PUBLIC POLICY AND HUMAN RIGHTS

Anjeza Xhaferaj, PhD Kandidat Lektore axhaferaj@uet.edu.al

The paper seeks to engage in a wide analysis of competing arguments of the concepts of power, conflict of interests, decision and non-decision, ultimately arguing in favour of Luke conceptualization of such concepts. The focus of the paper is to explore the mechanisms that influence and shape the articulation of groups interests in society. It will try to given an answer to the question: Who sets the public agenda? The paper will draw on the concepts of polyarchy of Dahl, mobilisation of bias of Schattschneider, Barach and Baratz and three dimensions of power of Luke. The concept of mobilisation of bias has widened the perspectives of analysing the values and interests of the different groups of the society. These values and interests are not to be observed only empirically in the form of key decisions taken by a community as suggested by Dahl. But they could be covert, due to power exercised by dominant groups who would like to protect the status quo and consequently their dominance in a given political situation. Barach and Baratz introduced the concept of non-decision, which is a decision taken by those who are aware of the problems but cannot voice them because of the power exercised to covert the conflict. However, Luke provides a better explanation of agenda setting by introducing the concept of latent conflict according to which people are manipulated by the dominant values and ideologies of the society where they live and consequently they dont understand that their interests are not taken in consideration. Indeed they are not even aware that such interests exist. Therefore in order to understand properly the problems and interests of the various groups in society, so that better public policies are designed, it is important to explore power in all its three dimensions. The paper will take as a case study the Party for Justice, Integration and Unity and explore how the institutional changes made possible to the group of ams to voice their rights.

Key words: public policy, covert conflict, group rights, non decision, power.

Bibliography Bachrach, Peter and Baratz, Morton.S. (1962) Two faces of power, The American Political Science Review 56 (4): 947-952. Bachrach, Peter and Baratz, Morton.S. (1963) Decisions and Nondecisions: An Analytical Framework, The American Political Science Review 57 (3): 632-642. Dahl, Rober (1957) The Concept of Power, Behavioral Science, July: 201-215. Dahl, Robert (1961) Who Governs?, New Haven: Yale University Press. Ham, Christopher and Hill, Michael (1993) The Policy Process in the Modern Capitalist State, (2nd ed.), London: Harvester Wheatsheaf. Hogwood, Brian W. and Gunn, Lewis A. (1984) Policy Analysis for the Real World, New York: Oxford University Press. Lukes, Steven (2005) Power A Radical View, (2nd ed.), UK: Palgrave. Parsons, Wayne (1995) Public Policy An introduction to the theory and practice of policy analysis, Aldershot: Eduard Elgar. Schattschneider, E.E. (1975) The Semisovereign People A realists View of Democracy in America, Hinsdale: The Dryden Press. The Central Elections Commission. Electoral Code. <http://www.cec.org.al/2004/eng/legjislacion/kodizgjedhor/Electoral%20Code.pdf> (20 Dec. 2009). The Central Elections Commission. Parliamentary Elections. <http://www.cec.org.al/2004/eng/zgjedhjeKuvend.htm> (20 Dec. 2009).