Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Principles of federalism
Principles of federalism
Principles of federalism
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
It is important to keep in mind that a term constitutional state theoretically differs from the constitutional democracy, as it does on practice. Any form of government together with electorate may establish a constitution. The bright example of that is totalitarian communism and its formal progressive constitution. There are many more other autocratic regimes around that match those criteria. In simple terms, even if such system applies the laws of constitution and follow all the prescribed rules with the support of the state apparatus and courts, it is only a rule-of-law state or rechtsstaat. It is called a dictatorship, and neither constitutional democracy nor democratic state with the rule of law at the top.
One cannot deny that power can be limited only by another equal power. In other words, the main factor of stability and internal balance is division of power and mutual control under a law approved by the nation – constitution. Also, it is necessary to pay attention to the fact that there have not been any major wars for last 60-70 years in Europe, which certainly owes itself to deep rooting of constitutionalism after WWII. It would be correct to mention the preventive effect of constitutionalism in this context as well as strong constitutional court. As Helmut Steinberger said: “… with their reputation, possibilities, and competence they in themselves have a limiting effect on any attempts to act in a manner contrary to the constitution and to restrict rights and freedoms.”
Actually, democracy is deemed to be a difficult form of government regardless if it is favourable circumstances or not. It seems to be all the more difficult when society’s economic environment is weak, civil society is still developing, and finally ...
... middle of paper ...
...ducts of these disorders. The courts primary purpose is to repress totalitarianism by supporting democracy, though constitutional values are greatly violated. The most of the time constitutional values are violated by the legislature and executive powers itself. To minimize the violations, constitutional jurisdiction was established which secures democratic constitutional stability and eliminates suppression of democratic values.
Certainly one may think that the constitution and constitutional courts are the “weapons” in hands of power to set down mutual interests and relations. However, constitutional law, establishing a framework for the society and its members, belongs to every and each one, who can count on it either it is unwritten or written.
Works Cited
6. R. Maruste. The role of the constitutional court in democratic society. JURIDICA INTERNATIONAL. 2007.
Gunther, G. (1991). Constitutional Law. Twelfth Edition. New York: The Foundation Press, Inc. pp. 1154-1161.
On the surface, it seems that determining how much power courts have would be a simple task. However, history has proven this to be false. The courts have been viewed in many different ways through out the history of our country. There are three common views of court power that are important for modern scholars of the court system. Those who believe courts have little power to cause social change are said to adhere to the Constrained Court view. Those who believe courts have a great deal of power to cause social change are said to adhere to the Dynamic Court view. The final, and youngest, take on court power combines aspects of the Constrained and Dynamic views into what I shall call the Condition Dependent Court view of power. This view sees that there are certain conditions which allow the court to cause social change.
The Constitution was the first stepping stone in the national sovereignty of the United States. It is the supreme law that has been valued and upheld since its ratification in 1787. It holds the rights and freedoms of all Americans and gives structure to the government. To uphold this structure, the judiciary branch was established, alongside the legislative and executive, by the Constitution. However, the judicial branch did not always have the power and influence it does today. Because of the 4th Chief Justice, John Marshall, the Supreme Court eventually gained the power and ability to become coequal to the legislative and executive branches. John Marshall’s establishment of Judicial Review in the Supreme Court and his strong federalists
In order to secure the rights of everyone, the system of checks and balances is necessary. It is not only for protection from the oppression of society’s rulers but also the injustice of one fraction of society to another. If the governed suspects that the legislative has abused its authority, such as using its powers for personal gains, then by the system of checks and balances, the people are allowed to allocate the legislative into new hands. This is a positive aspect of the constitution because it gives power to the people and not just those in the government. However, not all aspects of the system of checks and balances makes the constitution positive.
The legislative, executive, and judicial branches represent the constitutional infrastructure foreseen by the Founding Fathers for our nation 's governing body. Together, they work to maintain a system of lawmaking and administration based on checks and balances, and separation of powers intended to make certain that no individual or embodiment of government ever becomes too controlling. America is governed by a democratic government or a democracy which is a government by the people, in which the power is established in the people themselves. The people then elect representatives who carry out their power in a free electoral system. The United States government’s basic claim is to serve the people and only through a combined effort can we
all judiciary cases in which any fact is involved,) or may they act by representatives, freely and
Unlike many other foundational documents written by other counties, the US Constitution has held strong from the start. The Constitution is at the center of our everyday lives and is the reason we are able to live with the freedom and security that we do. As the Constitutions author, contents, and effect on the US are evaluated it is very clear why America holds so strongly to the foundation the Constitution set in place.
In his early work, Wilson view constitution as a document whose meaning persists over time. But later, Wilson’s main argument and analysis in Constitutional Government was his definition of the term “constitution.” He started by defining “constitutional government” as he said: “A constitutional government is one whose powers have been adapted to the interests of the people and to the maintenance of individual liberty” (p. 2). As a nation, government and individual are the ultimate test of its constitutional character; therefore, Wilson view the history of constitutional government in the modern world as the history of political liberty, which consists in the best practicable adjustment between the powers of the government. Wilson saw a government as a living thing not a machine; therefore, the structure of the government established by the Constitution was defective, because the separation of powers was based more on theory than practice. As he argued in the Constitutional Government, “ The makers of the Constitution constructed the f...
The new Constitution of the United States, ratified in 1789 by James Madison, created an entirely new system within America, which had never been attempted before. The first consideration to make is the new institutions created by the Constitution. Before its adoption, America was operating under the Articles of Confederation This document offered us a set of universal values out of which laws and codes have emerged and have been carried out . As such, it symbolizes the essence of constitutionality—that government must be restrained by the rule of law. The constitution has succeed in its ability to encourage government by wise forward statesman, In addition the creation of the three branches has discourages the negative effect of factions and has restrain government from taking more power than entrusted to it, Additionally it has restrains itself particular from using that power to reduce individual liberty.
One of the most unique and vital features of the American government is the establishment of a constitution. This constitution is a result of the fear of tyranny and the idea of rights that are unable to be infringed upon. The Constitution of America became the base of all law and decisions made in court. It gives us the ability to propose and pass laws, who can sit in power, what states can and can’t do under the supremacy clause, disburse funds, etc. In order to truly understand how the constitution can be implicated and interpreted, it is important to understand where it came from, and what Article One of the constitution states about governmental organization, and the Legislative branch.
Are there any resolutions for conflicting constitutional amendments? In recent years, the first and fourteenth amendments of the United States constitution has came into conflict over the nature and purpose of the aforementioned amendments. In other words, the intentions of the first amendment is in conflict with the intentions of the fourteenth amendment, notwithstanding the first and fourteenth amendments purposes are the same, to provide rights for the People in order to live a peaceful life within our society. The first amendment of the US constitution guarantees the People the right to live in a society without laws establishing a state mandated religion, and without laws prohibiting the free exercise of any chosen
In comparing the average citizen in a democratic nation, say the United States, to that of a non-democratic nation, for instance Egypt, it will be found that the citizen in the democratic nation is generally better off – free of persecution, free from fear of the authorities, and free to express his opinions on governmental matters. And while national conflicts occur everywhere, incidents like violent revolts have shown to be more prevalent in nations where citizens are not allowed to choose who governs them. It is slightly paradoxical that democracy, so inherently flawed in theory, can lead to such successful outcomes in practice. The question, then, becomes: “If democracy has so many weaknesses, why does it work?”
Throughout history different types of instrumental regimes have been in tact so civilizations remained structured and cohesive. As humanity advanced, governments obligingly followed. Although there have been hiccups from the ancient times to modern day, one type of government, democracy, has proven to be the most effective and adaptive. As quoted by Winston Churchill, democracy is the best form of government that has existed. This is true because the heart of democracy is reliant, dependent, and thrives on the populaces desires; which gives them the ability for maintaining the right to choose, over time it adjusts and fixes itself to engulf the prominent troubling issues, and people have the right of electing the person they deem appropriate and can denounce them once they no longer appease them. In this paper, the benefits of democracy are outlined, compared to autocratic communism, and finally the flaws of democracy are illustrated.
The preamble to the United States Constitution is an introductory statement of the Constitution's basic rules and principle's. The preamble is a summary of fundamental purposes written in the Constitution. The constitution opens on the preamble because it is a summary of all of the needs of the Constitution. The preamble is important because it is a preface of the Constitution. If you didn't want to read all of the constitution you could read the preamble instead.
There have been enormous efforts to spread democracy as a political system throughout the world by the developed democratic countries and the international development organizations including the World Bank. By the late 1990s the United States alone spent over a half billion dollars to promote democratic expansion throughout the world (Diamond, 2003). These were done considering that the democratic system leads towards development. As a result in the late 20th century we saw a huge political transformation towards democracy. During the last few decades a huge number of countries adopted democracy as their political system. However, it retain a big question how far democracy is successful in bringing development of a country? At this stage, some people also criticizes the effort of democratization arguing that it is done without considering the context of a country, sometimes democracy is not ideal for all countries and it is an effort to extinct diversity of political system. In studying the literature regarding the debate, we found a paradoxical relationship between democracy and development. Some argue that democracy has failed to ensure expected outcomes in terms of development. While others confronted that democracy has a considerable impact on development. Another group of people argue that form of political system actually does not have any impact on development process. On the verge of these debates, some development institutions and academics throw light on why democracy is not working properly, and what measure should be taken to make it more successful in bringing effective development of developing countries. Consequently, this writing is an effort of revisiting the different views about impact of democra...