Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below
Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.
Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/
Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation
Federal Agency for Education State educational institution of higher professional education
Moscow State Industrial University
Branch of the State Educational Institution MGIU in Sergiev Posad Moscow Region
Department of Civil Law Disciplines and Law Enforcement Agencies
Course work
in the discipline "Theory of State and Law"
on the topic: “Parliamentary monarchy”
Sergiev Posad
Introduction
1.2 Types of monarchy
Conclusion
Bibliography
Introduction
The study of the form of government of the state as one of the elements of the form of the state is important, as it allows us to understand in more detail the processes occurring in the state, to understand the general patterns of the emergence and development of various social phenomena.
In legal literature, the form of government is understood as an element of the form of the state that characterizes the organization of the supreme state power, the order of formation of its bodies and their relationship with the population. Depending on the position of the head of state, monarchies and republics are distinguished.
Monarchy (from the Greek - unity of power) is a form of government in which power is fully or partially concentrated in the hands of a single head - a monarch (king, czar, shah, emperor, etc.)
The purpose of the course work is to reveal the topic being studied, namely “Parliamentary Monarchy”, since this form of government exists in most highly developed and modern states.
Interest in studying the problems of monarchical statehood is supported by a number of the following circumstances:
A parliamentary monarchy is a constitutional monarchy in which the monarch performs his functions purely nominally. In a parliamentary monarchy, the government is responsible to parliament, which has formal supremacy among other organs of the state.
Parliamentary monarchies are much more common in the modern world compared to absolute and dualistic ones. Among monarchies they are the overwhelming majority. These are Great Britain, Japan, Canada, Spain, Australia, Sweden, New Zealand, Norway, Denmark, the Netherlands, Belgium, Thailand, Malaysia, Luxembourg, etc.
To achieve this goal, the following tasks are set in the work:
Reveal the essence of the parliamentary monarchy;
Identify the signs of a parliamentary monarchy;
Describe the modern parliamentary monarchy using the example of Great Britain.
Studying government in a parliamentary monarchy allows us to understand how states with this form of government create higher authorities states; what principle underlies the relationship between higher and other government bodies; how the relationship is built between the population of the state and the supreme state power; to what extent the organization of the highest bodies of the state makes it possible to ensure the rights and freedoms of the citizen.
parliamentary monarchy power government
I. CONCEPT AND FORMS OF STATE GOVERNMENT
1.1 Concept and signs of monarchy
The form of government is considered as the organization of the state, which includes the order of formation of supreme and local government bodies and the order of relationships between them. Forms of government vary greatly depending on whether power is exercised by one person or vested in a collective elected body. In the first case, there is a monarchical form of government. In the second - Republican.
Under a monarchical form of government, the source of state power, according to current laws, is the monarch. In a republican system, it is an elected state body.
The main difference between a monarchy and a republic is this: the monarchical form of the state means that power in the state belongs to the highest holder of state power on the basis of his own right.
In a monarchy, the monarch has the final decision on all major government acts. The people here do not have any power, or have it to a very small extent. In a monarchy, the people are either completely removed from government or participate in it only to a limited extent. The situation is different in the republic. By republic we mean a form of state where power belongs to the people themselves and only to them. Here the people themselves, directly or through representatives elected by them, govern the state and decide all the most important state affairs.
This is the main difference between monarchical and republican states.
Monarchy (from the gr. autocracy) is a state in which the supreme power in the country is concentrated (in whole or in part) in the hands of the sole head of state. The post of monarch is usually inherited from father to eldest son, less often to a daughter or collateral relative, and no authority has the right to influence this process.
The main features of the classical monarchical form of government are:
The existence of a single head of state who exercises his power for life (king, king, emperor, shah)
Hereditary (according to the law on succession to the throne) order of succession of supreme power;
The monarch personifies the unity of the nation, the historical continuity of tradition, and represents the state in the international arena;
Legal immunity and independence of the monarch, which is emphasized by the institution of countersignature.
1.2 Types of monarchy
Numerous and very weighty reasons for the division of monarchies are given by life itself. In relation, for example, to the monarchy, the main criteria for its classification into various varieties can be the different degrees of concentration of power in the hands of one person - the monarch, the presence or absence of constitutional acts that have a restraining influence on the manifestation of monarchical power, the functioning in the country along with monarchical institutions of republican institutions in the form of parliament or other representative bodies.
In turn, monarchies are divided into absolute and limited. In absolute monarchies, all the fullness of state power - legislative, executive and judicial - is concentrated in the hands of the monarch (an example of such a monarchy is Russia in the 17th and 18th centuries, France before the revolution of 1789, etc.). However, it should be noted that absolute monarchies are a historically limited category. In an absolutist monarchy there is no separation of powers; the monarch (the real head of state) concentrates in his hands all the highest powers of state power. He is the only or supreme legislator - only by his will can normative provisions acquire the force of law. He is the supreme judge, justice is administered in his name, and he has the right to pardon. He appoints and removes executive officials, and the government is responsible to him. An absolute monarch is subject to laws to the extent that he wishes to be subject to them. Legality, the power of laws, is a phenomenon characteristic of a republic; An absolutist monarchy is characterized by the rule of people - good and evil monarchs, just or unjust, “formidable” and “quiet,” etc.
As noted above, in absolute monarchies not only the population of the country, but also not a single body of the state, even the highest, has the right to change the choice of the head of state. Speaking about the constitutional consolidation of the form of government, it should be noted that the absolute power of the monarch rests solely on force and therefore cannot be subjected to any legal regulation, since any attempt to rely on the law means limiting power, introducing it into a certain framework. Therefore, most monarchies adopted the theory of the divine origin of state power.
Currently, there are only 6 states left in the world whose form of government can be called an absolute monarchy without any convention - these are Brunei, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Qatar, Swaziland, and the Vatican. In them, power rests undividedly with the monarch.
In limited monarchies, the power of the monarch is limited by an elected body - parliament - or a special legal act - the constitution. In most limited monarchies, there is a combination of both ways of limiting the power of the monarch - the constitution and parliament. But, for example, Great Britain has a parliament and does not have a constitution in its traditional form - in the form of a single written document. Therefore, monarchies limited in this way are usually called parliamentary.
There are many examples of such monarchies European states- in addition to the above-mentioned Great Britain, also Belgium, Denmark, the Netherlands, etc. On the one hand, the preservation of the monarchy in these states is a tribute to tradition, since the monarch in them performs purely nominal, representative functions, and power in the country belongs to an elected body - the parliament . On the other hand, maintaining the post of head of state in the person of the monarch is a symbol of the stability of these states, their respect for the historical past and their own statehood.
In a number of countries in Asia and Africa, limited monarchies operate in the form of dual monarchies (for example, in Morocco, Jordan, Kuwait, etc.). Their difference from parliamentary ones is that greater powers in the sphere of state power are concentrated in the hands of the monarch. He possesses not only all the executive power, but also a significant part of the legislative power, expressed in the right to impose an absolute veto on laws adopted by parliament. This act does not allow the law to come into force, but the monarch in a dualistic monarchy has the unlimited right to issue decrees that replace laws or have even greater normative force in comparison with them.
In dualist monarchies, the government is formed independently of the party composition in parliament and does not bear parliamentary responsibility. In this form of government, power is dual (dualistic) in nature. It is legally and actually divided between the government, formed by and responsible to the monarch, and parliament. The hereditary monarch expresses the interests of the feudal class, while parliament represents the interests of the bourgeois class. The existence of a dualistic monarchy testifies to the weakness of the bourgeoisie in a given country, to its forced division of state power with the feudal lords. Dualistic monarchy existed in Kaiser Germany (1871-1918), in Ethiopia, Iran and other countries. Currently, this form of government is practically becoming obsolete.
II. ESSENCE OF PARLIAMENTARY MONARCHY
2.1 General concept parliamentary monarchy
A parliamentary monarchy is a type of constitutional monarchy in which the monarch has no power and performs only a representative function. In a parliamentary monarchy, the government is responsible to parliament, which has more power than other government bodies (although this may vary from country to country).
But at the same time, the category of monarchies includes not only states in which real power belongs to the monarch, separated from his subjects, but also nominal monarchies in which the monarch has no real power; the latter are, as a rule, democratic states, which, in essence, are republics.
A parliamentary monarchy is a different matter. Here the monarch is the nominal head of state, that is, an official who does not have the real powers of any branch of government. “On behalf of” or “on behalf of” the monarch, the actual powers of the highest bodies of legislative and executive power are exercised by the parliament and the government formed by it. The Constitution formally places a wide range of issues within the competence of the nominal monarch, but the monarch does not have the right to regulate them independently. In a parliamentary monarchy, there is the institution of countersignature, meaning that the monarch's signature is valid only if it is signed by the prime minister or other competent member of the government.
In parliamentary monarchies, which are the most common form of monarchy today, the government is formed by the party that receives the majority of votes in Parliament during the general election, or the parties that together have a majority of votes in it. The leader of the party with the majority of parliamentary seats becomes the head of government. A parliamentary monarchy is distinguished by the fact that the status of the monarch is formally and actually limited in all areas of the exercise of state power. The power of the monarch is very limited in all spheres of state life and activity, and above all in the legislative and executive. Moreover, this restriction is not of a formal legal nature, but of a factual nature. Legislative power lies entirely with parliament. Executive - to the government, which is responsible for its activities to parliament. The ruling strata view the constitutional monarchy as a kind of reserve means of influencing other segments of the population, as an additional means of protecting their interests in the event of extreme aggravation of social-class conflicts. Parliamentary monarchies in scientific literature often called constitutional monarchies.
In a constitutional monarchy, laws are passed by parliament and approved by the monarch. However, this prerogative of the monarch, like most of his other powers, is of a formal nature. Due to the current political practice and constitutional customs, the monarch, as a rule, does not refuse to sign bills passed by parliament.
The government, according to constitutional provisions, is responsible not to the monarch, but to parliament. The existence of a parliamentary monarchy is evidence of the complete victory of the bourgeoisie over the feudal lords in a given country. Currently, parliamentary monarchies exist in Great Britain, Belgium, Holland, Denmark, Sweden, Japan, Australia, Spain, Norway and a number of other highly industrialized capitalist countries.
In a monarchy, parliamentary power is also divided between the monarch and the people's representatives. But whereas in a constitutional monarchy the power of the monarch is much more extensive than the rights of parliament, here, on the contrary, the power of popular representation is both factually and, perhaps, legally, more extensive than the power of the monarch. The well-known saying: “The king reigns, but does not rule” is quite applicable to a parliamentary monarchy. In it, the parliament is in charge of the country's destinies. Management is also concentrated predominantly in the hands of the latter. This is the general and main difference between parliamentary monarchy and other types of the latter.
This common feature manifests itself primarily in the fact that in a parliamentary monarchy, ministers are actually appointed by the people's representation itself, represented by the majority of parliament.
The king's approval is required only as a mere formality. This fact is very important. It usually happens like this. The Chamber of Deputies is divided into parties. The party that has the majority of MPs usually nominates a fellow member as chief minister. The king invites this intended candidate to accept the post of chief minister and form the entire cabinet of ministers, that is, to invite as the remaining ministers those persons, usually from the same party of the parliamentary majority, whom the chief minister wishes. Those invited, once they have accepted the ministerial portfolios offered to them, become ministers and together form a single, coordinated cabinet of ministers responsible to the people. This cabinet, composed of members of the parliamentary majority, is, together with parliament, the actual government of the country. The King only approves for the sake of form what is being done by these ministers. From what has been said it is clear that the state of affairs here is different than in a constitutional monarchy. There, ministers are arbitrarily appointed by the monarch, without asking the consent of the people's representatives; here the ministers are determined by parliament itself from those parties that constitute the majority in parliament. In a constitutional monarchy they are responsible to the monarch, in a parliamentary monarchy they are responsible to parliament. In the first, the dismissal of ministers depends solely on the monarch, in the parliamentary - on popular representation. The responsibility of ministers here is twofold. First of all, every minister is subject to trial for some crime. But besides this general responsibility, which also exists in a constitutional monarchy, there is another, political responsibility of ministers as a whole. It consists in the fact that the entire cabinet of ministers collectively, as one whole, is responsible to parliament for the appropriateness of the measures of each individual minister. Under this form of government, parliament usually has the right to interrogate the government. Ministers are required to respond to every request. If the government's response is considered unsatisfactory by parliament, the ministry must immediately resign. The same thing happens when the Chamber of Deputies rejects a bill proposed by the Cabinet of Ministers. In short, every ministry in a parliamentary monarchy remains in power only as long as it has a majority of the Chamber of Deputies behind it. As soon as he does not have this majority, which is expressed in the form of the majority of the chamber recognizing one or another government measure as inappropriate, or in the form of rejecting a ministerial bill, or in the form of an expression of no confidence in the ministry by the chamber, the entire cabinet is obliged to resign and make way for a new ministry constituted again from members of the majority of the House and relying on the support of this majority.
This is the essence of the political responsibility of ministers and the system of appointing and dismissing them in a parliamentary monarchy. As we can see, the role of the king here is insignificant. It is not the king who actually appoints and dismisses ministers, but the people's representatives. This order was wittily expressed by the father of the current king of Belgium in his conversation with Emperor Alexander III.
They say that the latter asked the Belgian king to show him what the positive aspects of parliamentarism were. The Belgian king answered this question briefly: “Parliamentarism is good because when my minister has a majority in parliament, I go for a quiet walk. If he doesn’t have this majority, I send him for a walk, that is, he resigns.” This is the main difference between a parliamentary monarchy and a constitutional one.
The parliament here not only legislates, but also governs the country, first of all, because it itself determines the composition of ministers and the line of their policies, and secondly, it is entirely in charge of all other branches of government, from financial issues to issues of war and peace. Without his participation, and even more so against his will, the king cannot commit any important state act. Therefore, the saying of one is not far from the truth English writer, which reads: “Parliament can do everything. He cannot only turn a man into a woman and a woman into a man.”
From what has been said, the advantage of a parliamentary monarchy over a constitutional one is clear. In the first, the people, represented by their representatives, have incomparably more power than in the second. In the first, those abuses of the monarch and his government that are common in a constitutional monarchy are impossible. Here, whenever the will of the king diverges from the will of parliament, the latter has in his hands a number of measures by which he can achieve the fulfillment of his desire.
Is it any wonder, therefore, that a number of states, having moved from an unlimited monarchy to a constitutional monarchy, do not stop at the latter, but move on to a parliamentary monarchy as a more in better shape government system. Currently, the best example of a parliamentary monarchy is England. In this country, through gradual development, the described features of parliamentarism were established.
Having pointed out in the previous paragraph the enormous power of parliament in such a state, one cannot help but emphasize, on the other hand, that the king still continues to retain some importance here. Let us note from his rights two rights that are often found in a parliamentary monarchy. One of them is the king’s right to dissolve parliament and call new elections. In cases where the king and his ministers assume that their policy, despite the disapproval of parliament, is not at odds with the opinion of the people themselves, the king can dissolve parliament and call new elections. This dissolution represents, as it were, a new poll of the country: if the latter supports the opinion of the dissolved parliament, it again elects the same deputies, but if the country agrees with the opinion of the king, it will elect as deputies new persons who are aligned with the king’s policies. Such is the right of the monarch and such is its social significance.
The second power of the king, often found in a constitutional, less often in a parliamentary monarchy, is his right to impose his ban (veto) on a particular bill of the chamber. In order for any demand of the people's representatives to become law, the consent of the monarch is legally required. But if the monarch had the right to defend bills without restriction, no provision of parliament could be enforced. To prevent this from happening, life has established a rule according to which the monarch can veto (ban, disagree) a particular bill only a limited number of times, for example, from one to three times. If, say, the Chamber of Deputies approves a project, then the king can stop it once. But if the chamber approves it again a second time, it can no longer be stopped by the king. Whether the latter agrees or not, the bill still becomes law.
This rule is, of course, very important. If it were not for him, the monarch would still be able to slow down all the work of the people's representatives. To prevent this from happening, life introduced such restrictions.
From what has been said it is clear that best view The monarchical form of government is the so-called parliamentary monarchy.
2.2 Parliamentary monarchy in Great Britain
Great Britain is a parliamentary monarchy headed by the queen. The legislative body is a bicameral parliament (Monarch + House of Commons and House of Lords - the so-called King (Queen) in Parliament system). Parliament is the highest authority throughout the territory, despite the presence in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland own management administrative structures. The government is headed by the monarch, and is directly administered by the prime minister, appointed by the monarch, who is thus the Chairman of His (Her) Majesty's Government.
A distinctive characteristic is the absence of any single document that could be called the fundamental law of the country; there is no written Constitution, moreover, there is not even an exact list of documents that would relate to the Constitution. Instead of the Constitution, there is the Magna Carta, created in the Middle Ages and defining the rights of the inhabitants of the country. The relationship between the people and the government is regulated by statutes, unwritten laws and conventions.
British Constitution - An unwritten Constitution, the act of which was officially proclaimed as fundamental law, does not exist in Great Britain. The unwritten Constitution of Great Britain consists of three categories:
1. norms of statutory law;
2. norms of case law (case law);
3. norms, which are nothing more than constitutional customs.
The British state, officially called the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, is a unitary state. This state includes 4 historical and geographical regions that have some peculiarities in the management system - England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.
The monarch in Great Britain is the Queen (King) - the head of state and formally the source of sovereign power.
Succession to the throne, according to the Act of 1701, is determined according to the Castilian system, according to which the throne is transferred to the eldest son of the deceased or abdicated monarch, and in the absence of sons - eldest daughter. So in 1952, the current Queen Elizabeth II, who belongs to the Windsor dynasty, reigned: her father George VI had no sons. In this case, the monarch must be a Protestant and cannot be married to a Catholic. He has the right to abdicate the throne in favor of his close relative, in which case his direct descendants lose the right to inherit the throne. This happened to Edward VII, who in 1936, in order to marry an American Catholic woman, abdicated the throne in favor of his brother, who became King George VI. His daughter is the reigning Queen. She is the 42nd English monarch and 6th Queen.
The monarch can change the order of succession to the throne and determine which of his descendants will inherit the throne. In particular, Elizabeth II, due to the unsuccessful family life his eldest son - the first heir to the throne - is thinking about appointing his eldest grandson or youngest son as such.
The first heir to the throne is the eldest son of the reigning monarch. He bears the title Prince of Wales. There is also a possible heir (heiress), for example, the youngest (next in age to the first heir) son or eldest (only) daughter of the monarch.
The Queen's Consort is not a monarch. As Prince Consort, he is given the title Prince of Edinburgh. The King's wife is called the queen, but does not have the powers of the monarch.
In British official documents and doctrinal writings, the institution of the monarch is often referred to by the term "Crown".
The powers of the monarch can be divided into two groups: prerogative and statutory. Most powers exist in the form of a prerogative of the Crown, that is, its innate exclusive rights, not derived from the decisions of Parliament. Royal prerogative can be divided into personal and political.
Personal prerogative covers the right to the attributes of royal power: crown, mantle, throne, scepter and orb, a title that lists the monarch's possessions and indicates the divine origin of his power. The official title of the Queen of Great Britain is: “Her Majesty, by the grace of God, Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and her other subject states and territories, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith.” The personal prerogative also includes the right to the royal court and the civil list (in 1995, payments for it amounted to 7.9 million pounds sterling). Previously, personal prerogative included tax exemption, but in the early 90s. Elizabeth II voluntarily responded to this. She also refused special planes and now uses regular ones.
In connection with political prerogative, it should be noted that the monarch is an integral part of parliament along with both houses. However, the queen cannot attend chamber meetings without a special invitation. The only exception arising from the royal prerogative is that it is the queen who opens the next session of parliament every autumn, delivering a speech from the throne prepared by the government at a joint meeting of the chambers. It sets out the next government program.
The prerogative also includes the queen's right to dissolve the House of Commons.
Formally, the monarch has very extensive powers, but in fact his personal power is limited, and not so much by legislative acts as by case law and constitutional customs. Each bill (law), after its consideration in the chambers of parliament is completed, is submitted to the monarch for signature. But last case The refusal of royal assent to the bill took place in 1707. Essentially, since that time, a custom has developed obliging the monarch to sign all bills received by him.
The king (queen) convenes and dissolves parliament, appoints and dismisses ministers and other senior officials, is the head of the executive branch, concludes and ratifies international treaties, exercises the right of pardon, etc. The King is also the head of state of the former British Dominions of Canada, Australia and New Zealand.
However, at his own discretion, the monarch cannot exercise either statutory or prerogative powers. This does not mean that the queen does not play any role in the exercise of state power. Although she herself decides almost no state affairs, she can influence the decisions made by officials of the British state. Nowadays, government is carried out on behalf of the Queen by Her Majesty's Government. There is a rule in UK case law that “the king cannot be wrong.” In practice, this means that the monarch is not responsible for acts issued on his behalf - the ministers who signed them are considered responsible. The Queen exercises her powers only on the “advice” (proposal) of the relevant ministers. She cannot even attend cabinet meetings, but receives regular information about the decisions it makes.
The Queen is assisted by the Privy Council, with which she consults. Cabinet - appeared at the end of the 17th century. as a committee of the monarch's Privy Council. The Privy Council consists of members of the royal family, archbishops, ministers and honorary members, numbering over 420 people. IN in full force it meets on especially solemn occasions, and in general its quorum is three members. Formally existing as an advisory body under the monarch, the Privy Council is convened for meetings by decision of the Queen, most often in cases where she adopts acts of legal significance: proclamations in the Council and orders in the Council. Proclamations are adopted on issues of declaring war and concluding peace, convening parliament, declaring a break in its work and dissolving the House of Commons. On other issues, orders are issued in the Council, which are divided by doctrine into legislative, executive and judicial.
The central executive power in Great Britain is represented by a body consisting of ministers - Her Majesty's Government, headed by the Prime Minister. Actually main role The government and the prime minister play a role in governing the state.
Certain issues of the organization and activities of the government are regulated by the following main regulations: Acts on Ministers of the Crown of 1937, 1934, 1975; Ministerial Conveyance Acts 1946, Commons Disqualification Acts 1957, 1975; Public Records Act of 1967; Ministerial Salaries Act 1972
The procedure for forming a government is based mainly on constitutional agreements. A new government is formed after each parliamentary election. The Queen appoints as Prime Minister the leader of the party that receives an absolute majority of seats in the House of Commons. Since each party has a pre-selected leader, the queen cannot appoint anyone else to this post. If none of the parties receives an absolute majority, the queen consults with the leaders of the pariahs and, after listening to their advice and proposals, makes decisions herself. After the appointment of the Prime Minister, the Queen, on his proposal, appoints the remaining members of the cabinet and the entire government.
If the Prime Minister resigns between parliamentary elections, his successor is appointed by the Queen after the party with a majority in the House of Commons elects a new official leader. The new prime minister, even if he belongs to the same party as his predecessor, forms a new cabinet. Defeat in the elections entails the collective resignation of the government. As for the royal prerogative to dismiss the prime minister, monarchs have not used it since 1783.
The office of prime minister arose as a result of a constitutional agreement. Until now, its powers and actual role are determined by unwritten law and also depend on political circumstances.
By custom, the Prime Minister bears the title of First Lord of the Treasury and, since 1968, has held the position of Minister for the Civil Service. In exceptional cases, the prime minister is entrusted with direct leadership of any major ministry. For example, Harold Wilson headed the Department of Economic Affairs from 1967 to 1968, jointly with the corresponding Secretary of State.
The Prime Minister plays a leading role in the cabinet and government, directing their activities, as well as leading the main ministries and central departments. He is the queen's chief adviser, presents her speech from the throne, which serves as the government's program, for reading in parliament, and performs representative functions in international relations. The Prime Minister establishes the range of issues to be considered by the cabinet and the government, determines their overall political strategy, directs the work of committees, makes recommendations to the monarch regarding the composition of the cabinet, decides on the dismissal of ministers and the resignation of the government, and directs the law-making activities of the cabinet. Modern Great Britain is characterized by an increasing role of the prime minister in political decision-making and a limitation of collegial forms of cabinet activity. Of course, it is recognized that he has the right to interfere in any area of government. Practice shows that the prime minister plays a leading role, primarily in the field of foreign relations, economic policy and in other most important spheres of public life.
The prime minister exercises a number of prerogatives of the monarch on his behalf: appoints the highest officials of the state, convenes and dissolves parliament, declares war and makes peace. English law does not contain special requirements for a candidate for the post of Prime Minister. The person applying for this position must be an adult, a British subject, and a Member of Parliament.
To ensure the effective functioning of the head of government, the personal secretariat of the prime minister is used, which does not have a permanent composition. The Prime Minister can create new links in the structure of this body. The Prime Minister's Secretariat includes persons who are citizens and employees - officials of the highest rank. His functions include maintaining correspondence, maintaining contact with a member of the cabinet, with individual ministries and departments, and preparing information and analytical materials. Unlike other countries, a cabinet of ministers with a narrower composition is formed and operates within the UK government.
Thus, the terms “government” and “cabinet” are not equivalent. The government includes all ministers, while the cabinet is an organizationally separate part of the government that plays a particularly important role.
As for the composition of the cabinet, it is determined personally by the prime minister, and usually the number of ministers in it ranges from 16 to 24 people, including the prime minister himself. The Prime Minister groups around himself several ministers who occupy a special position in the cabinet due to the importance of the departments he heads. The work of the cabinet is organized by the apparatus, which includes a number of bodies: the secretariat, the central statistical service, etc. The structure of the apparatus can change depending on the personal discretion of the prime minister, who has the right to create new posts and divisions in it.
In the judicial sphere, the monarch appoints judges and has the right to amnesty and pardon.
The Monarch is the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, although military rank the queen herself is a colonel. It appoints senior officials in the armed forces, assigns ranks to officers of the army, air force and navy, and awards insignia.
The Queen heads the Commonwealth, which includes about 50 states, of which 17, including Canada, Australia and New Zealand, recognize Elizabeth II as their head of state. She promulgates the constitutions of these states and, on the proposal of their governments, appoints governors general who act on her behalf. The Commonwealth is a unique economic and legal form of connection between Great Britain and its former colonies.
In the foreign policy sphere, the Queen also has the right to appoint diplomatic representatives, conclude international treaties, declare war and conclude peace.
Finally, the uniqueness of the status of the British queen lies in the fact that, as we have already noted, she heads the Anglican Church in England and the Presbyterian Church in Scotland. In this capacity, she appoints the ecclesiastical hierarchs of the Church of England.
All acts of the Queen are subject to the countersignature of the Prime Minister. This rule is formulated in the Act of Dispensation of 1701. Thus, the government bears responsibility for the queen’s acts, based on the formula “The King cannot be wrong,” expressing the principle of the monarch’s irresponsibility.
The institution of monarchy is preserved in Great Britain as a symbol of the unity of the nation, continuity in its development, and as a guarantor of stability in society. This is facilitated by the political neutrality of the monarch, who, in particular, cannot be a member of any political party, his awareness in matters of governance and competence, ensured by preparation from childhood for the dignified performance of his function and then many years of experience.
Conclusion
In this work, the essence of the parliamentary monarchy, its characteristics were explored, and Great Britain was analyzed as an example of this type of monarchy. Thus, based on the above, some conclusions can be drawn:
Parliamentary monarchies are much more common in the modern world compared to absolute and dualistic ones.
There is very little real power left in parliamentary monarchies. None of his wishes, even such a private one as regarding the pardon of a criminal, can actually be fulfilled if it displeases parliament. Sometimes parliaments even restrict the freedom of monarchs in their private affairs.
But still, legally, enormous power remains with the monarch: the final approval of laws, and their execution, and the appointment and removal of all officials, and the declaration of war, and the conclusion of peace - all this lies with him, but he can carry out all this only in agreement with the will of the people as expressed by parliament. The monarch “reigns but does not rule”; however, he also represents his state and is its symbol.
It would be wrong to say that in such states the active role of the monarch is reduced to zero: being the main representative of the state and the executor of the will of the people, he carries out various functions, important especially in the field of foreign policy, as well as in moments of crises and conflicts in the domestic field.
In addition, in the second part of the course work I described the parliamentary monarchy of Great Britain. I chose this country as an example of a modern monarchy not by chance, but for a number of reasons.
Firstly, this is the most striking and traditional example of a parliamentary monarchy to date.
Secondly, England has a history of establishing a constitutional monarchy, which fully reflects the development of this type of monarchy.
The constitutional monarchy, in turn, went through two phases of development: from a dualistic monarchy to a parliamentary one. The parliamentary monarchy is the final stage of development of this institution and the most widespread today.
The monarchical and in particular the parliamentary form of government is currently developing successfully; An example of this is provided by monarchical states around the world, and these states are among the most prosperous in terms of the standard of living of the population, in terms of the degree of criminal situation in the country, in terms of the level of development and innovation.
Bibliography
1. Avtonomov, A.S. Constitutional (state) law of foreign countries: textbook. / Ed. A.S. Avtonomova. - M.: Jurisprudence, 2001. P. 279-286.
2. Komarov, S.A. Theory of state and law: educational method. complex. / S.A. Komarov; edited by A.V. Malko. - M., 2004. - 224 p.
3. Korelsky V.M. Theory of State and Law: A Textbook for Law. universities and faculties. / V.M. Korelsky; edited by V.D. Perevalova. - M., 1997. - 180 s.
4. Malko, A.V. Constitutional law of foreign countries: educational method. complex. / Ed. A.V. Malko. - M.: Norma, 2004. P. 223-229.
5. Marchenko, M.N. Problems of the theory of state and law: textbook. / M.N. Marchenko. -M., 2001. - P. 185-186.
6. Marchenko, M.N. General theory State and Law: Academic Course. Volume 1. / M.N. Marchenko. Ed. 2nd. - M., 2001. - P. 289-290.
7. Marchenko, M.N. Theory of state and law: textbook. / M.N. Marchenko. Ed. 2nd. - M., 2009. - P. 299-300.
8. Nersesyants, V.S. Problems of the general theory of state and law: a textbook for universities. / Ed. V.S. Nersesyants. - M., 2004. - P. 598-599.
9. Patsatsiya, M.Sh. Theory of state and law: textbook. allowance. / M.Sh. Patsatsiya. - M., 2006. P. 152-154.
10. Pigolkin, A.S. General theory of law: a textbook for law. universities / A.S. Pigolkin. Ed. 2nd. - M., 1996. - P. 69-73.
11. Khropanyuk, V.N. Theory of state and law: a textbook. / V.N. Khropanyuk; edited by T.N. Radko. - M., 1998. - P. 242-245.
12. Khropanyuk, V.N. Theory of Government and Rights. / Ed. doc. legal Sciences V.G. Strekozova. - 2nd ed., add. and corrected. - M., 2002. P. 100-102.
Posted on Allbest.ru
...Similar documents
The concept and essence of monarchy. Signs of monarchy as a form of government. Advantages and disadvantages of the monarchical form of government. Monarchy as forms of government: absolute, limited monarchy - dualistic, parliamentary. Historical types of monarchies.
course work, added 03/19/2008
Characteristics of the formation and establishment of relationships between the highest state authorities, history of development and types of forms of government. Distinctive features parliamentary and presidential republics. Absolute, dualistic and parliamentary monarchies.
presentation, added 09/30/2012
Forms of government in the history of mankind. The formation of the Russian monarchy, its essence, character traits, role in history. Absolute, constitutional, dualistic, parliamentary and theocratic monarchy. Weak sides monarchy.
course work, added 05/28/2014
The form of government as a characteristic of the structure and relationships of the highest bodies of the state. Main types and existing characteristics birth characteristics such a form as a monarchy. Parliamentary, presidential and mixed (semi-presidential) republic.
abstract, added 10/13/2011
The main features of the classical form of government. Types of monarchies: absolute, constitutional, parliamentary, dualistic. Features of absolutism in France, Germany, Austria and Russia. Transformation of an absolute monarchy into a limited and constitutional one.
abstract, added 06/21/2013
Concepts of form of state and form of government. Features of monarchy as a form of government. Monarchy as a chain of political and legal consequences. Primary and secondary consequences of the monarchy. Types of atypical forms of monarchies. The Swedish model of the functioning of the monarchy.
course work, added 06/26/2012
Types of government. The difference between a political regime and a form of government. Signs and characteristic features of the republic. Parliamentary, presidential and mixed republic. Types of monarchies: absolute, constitutional, dualistic, parliamentary.
course work, added 03/05/2012
Definition of the concept and characteristics of a monarchical form of government. Study of the varieties of monarchy in history and today. The essence of the monarchical principle as the supreme power moral ideal. Features of this movement in modern Russia.
course work, added 11/26/2014
Characteristics of various forms of government and structure. Concept and types of political regime. The main features and classification of the monarchy, its advantages and disadvantages. Prospects for the monarchical form of government in foreign countries and Russia.
course work, added 11/14/2013
Concept and essence, advantages and disadvantages, conditions of origin, types, historical forms of development and signs of monarchy as a form of government. Features of the government of modern monarchical states, their system of organization and exercise of power.
In a parliamentary monarchy the head of state nominally participates in political decision-making and his prerogatives have a formal rather than substantive meaning. The head of state in this form of government is said to “reign but not rule.”
Formally, the legislative body is not parliament or the monarch, but a special legal structure formulated by the British - “the king in parliament.” The formula “king in parliament” means that the adoption of laws falls under the joint competence of the monarch and the representative body. Legally, this is expressed in the fact that every parliamentary act acquires legal force only after it is signed by the monarch.
At the same time, the sanction of the monarch to make parliamentary decisions is a formal act. The head of state in a parliamentary monarchy does not have the right to be guided by his own opinion in matters of adoption of laws. His signature on adopted laws formalizes decisions adopted entirely by parliament. The monarch does not have the right to veto decisions of parliament (Sweden) or does not use this prerogative (Norway).
Only sometimes, as an exception, do “failures” occur in the operation of the “king in parliament” mechanism. But they are not determined by the political inclinations of the monarch, not by his desire to influence legislation; and special, abnormal circumstances. For example, in 1989, the Belgian King Baudouin was asked to sign a law on the legalization of abortion approved by parliament. The head of state, not considering himself the right to refuse parliament to sign the law, still could not fulfill his function, since for him, a Catholic king, even formal participation in actions contrary to his faith was unacceptable. The king suggested that politicians find a way to exempt him from signing the abortion law. The legislation of most countries regulates the procedure for replacing the head of state in the event of his inability to fulfill his duties. It was through the procedure of temporarily removing the king on the grounds of his “inability” to participate in the administration of power that the constitutional conflict was resolved and the law was signed without the participation of Baudouin. And after this the king was restored to his rights.
The monarch has the right to convene and dissolve parliament. And the Australian Governor-General (representative of Queen Elizabeth II) has the power not only to convene and dissolve the House of Representatives, but also to postpone the convening of Parliament for a session. However, the head of state cannot use this right at his own discretion. He convenes parliament insofar as the deadline for its convocation comes or other circumstances arise as provided for by state law. The dissolution of parliament is carried out by the monarch on time or ahead of schedule in the event of a parliamentary (government) crisis. For example, in 1973, the Australian parliament did not approve the government's proposed budget for several months and was dissolved. The monarch dissolves parliament not because he is dissatisfied with its decisions or the composition of deputies, but because these are his duties stipulated by state law.
The composition of the government is determined by parliament, but formal appointments to ministerial positions are made by the monarch. The government bears political responsibility to parliament. The support of the parliamentary majority is the political basis of ministerial powers, and formally the powers of ministers are confirmed by an act of sovereign monarchical power.
The monarch is also formally involved in foreign policy. All his decisions related to the diplomatic corps are determined by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Prime Minister.
Acts of the monarch acquire force provided that they are counter-signed by the Prime Minister or responsible ministers whose competence relates to the subject of the document.
Even a parliamentary monarchy usually recognizes more or less extensive jurisdictional prerogatives for the head of state. But this group of powers is rather a tribute to tradition - a tradition that considers the king as the highest judge, the pillar of justice and fairness. Not to mention the fact that the monarch does not make judicial decisions; he does not even have the ability to issue acts of pardon on his own. Such acts can be political in content and must be consistent with the criminal repressive policy of the state.
Thus, a parliamentary monarchy is a legal form that, ensuring the rule of two sovereigns - the people and the monarch, assigns basic political powers to the people's representative body (parliament), and formal legal powers to the monarch.
Parliamentary monarchy
PARLIAMENTARY MONARCHY is one of two types of constitutional monarchy (along with dualistic monarchy). Characterized by the fact that the monarch performs his functions nominally. Government under P.m. formally and actually responsible to parliament, which, in accordance with the constitution, has formal supremacy among other organs of the state. P.m. developed in Great Britain in the 18th century, and in other European countries in the 19th - early 20th centuries. Currently P.m. exists in the UK, the Netherlands, Spain, Belgium, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Japan and some other countries.
From the book Encyclopedic Dictionary (M) author Brockhaus F.A. From the book Big Soviet Encyclopedia(IY) author TSB From the book Great Soviet Encyclopedia (MO) by the author TSB From the book Great Soviet Encyclopedia (PA) by the author TSB From the book Politics by Joyce Peter From the book Political Science: Cheat Sheet author author unknown From the book Lawyer Encyclopedia by the authorPARLIAMENTARY FORM OF GOVERNMENT In a parliamentary form of government, the executive branch of government is made up of legislators and is collectively accountable for its actions to the legislative branch. The positions of head of state and head of executive power are separated,
From the book All about Great Britain author Ivanova Yulia Anatolevna14. PRESIDENTIAL AND PARLIAMENTARY REPUBLIC: GENERAL AND SPECIFIC The distinctive features of a parliamentary republic are the formation of the government on a parliamentary basis and its formal responsibility to parliament. Parliament forms and supports
From the book The Question. The strangest questions about everything author Team of authorsMonarchy MONARCHY (Greek monarchia - autocracy) - along with the republic, one of two forms of government, famous history states and rights; in this form, the head of state is the sole ruler - the monarch: the power of the monarch, as a rule, is lifelong and
From the author's bookParliamentary republic PARLIAMENTARY REPUBLIC is a type of state with a republican form of government. The other is a presidential republic. There are often mixed options. Specific trait Etc. - the leading role of parliament in the state.
From the author's bookParliamentary immunity see Immunity
From the author's bookParliamentary ethics see Parliamentary ethics.
From the author's bookParliamentary session PARLIAMENTARY SESSION (lat. sessio - meeting) - a period of time. during which parliament (chambers of parliament) hold plenary sessions and make competent decisions. The sessional order of work of parliament historically developed during the period
From the author's bookParliamentary faction PARLIAMENTARY FACTION - in parliament or its separate chamber an association of deputies belonging to the same party or movement. They are either elected from their list on the basis of a proportional electoral system, or nominated (supported) by a party,
From the author's bookThe monarchy of Britain is a country of traditions, and one of the most strong traditions- this is a monarchy. Looking at the modern British monarchy, we are faced with a clear contradiction between fundamental law and reality. Her Majesty's Subjects, formally
From the author's bookIs a parliamentary republic possible in Russia? STEPHEN COHENHistorian, Professor Emeritus at Princeton and New York UniversitiesI believe that a parliamentary republic is the most democratic and representative form of government. However, she
8. Non-traditional monarchies.
1. Currently, there are several dozen monarchies in the world. In Europe:
Great Britain (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland); Spain; Sweden; Holland; Belgium; Luxembourg; Denmark; Norway; microstates - Andorra, Monaco, Liechtenstein, Vatican.
Saudi Arabia; Kuwait; United United Arab Emirates; Oman; Qatar; Bahrain; Nepal; Butane; Brunei; Thailand; Malaysia; Japan.
In Africa:
Morocco; Swaziland; Lesotho.
A number of monarchies are located in Oceania (Fiji, Tonga, other island states).
Other monarchies are: Canada; Australia; New Zealand. The head of these states is the MONARCH of Great Britain (currently the Queen).
2. Monarchy is distinguished by the following features:
ü the head of state is the Monarch;
ü the power of the monarch is inherited;
ü the activities of the monarch are not limited to a certain period, the monarch performs his duties for life."
ü the monarch is not elected by the people;
ü the monarch cannot be forcibly removed from office (except in cases of anti-monarchical revolution, coup, etc.);
ü the monarch, as a rule, is the commander-in-chief of the armed forces;
ü there is a special procedure for the monarch to assume power and a ceremony accompanying his activities.
3. Monarchy can be
ü absolute;
ü limited.
4 . At absolute monarchy the monarch has unlimited power (makes laws, appoints officials, etc.) - “The State is I” (Louis XIV).
5. Varieties limited monarchy are:
ü dualistic;
ü parliamentary.
6. Dualistic monarchy - Intermediate, transitional option from absolute to parliamentary monarchy.
In a dualistic monarchy, the power of the monarch is limited, but only slightly. The following features of a dualistic monarchy can be identified:
ü the presence, along with the monarch, of other higher bodies of state power - parliament and government (which is unusual for an absolute monarchy);
ü appointment of members of parliament (or one of its chambers) by the monarch (as opposed to a parliamentary monarchy, where parliament is elected by the people);
ü appointment of members of the government by the monarch and the responsibility of the government personally to the monarch;
The monarch performs the functions of the real head of state.
Dualistic monarchies were common in late XIX- early 20th century (during the period of bourgeois-democratic revolutions) at a time when the monarchs could no longer maintain the form of government in the form of an absolute monarchy, and the bourgeoisie was not yet strong enough to take power into their own hands. Examples of dualistic monarchy today: Kuwait; Nepal.
Until 1990, both of these states were absolute monarchies, however, due to historical events (the popular uprising in Nepal in 1990, the war of Kuwait against Iraq together with international forces in 1991), democratic reforms began in them and today Kuwait and Nepal have moved from absolute to dualistic monarchies.
7. Parliamentary (constitutional) monarchy differs in the following characteristics:
ü Along with the monarch, there are the highest bodies of state power - parliament, government, etc.;
ü Parliament is elected by the people;
ü the government is formed by the party that wins the majority of seats in parliament; as a result of elections, the government is responsible to parliament (also in a parliamentary republic);
ü there is a separation of powers;
ü the monarch takes part in political life, however, his power functions are minimal and are of a ceremonial nature (accepting the resignation of the government, representing the state abroad, presenting state awards, etc.);
ü only in some parliamentary monarchies the monarch has real levers of government (dissolves parliament, is the head of the judiciary, the head of the church - Great Britain), but in practice many real levers of power are practically not used.
Currently, almost all European monarchies are parliamentary monarchies: Great Britain, Sweden, Spain, Belgium, Holland, Denmark, Norway, as well as Japan, etc.
8. A special type of monarchy is non-traditional monarchies; United Arab Emirates and Malaysia.
The United Arab Emirates consists of several monarchies - the Emirates (Sharjah, Dubai, etc.), headed by emirs, each of whom in turn becomes the Supreme Emir of the UAE. Malaysia consists of both republics and monarchies. The heads of monarchies elect a national monarch from among themselves for a period of 9 years.
QUESTION 15 . Republic as a form of government
This form of government usually exists in highly developed states, where the transition from an agrarian system to an industrial one was accompanied primarily not by a radical breakdown of the previous institutions of power, but by their gradual transformation and adaptation to new conditions (Great Britain, Japan, the Netherlands, Sweden, Canada, Australia, etc.) .
Here we observe a developed separation of powers with the recognition of the principle of the supremacy of parliament over the executive branch, democratic or at least liberal political regime.
The supremacy of parliament is expressed in the fact that the government, which is usually appointed by the monarch, must enjoy the confidence of parliament (or its lower house), and the monarch is therefore forced to appoint as head of government the leader of the party that has the majority of seats in parliament (the lower house), or the leader of the coalition parties that have such a majority.
The monarch in this form of government “reigns, but does not rule.” The right of veto in relation to laws adopted by parliament, even when it belongs to it, is either not used in practice, or it exercises this right at the direction of the government. As a rule, he is deprived of the opportunity to act independently, and all acts emanating from him are usually prepared by the government and countersigned (sealed) by its head or the relevant minister, without which they have no legal force. Thus, the head of government or minister assumes responsibility for this act of the monarch, since the monarch himself is not responsible (in Great Britain this is expressed by the principle “The King cannot be wrong”).
The main distinguishing feature of a parliamentary monarchy is the political responsibility of the government to the parliament (lower house) for its activities. If the parliament (lower house) expresses no confidence in the government or refuses confidence (below - in paragraph 6 of § 6 of Chapter VIII in connection with parliamentary control over the government and its responsibility to parliament - we will show what the difference is), the government must leave resign or be dismissed by the monarch. However, usually this power of parliament is balanced by the right of the government to propose to the monarch to dissolve parliament (the lower house) and call new elections so that the conflict between the legislative and executive powers is resolved by the people: if they support the government, then as a result of the elections a majority of its supporters will be formed in parliament, if voters do not agree with the government, then the composition of parliament will be appropriate, and the government will be replaced.
The outlined system of relations between the monarch, parliament and government characterizes the parliamentary regime, or parliamentarism. However, this state regime operates only on the condition that no political party has an absolute majority in parliament and cannot form a one-party government. This situation traditionally exists, for example, in Denmark, the Netherlands and some other countries. The wider the party coalition that formed the government, the less stable this government is, because the more difficult it is to achieve agreement between coalition partners on various political issues. Sometimes, as soon as a party withdraws its representatives from the government, it loses the necessary majority in parliament (the lower house) and is often forced to resign.
On the contrary, in countries where there is a two-party system (Great Britain, Canada, Australia, etc.) or a multi-party system with one dominant party (Japan in 1955–1993) and basically one-party governments, the parliamentary model of relations between parliament and government practically becomes in its opposite. Legally, parliament exercises control over the government, but in reality, the government, which consists of the leaders of the party that has a majority in parliament (respectively, in its lower house), through this party faction, completely controls the work of parliament. This government regime is called the cabinet system, or ministerialism.
Consequently, with the same form of government - a parliamentary monarchy - two state regimes are possible: parliamentarism and ministerialism. It depends on the existing party system in the country.
From developing countries to parliamentary monarchies Malaysia, Thailand, Nepal can be included, but in the latter, taking into account the real influence of the monarch, we have to admit the presence of elements of a dualistic state regime.