Acceso usuarios
This article analyses parliamentary practices in conducting Post-Legislative Scrutiny (PLS) in Germany, Italy, France, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom against four categories of parliamentary approach in PLS. Parliaments as passive scrutinisers have few parliamentary structures, capacity and procedures for PLS and no parliamentary PLS reports. Parliaments as informal scrutinisers have few parliamentary structures and procedures but are stronger in terms of own parliamentary outputs on PLS. Parliaments as formal scrutinisers have more developed structures and procedures on PLS but remain weak in terms of outputs and follow up. Parliaments as independent scrutinisers are strong in terms of structures and procedures as well as in terms of reports and follow up. The case-studies indicate that the federal parliament of Germany is a passive scrutiniser in PLS, the parliament of Italy an informal scrutiniser, the parliaments of Sweden and France formal scrutinisers, and the UK Westminster and Swiss parliaments independent scrutinisers.
