and English. This may lead to the
omission of some contextual details. Despite
these limitations, the study aims to provide an
objective and comprehensive analysis of the
parliamentary practices of the Democratic
Republic of Azerbaijan and compare them with
modern legislative systems in order to draw
important lessons and conclusions.
Conclusions
In conclusion, this study underscores the pivotal
role of historical analysis in comprehending the
evolution of parliamentarism, shedding light on
its emergence, traditions, and enduring impact.
The investigation of parliamentary practices in
the Republic of Azerbaijan, juxtaposed with
international counterparts, employs a historical
lens to unveil the intricacies of this institutional
development. By delving into the historical
necessity that shaped parliamentary traditions,
the study constructs a nuanced narrative,
enriching our understanding of the national
parliament's trajectory. The findings
convincingly demonstrate that the influence of
the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic transcends
its brief existence, leaving an indelible mark on
the national resurgence and the formation of
214
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
statehood. Furthermore, the study highlights the
global ramifications of the Democratic
Republic's activities, contributing to republican
ideals and democratic movements in Eastern
countries during that era.
Hence, the scientific novelty lies in the
comprehensive examination and comparison of
parliamentary practices between the Azerbaijan
Democratic Republic in the early 20th century
and contemporary legislatures. The study probes
into the impact of historical events on
democracy's development and the formation of
modern institutional frameworks. Revealing both
similarities and differences in parliamentary
structures and functions, this research provides
foundational knowledge for future inquiries into
parliamentarism and democratic evolution.
Despite these contributions, it is essential to
acknowledge the study's limitations. Access
constraints to historical documents may hinder
the completeness and accuracy of the historical
analysis. Additionally, language limitations
focusing on Russian, Azerbaijani, and English
sources could lead to contextual omissions.
Nonetheless, these limitations are inherent in any
study, and this research remains an invaluable
resource for understanding the evolution of
parliamentary systems. The insights derived
from this study have practical applications,
offering recommendations to enhance
contemporary parliamentary practices on both
national and international levels, thus reinforcing
its significance in advancing democratic
institutions.
In essence, this study stands as a beacon
illuminating the historical foundations of
parliamentary systems, with particular focus on
the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic. Through its
insightful comparisons and comprehensive
analysis, it not only enriches our understanding
of the evolution of democracy but also provides
practical recommendations for improving
contemporary parliamentary practices.
Bibliographic references
Almoatasm, H. M. (2020). Determinants for new
role of contemporary parliament [Preprint].
Review of Economics and Political Science.
https://doi.org/10.1108/REPS-06-2019-0083
Alieva, L. (2014). Azerbaijan and the impact of
the lack of democratisation on relations with
the EU. European View, 13(1), 39-48.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12290-014-0292-8
Azerbaijan. (1995). The constitution of the
Azerbaijan Republic. Milli Mejlis of
Azerbaijan Republic.
https://president.az/en/pages/view/azerbaijan
/constitution
Balampanidis, I., & Rezola, M. I. (2023). From
dictatorship to democracy the institutional
transitions. Transitions from above?.
Melanges De La Casa De Velazquez, (53),
41-68.
https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?co
digo=9058122
Ceyhun qızı Qasımova, A. (2021). Legal basis of
parliamentary elections in the Republic of
Azerbaijan. Scientific Work, 15(2), 128-131.
https://doi.org/10.36719/2663-4619/63/128-
131
Cheibub, J. A., & Rasch, B. E. (2022).
Constitutional parliamentarism in Europe,
1800–2019. West European Politics, 45(3),
470-501.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2020.1870
841
Christiansen, T., Griglio, E., & Lupo, N. (2021).
Making representative democracy work: the
role of parliamentary administrations in the
European Union. The Journal of Legislative
Studies, 27(4), 477-493.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13572334.2021.1976
948
Crum, B. (2023). Why the European Parliament
lost the Spitzenkandidaten-process. Journal
of European Public Policy, 30(2), 193-213.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2022.2032
285
Dahlen, Ø. P., & Skirbekk, H. (2021). How trust
was maintained in Scandinavia through the
first crisis of modernity. Corporate
Communications: An International Journal,
26(1), 23-39. https://doi.org/10.1108/CCIJ-
01-2020-0036
Gadimaliyev, A. (2023). Organization of
parliamentary institutes in Azerbaijan
democratic republic. Academic Journal of
History and Idea, 10(6), 2125-2138.
https://doi.org/10.52340/lap.2023.36.02
Gahramanova, A. (2009). Internal and external
factors in the democratization of Azerbaijan.
Democratization, 16(4), 777–803.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13510340903083919
Griglio, E. (2020). Parliamentary oversight under
the Covid-19 emergency: Striving against
executive dominance. The Theory and
Practice of Legislation, 8(1–2), 49-70.
https://doi.org/10.1080/20508840.2020.1789
935
Gurbanalieva, S. F. (2021). From the history of
culture of the Azerbaijan democratic
republic. Theoretical & Applied Science,
94(02), 139-141.
https://doi.org/10.15863/tas.2021.02.94.33
1Volume 12- Issue 72
/ December 2023
215
http:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
Hui, W. (2019). Twentieth-century China as an
object of thought: An introduction, Part 1 The
birth of the century: The Chinese revolution
and the logic of politics. Modern China,
46(1), 3-48.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0097700419878849
Ihalainen, P., Ilie, C., & Palonen, K. (2016).
Parliament as a conceptual nexus. In P.
Ihalainen, C. Ilie, & K. Palonen (Eds.),
Parliaments and parliamentarism: A
comparative history of a European concept
(pp. 1-16). Berghahn Books.
Ismayilova, A., Bashirli, N., & Azimov, S.
(2022). The pearl of democracy of the east -
parliament of the Azerbaijan democratic
republic. Scientific Collection «InterConf+»,
(13(109), 207-214.
https://doi.org/10.51582/interconf.19-
20.05.2022.027
Jagodzińska, M. B. (2022). Declaration of
independence of the democratic republic of
Azerbaijan (1918–1920) – legal analysis.
STUDIA IURIDICA Cassoviensia, 10(1).
https://doi.org/10.33542/sic2022-1-01
Kaya, S. B. (2022). Parliamentarism, rationalized
parliamentarism and applicability in Turkey.
Dokuz Eylül University Faculty of Law
Journal, 24(2), 717-741.
https://doi.org/10.33717/deuhfd.1182477
Kiss, R., & Sebők, M. (2022). Creating an
enhanced infrastructure of parliamentary
archives for better democratic transparency
and legislative research: Report on the
OPTED forum in the European Parliament
(Brussels, Belgium, 15 June 2022).
International Journal of Parliamentary
Studies, 2(2), 278-284.
https://doi.org/10.1163/26668912-bja10053
Mineur, D. (2020). Theories of parliamentarism,
philosophies of democracy. In C. Benoit &
O. Rozenberg (Eds.), Handbook of
parliamentary studies: Interdisciplinary
approaches to legislatures (pp. 86-101).
Edward Elgar Publishing.
Malikli, N. (2020). The election process of the
regional representatives to the parliament of
the democratic republic of Azerbaijan.
Scientific Journal "Regional Studies", (20),
38-50. https://doi.org/10.32782/2663-
6170/2020.20.7
Motos, C. R. (2019). Deliberation in parliaments:
a review of the empirical, rhetorical and
systemic approaches. Revista de Sociologia e
Política, 27(72), Article e007.
https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-987319277207
Norden, L. L. (2021). Investigation the need to
teach the characteristics of the development
of parliamentarism in Latin America as part
of education. Journal of Educational
Psychology-Propositos y Representaciones,
9(3), Article e1292.
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1301341
Palieieva, Y. S., Bocharova, N. V., &
Todoroshko, T. A. (2022). Information and
analytical resources on the development of
modern parliamentarism. Analytical and
Comparative Jurisprudence, (2), 40-43.
https://doi.org/10.24144/2788-
6018.2022.02.7
Palonen, K. (2020). Aspects of a conceptual
history of parliamentary politics. In C. Benoit
& O. Rozenberg (Eds.), Handbook of
parliamentary studies: Interdisciplinary
approaches to legislatures (pp. 67-85).
Edward Elgar Publishing.
Plassart, A. (2021). Parliamentarism: From
Burke to Weber. European Journal of
Political Theory, 21(4), 836-846.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1474885120937574
Rahimli, M. (2021).
Democratization/dedemocratization of
political institutions in Azerbaijan. The
Journal of V.N. Karazin Kharkiv National
University. Issues of Political Science, 39,
123-134. https://doi.org/10.26565/2220-
8089-2021-39-16
Rasizade, A. (2003). Azerbaijan in transition to
the “New Age of Democracy”. Communist
and Post-Communist Studies, 36(3),
345-372. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0967-
067x(03)00043-6
Sablin, I. (2020). Parliaments and
parliamentarism in the works of Soviet
dissidents, 1960s–80s. Parliaments, Estates
and Representation, 40(1), 78-96.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02606755.2019.1615
672