Nowadays, the legal order and the rule of law within the state system play a forefront role in the developed democracies. Undoubtedly, the notion of democratic state itself is closely associated with the high standards of legal system in it. However, in order to define what the high standards of legal system actually mean, it is important to answer the question what one would perceive as the real democracy. Although, we used to describe the democracy as the will or voice of majority in general terms, there are many more other factors of the modern democracies such as the separation of power, for instance. Based on this, we may assume that a constitution is a way of organizing all these into a single universal binding document to reach, and subsequently retain, those principles within a society. There is a broad concept that modern democracies cannot operate without a constitution to protect and implement democracy and legal rights of their citizens. On the opposite side, others insists that the constitution is absolutely useless since it is widely adopted in the numerous autocratic states, and used to retain the power and authority in hands of current government. Basically, those debates reflects the controversial nature of statecraft. My paperwork is intended to consider the role of the constitution and constitutional court in democratic society.
As R. Dahrendolf mentioned, constitutional democracy can be achieved in three stages:
1. The drafting and implementation of a new constitution that sets up the core values of statehood, fundamental rights, the main models of the rule of law, independent and unbiased carrying out of justice, and power separation. ‘The hour of the lawyers’, as he stated that.
2. The creation of a market e...
... middle of paper ...
...et of principles, methods, institutions, practices, and norms that functions to limit power. Without a deep culture of constitutionalism, formal democracy may become superficial and corrupt. With a constitution, a nation ties itself and its government to Odysseus’ mast in order not to be distracted by the calls and temptations of the sirens.”
Works Cited
1. H. Schwartz. The Struggle for Constitutional Justice in Post-Communist Europe. 2000.
2. H. Steinberger. Decisions of the Constitutional Court and Their Effects. – The Role of the Constitutional Court in the Consolidation of the Rule of Law. CoE proceedings. Bucharest 1994.
3. J. Habermas. Law as a Medium and as an Institution. – Dilemmas of Law in the Welfare State. 1988.
4. L. Hand. The Spirit of Liberty. – The Spirit of Liberty. Knopff 1952.
5. R. Dahrendorf. Reflections on the Revolution in Europe . 1990.
Chapter nine of Enduring Debate talks about how the American opinion poll plays role in constructing the government and how the media has affected the American politics. The public polling promotes democracy by allowing citizens to give their views concerning issues in government. The opinion polls also keep the government on toes. The main ideas are based on the founding of the American state and the constitution. Constitutionalism is based on the concept of the rule of law and limited authority. American constitutional principles can be traced back over 200 years ago. However, the practical meaning of constitutionalism is a recent and peculiar achievement. In the American history before the constitution was implemented, most governments were established by use of force, heredity, the need to stop anarchy and by the belief in God’s will. During out the history, this style of establishing authority has endorsed power to different leaders with different characteristics. Some were dictators, divine, kings, tyrants while others were bureaucratic. These people had full control of power. They exercised absolute authority. The main reason is that there were no instruments of power such as constitution that could limit and keep in check the powers of these forms of government.
In conclusion the power of being put into office differinates between these three documents With the power of the election of being placed into office by the people themselves, this can be seen in the Athenian constitution less but more in the roman and U.S. constitutions as these documents represent the symbolism of democracy at hand. But meanwhile their similarities can be found in the aspect of being found worth and right for the position the one running for office is seeking and that is something that can be understood by all that it’s never to be
The United States of America, United Kingdom, and Russia all have different ways of controlling their country. There are three models of democracy: parliamentary, presidential and semipresidential systems (O’Neil, 2007). A presidential system represents the minority of democratic systems around the world. Parliamentary systems can be found in a majority of democracies around globally (O’Neil, 2007). Lastly, there is a semipresidential system. The semipresidential system is a hybrid between parliamentary and presidential systems that has become more widespread over the past fifty years (O’Neil, 2007). Executive, legislative, and judicial institutions can vary dramatically across democracies in their construction and degree of power. We will revise these institutions, and examine the main differences on how they can be constructed in relation to one another. This paper will compare and contrast the primary structures of the United States’ presidential system and the British parliamentary system, and glance into the political system of Russia.
The Constitution of the United States is one of the most iconic and important documents of all time. However, when it was first generated, its writing and ratification caused some major concerns. The purpose of the Constitution was to address the great number of issues of a new nation. To be more specific, the Constitution was meant to resolve the political, economic, and social problems of the country. Nevertheless, the document spurred much discussion and concern over people’s rights, the economy, and political corruption.
Gunther, G. (1991). Constitutional Law. Twelfth Edition. New York: The Foundation Press, Inc. pp. 1154-1161.
In this excerpt from Democracy in America Alexis Tocqueville expresses his sentiments about the United States democratic government. Tocqueville believes the government's nature exists in the absolute supremacy of the majority, meaning that those citizens of the United States who are of legal age control legislation passed by the government. However, the power of the majority can exceed its limits. Tocqueville believed that the United States was a land of equality, liberty, and political wisdom. He considered it be a land where the government only served as the voice of the its citizens. He compares the government of the US to that of European systems. To him, European governments were still constricted by aristocratic privilege, the people had no hand in the formation of their government, let alone, there every day lives. He held up the American system as a successful model of what aristocratic European systems would inevitably become, systems of democracy and social equality. Although he held the American democratic system in high regards, he did have his concerns about the systems shortcomings. Tocqueville feared that the virtues he honored, such as creativity, freedom, civic participation, and taste, would be endangered by "the tyranny of the majority." In the United States the majority rules, but whose their to rule the majority. Tocqueville believed that the majority, with its unlimited power, would unavoidably turn into a tyranny. He felt that the moral beliefs of the majority would interfere with the quality of the elected legislators. The idea was that in a great number of men there was more intelligence, than in one individual, thus lacking quality in legislation. Another disadvantage of the majority was that the interests of the majority always were preferred to that of the minority. Therefore, giving the minority no chance to voice concerns.
The United States Constitution has received much criticism, both before and after its ratification in 1789. A wide array of thinkers from across the ages of the republic have offered criticisms about the nature, scope, and even fine details of the Constitution, sometimes providing solutions they think better themselves. Truly, however, two major schools of criticisms arise: those condemning the implications of having a document like the Constitution supreme over the nation, and those condemning specific parts and clauses of the document itself. Both criticisms based on the view that the Constitution is pro-slavery and those arguing against the nationalist nature of the document are unfounded.
Kanovitz, J. R. (2010). Constitutional Law (12th ed.). (E. R. Ebben, Ed.) New Providence, NJ,
Although the United States has been celebrated as a pioneering democracy, the nation’s constitution formulates a system of government that deviates from purely democratic principles. That is, when assessing the intentions of the framers, the Constitution’s calculated deviations from an absolute popular rule establishes a system of governance in which the security of American liberties is prioritized. Moreover, by examining the nuances of the Constitution from the framers’ lenses, the divergence from purely democratic ideals becomes all the more apparent. However, despite paving the road for democracies to come, emerging democracies around the world have broken away from the American system of governance outlined by the constitution through
The case of Francovich had a significant impact on the European Union (EU) law. If a conflict arises between the EU law and the national law, the EU law highly prevails. The European Union law is a framework of treaties and legislation, which have a direct or indirect effect on the laws of the member states which are bound to the European Union. Primary and Secondary laws are the two sources of the EU law. This essay will firstly analyse the main institutions of the European Union and define various legal terms. It will then move on, to discuss the case of Francovich and the importance it had for state liability. Furthermore, it will refer to subsequent cases which are linked with state liability and had an impact on the EU Law. Lastly, my own views about State Liability will be presented.
The Constitution, which was written in 1787, is a democratic plan of government. A democracy is a government in which the people either directly or through elected representatives are in control. . One reason the Constitution is democratic is that it gives the people the rights of expression in the Bill of Rights. Another reason the Constitution is democratic is because overtime while it was being amended, there were more democratic ideas added to it, such as the abolition of slavery, voting rights, and the changes of the election of Senators. The last reason is that all elected terms have intervals in which the person is either reelected or a new person is elected for the position. Since there are so many democratic elements in the Constitution, it makes it a democratic plan of government.
Kanovitz, J. R. (2010). Constitutional Law (12th ed.). (E. R. Ebben, Ed.) New Providence, NJ, U.S.A.: Matthew Bender & Company, Inc., LexisNexis Gorup.
The scenes in creation being intellectual, the put together of constitutional democracy was very empirical. The Constitutional Convention was convened to formulate the constitution. What had to be clear was that the only way to assure a functioning constitutional democracy was the public's discussion. In philadelphia the delegates compromised. The outcome was to integrate states with large populations and states with small populations with a bicameral legislative branch. Also compromises that guaranteed say from both slave owning states and non-slave states could be listened to. The Bill of Rights
The United States Constitution was written up by delegates at the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, when many of the country 's leaders realized that the Articles of Confederation, the set of laws that the country had been following up until that point, were creating more problems than solutions. Once it was written, and approved and signed by delegates in 1787, it was sent to the 13 states for ratification. But many of the states saw flaws in the document, and refused to agree to it until changes were made. Both the writers of the Constitution and it 's critics were invaluable to the shaping of the final document. A few of the major flaws pointed out by critics were the lack of a Bill of Rights, the unlikelihood of one government ruling over such a widespread nation while remaining democratic, and doubt that such varied people would be able to exist under the same government without constant turmoil. The supporters of
Democracy is designed to concentrate the power of government in the hands of the people and protect against autocracy and oligarchy. It presupposes societies need a modicum of rule, as they cannot function if there is anarchy. In this way, democracy is a virtue, or a mean between two vices. However, democracy has a sliding scale, the metric of which is the citizens who rule it. Citizens ultimately dictate the laws to be agreed upon, codified and enacted. These laws not only govern behavior and maintain order, but also provide citizens with a mechanism to seek relief through the courts should they be aggrieved.