Abstract
The paper discusses the possibilities and limits of the empirical research of the theory of deliberative democracy on the example of the advisory bodies and consultative procedures through which governments consult their decisions with experts and the public. Theory of deliberative democracy follows the classic normative political theory, especially Jürgen Habermas ("ideal speech situation") and John Rawls ("overlapping consensus") and includes several different theories, which have in common the interest in the communication.
Deliberative democracy puts the importance on the process of formation and transformation of preferences through the dialog of informed and competent actors, those who are concerned a decision (or their representatives), over the decision making by aggregating preferences. At the end of the last century deliberative theory has undergone several significant turns (Dryzek 2010).
One of them is the empirical turn, which range from testing deliberative theory as a whole (transformation of deliberative theory to the form of testable hypotheses), to studies that on the bases of the study of specific situation propose reformulation of some specific theoretical premises. The paper discusses these approaches particularly in relation to the possibilities of answering the questions related to the practical processes of deliberation and participation.