Research Articles Base: Government Structure

Political Science

Political Science Introduction: The peace and welfare of this and coming generations of Americans will be secure only as we cling to the watchword of true patriotism: “Our country — when right to be kept right; when wrong to be put right.” In the book, America the Unusual,   notes that “the American emphasis on individualism and limited government has obvious direct consequences for the shape of our public policies” (1999:43).  ’s argument is one of “path dependence.” The people who settled in North America and created what became the United States were more suspicious of authority and hierarchy than the people elsewhere. Those beliefs dictated the type of political institutions they established. Power was fragmented – not only within the federal government but between the federal government and the states (2001). However, According to   rejects a cultural explanation of American public policy in favor of the “path dependence” hypothesis of W.  and other economists and political scientists, who see early political decisions gathering force and making it more difficult to change policies as time goes by. Nevertheless, unlike cultural beliefs and values, political ideas are more open to challenge and reform (2001). Using the example of air pollution control as a case study,  argues that rather than doing what most countries do to discourage the burning of fossil fuels, i.e., raise gasoline taxes, Congress resorted to legislation, the Corporate Average Fuel Economy Act, to require automobile manufacturers to produce cares that achieve a prescribed fuel economy. “Americans do not liked to be taxed, even when those taxes are used to strengthen our nation ()”. When Americans were polled in 1988 it showed back then that 61% of Americans preferred a health system like Canada’s over the U.S. and 95% of Canadians polled preferred their health system then the US’s (). This complex and ultimately ineffective approach stems from American’s belief that taxes are a confiscation of property. The major contributor of public policy funds is taxes that are paid by every individual in a particular nation. This makes America Different – their indifference towards the scope of public policy that has been stable over time. They are resistant to change though Americans would seek for better transportation, health care, welfare and housing and yet they are unwilling to pay for taxes. Ultimately,  believes, necessity will overcome ideology, as an aging population demands better environmental protection. Nonetheless, this was further explained that the main ideology of the Americans was due to the fact that the beliefs of the American stand courageously behind individualism and equality that limits public policy in America for less government, a more limited government. American government schemas or agendas are much less pushy than those of other developed democratic nations. ‘Programs in health, welfare, housing, transportation, and many other areas are much smaller and less ambitious (). Compare to other industrialized countries wherein, the government has influenced the everyday life of its people by providing more public sector than of the private sector such as, social welfare, housing, means of transportation and health care. The one exclusion for other countries is public education. In other countries there are not as many universities, colleges and trade school as in the U.S. Conclusion: There are numerous probable explanations for the grounds or basis that Americans think this way, including the character or the persona of the immigrants who fled here, our physical isolation from other countries, and the diversity of the American population. In particular this paper concludes that though America is a firm believer of a small government with limited power due to the fact that is fragmented that it might never work as a whole again; it is still the same America that our fore grandfathers had fought with their lives for the sake of the Nation. True, that there are numerous reasons as to how and why America should not resist change in regards to the governments system and most importantly the stern beliefs that had existed before time. One must know that to resist change would not resolve any problems nor the act of complaining won’t get anyone to anywhere. It would be better to change together with the flow of the tides and the continual change of the season.  even believes that globalization holds the most promise in this respect. “Globalization… could be making the distinctiveness somewhat less possible and may increase the similarities among countries as the years go along,”  writes. “as we continue the process of increasing global interdependence, we may find that we will not necessarily be forced to make the stark choice between American – style relatively unfettered capitalism with limited government and European – style social programs and economic interventions.” In short, it gives us a bleak idea that we have the freedom to do choices on what suitable interventions on whatever situation we have failed to see. This is not just a one man approach, what is needed is the cooperation of like minded minds that would ensure the best of both worlds. Though, quite ambitious, it must survive all those challenges that the present society has imposed.  Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

Political Science

Political Science Introduction: The peace and welfare of this and coming generations of Americans will be secure only as we cling to the...

The New Europe and Old Europe

The Old Europe European society was largely dominated by rich, hereditary, landed oligarchies. Most of the members of these groups also enjoyed nobility. Human society has never existed without élites, but those of the post-industrial world are numerous, diverse, and difficult to assess in their relative importance. Before 1800 matters were much simpler. Most wealth, most power, most privilege, and most prestige tended nearly everywhere to be concentrated in the hands of a single social group, universally recognizable. Like all social categories, it was considerably blurred at the edges, with an infinite number of local variations. No one term used by historians–aristocracy, landed interest, privileged order, feudal class–captures its full character. Yet the reality was concrete enough. It was the basic feature of social organization throughout Europe. The French state was held to comprise three orders or estates:–the clergy, the nobility, and the third estate (Forsythe, 1994). This division originated in the medieval organization of society into those who prayed, those who fought, and those who worked. The nobility had done the fighting–noblemen still regarded the military career as peculiarly their own. Nevertheless in practice the nobility seldom invoked any justification other than the fact that it existed and always had. When the estates-general, representing all the king’s subjects, met, the nobility and clergy elected their own representatives and sat in separate houses. The nobility had a complex internal hierarchy of titles. At the top came the princes of the blood royal and (in 1775) forty-seven dukes and peers; together they made up the peerage, the élite among the élite. Below them came ever more numerous categories of marquises, counts, viscounts, barons, knights, and esquires without further distinctive title. All nobles enjoyed a number of privileges. They took special precedence on public occasions, carried swords, boasted distinctive coats of arms, received special treatment in the courts, and above all benefited from certain fiscal advantages. (Forsythe, 1994) They were personally exempt from the taille, the basic tax, although in certain areas they often paid it on the basis of their landed possessions. They contributed to a number of other taxes at special rates. They were indeed subjected to various new taxes introduced from 1695 onwards, but taille exemption remained an essential touchstone of noble status. Equally essential was a certain lifestyle–’living nobly’ without manual work (which included retail trade). Those who broke the rule underwent derogation, or loss of nobility, which might entail the degradation of the offender’s whole family, since noble status was transmitted through the male line to all children. Organization of the nobility into an order was common throughout Europe. In Sweden, much of Germany and most of the Habsburg domains the nobility was represented in a separate house of the diet or estates of the realm. In Hungary and Poland they alone were represented (Stares, 1992). In Spain the nobility was an order with clearly defined limits and prerogatives; while in the Italian mercantile republics of Venice and Genoa noble families had their names entered in special public ‘Golden Books’. Equally common was the principle of hierarchy within the order. Scales of titles were universal, except in Poland. In Hungary the diet was divided between an upper house of magnates sitting in person and a lower consisting of representatives of the lesser nobility. The Emperor Charles V had organized the Spanish nobility into a small élite of grandees (of whom there were 113 in 1707), a larger body of titled nobles, and an enormous army of proud but untitled gentlemen–the notorious hidalgos, a category drawn so widely as to include every male inhabitant of certain Basque Provinces. The prohibition of manual or degrading work was in most areas even stronger than in France, and it was reinforced by the prejudices of nobles themselves (Flynne, 1995). The same applied in Spain’s satellite, Naples, but equally in Poland, where the repeal in 1775 of the rule against trading had no noticeable effect. In Sweden, Prussia, and certain other German states the formula was stated in more functional terms. Nobles denied common outlets for their energies were expected, more or less explicitly, to serve the state in the army or the administration (Wessel, 1991). The great and surprising continental exception to this rule was Hungary, where the nobility thought of itself as a nation of free men not to be bound by artificial restrictions. If there was prejudice here, it emanated from the domesticated, absentee magnates of Vienna, not the local petty nobility who were so often its mainstay elsewhere. The New Europe The European Community also did much to assuage concerns about Germany and facilitate unification. The Federal Republic’s membership in the EC helped reassure those countries that feared the new Germany would once again embark on an independent course with ominous consequences for the rest of Europe. In the process, the EC received an added boost with the decision to buttress further economic and monetary integration with political union. It is not entirely true, however, that Germany has ceased to be a point of contention. History–both recent and more distant–still haunts the minds of many. Divided or united, Germany has always been a great power or a pawn at the core of Europe and has always exerted a decisive influence on the continent (Ziring, 1993). As a great power, it was too strong not to seek domination, but it was too weak to dominate for long. While the “Yalta system” temporarily solved the German question by dividing the country and incorporating its two halves into antagonistic alliances, unification has raised the concern that a sovereign Germany will now dominate the continent. It is not just memories of the past, however, that cause the new Germany to loom large in all the schemes designed to establish a new order on the European continent. Germany is now too powerful not to play a central role (Reinicke,1992). Unification and the demise of the inner and outer empires of the Soviet Union have removed traditional international constraints. Old dilemmas have vanished, including the need to import security from the United States at the cost of sovereignty and the desire to accommodate the Soviet Union at the cost of commitments to the Western alliance. This does not mean that Germany no longer needs to rely upon allies–above all the United States-or participate in security arrangements within NATO, the West European Union (WEU), or the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) to prevent potential conflicts. Nor does it mean that Germany no longer has to worry about potential trouble east of its borders or that the country is not constrained by new vulnerabilities or liabilities  (Stares, 1992). What it means is that the political, geographical, and symbolic boundaries of German power have expanded. Geographically, both unification and the demise of the Soviet empire have shifted Germany’s center of gravity eastward, situating the country again at the heart of the continent and at the crossroads of its flows and interactions. Germany is now the country in Europe surrounded by the greatest number of neighbors. Politically as well as geopolitically, the united country has regained its sovereignty and may become more powerful than ever, especially if its important partners to the east and west fare badly for any reason. In many respects, Germany’s preeminent economic position within Europe has defied rational expectations. The rise in production and exports and the growth of structural surpluses has promoted prosperity in Germany, but its high prices–due in part to rising labor costs and a strong currency–should, on the face of it, have curbed exports and checked production. The answer to this apparent contradiction lies in the notion of a “virtuous circle.” 9 For many years Germany has specialized in the production of high-quality equipment and chemical products that have remained in almost limitless international demand regardless of price. Far from hindering exports, the strong currency and higher prices have led to increased growth, higher wages, and ultimately internal stability. External growth and internal stability have thus complemented one another. In fact, Germany’s entire socioeconomic system has been adapted to meet international demand–and has benefited from it. Many challenges faced by contemporary France are challenges to French identity because they call into question both key dimensions of what it has meant to be French, and the specific compact that the French people have had with their state (Flynn, 1995). None of the above is meant to argue that external factors are more important than the internal to the identity problems France faces today. Indeed, the most important dimensions of France’s identity problems are probably internal: the profound structural changes in French society over the past several decades have not yielded a new pattern of social harmony; immigration is challenging the myth of France as an open, absorption society; the centralized French approach to economic and social management is under severe challenge by the global economy; political ideologies have collapsed and political party structures have lost much of their importance in the organization of daily life — all subjects of other chapters presented in this volume. But it is also clear from the above analysis that the international context in Europe contributes in an important way to France’s identity dilemmas both by challenging its essence and by forcing a change in its content. The problem is that the direction in which the content must naturally move provides, at least in the short run, an increased challenge to the essence. It is going to be very difficult to separate Europe as a vehicle for pursuing France’s national interests from a Europe that disputes traditional views of French sovereignty and thus a core piece of the myth of the French state (Wessell, 1995). Thus, in coming to grips with the future shape of European integration, which itself cannot occur in isolation from coming to grips with the relationship between the two halves of Europe, the French inevitably must confront that myth. If that myth remains strong and thus a key to how the French define their national interest, then using Europe as a policy to pursue French interests will become exceedingly difficult because in the end it becomes almost impossible to pursue the policy without using the symbol of Europe. Under these circumstances, it will be almost impossible to reconcile a Europe compatible with domestic political needs with a Europe that allows France to maintain a leadership role in shaping its future. The next French president faces an acute task — one that Mitterrand attempted to address but with only partial success — of bringing the myth of state into line with international realities. If he fails, he will fail to have the symbols at his disposal to legitimize his policies at home, and French European policy will remain a subject of substantial political controversy. France today is very different than the country de Gaulle inherited in 1958. While it is not a country of first rank, as the general always claimed it must be, it has accomplished an incredible transformation during the postwar period, a transformation many of its European partners have failed to achieve. France is no longer fractured; it has overcome its historic divisions even as it must confront new and difficult cleavages. France no longer requires the Gaullist rhetoric, even if it once did, to help manage its domestic affairs. Indeed, the residuals of that rhetoric, although meaningful to a hard core minority, may well have become a source of division that is keeping France from dealing more effectively with the challenges of shaping the new Europe. The reality today is that most of France has become more comfortable with its multiple identities. The challenge is to make the adjustment so that the debate over France’s role in Europe is not a debate over alternative visions of France, but over what being European should mean. This will require bringing French notions of sovereignty and the state into line with contemporary European realities. France must adjust the essence of its identity in order to give new content to that identity in the new Europe. A failure of the former will make the latter a continuing problem, weakening Europe and France in the process.   Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

The New Europe and Old Europe

The Old Europe European society was largely dominated by rich, hereditary, landed oligarchies. Most of the members of these groups also e...

Civil Service Commission

Civil Service Commission             Civil Service Commission is a program that is usually found in every modern city. “We need to develop the new arts of social and economic engineering into a coherent pattern suited to the new mass economy” (1952); its purpose therefore is to help the city itself to prosper by seeing to its condition through integration of its smallest concerns to the people’s needs and other services such as health related programs. It has workers who have different assignments such implementing laws, hiring of government workers, provision of programs for retired personnel and other services whose purposes are to serve the people. Civil Service Commission actually first came to be in China during the dynasty (206 B.C.-A.D. 220) and then later on expanded to include all important positions there are during the Sung dynasty (960-1279) ( 1973). Its purpose was to give examinations to all males who have the ability to be of service to their dynasty.  The accumulation of Civil Service Commission towards the East was slow and took a lot of time. In fact, establishment of modern civil service is closely associated with the decline of feudalism and growth of national autocratic states. Historical movements that prompted the change were due to the agitation felt after the Civil wars and because the Civil Service of the Unites States was far behind in terms of competence. In 1871, the President was given authority by the Congress to appoint the Civil Service Commission which only lasted for a couple of years. The assassination of President  in 1881 gave way to the passage of Pendleton Act on 1883 declaring to bring back the Civil Service Commission. Later on, the Hatch Act 1940 forbade officeholders to hold campaign contributions for the purpose of separating civil service from politics. And then on 1993 there was a revision of the act which now allows civil service workers to campaign on their own time (2004). However there were also times when neutrality was practiced. It was in 1923 when the most striking recent demonstration of neutrality happened when the first labor government assumed power (1935). Suggestions             Being a fast growing suburban community, it has been the City Manager’s concern as to how to manage it since a lot of revisions and projects are to be done in order to allow Townscape to keep pace with rising technological changes. However, for a lot of changes, the people are also concerned about the budget of such projects. People wanted to know where there community will be in the near future.             Financial planning, funding, and financial control, not withstanding their different missions, functions, sizes and complexities of organizations (1986) should be observed when thinking of doing a project. Considering the amount that a community can produce for a big change is essential because any project can never be put into action when you lack the funds. However if the lack of funds is not a question, then proper implementation of policies and plans should be done. Think of any possible ways to have a lot of development within your sector especially if your are not yet overpopulated. That is an A plus. Even if the population is not yet too much, unemployment should be viewed as a future problem because eventually population will grow and if the sector has not provided numerous developments to sustain the number of people then unemployment enters. Therefore, you may provide numerous social services which may be flexible for expansion either publicly or privately. An example is the hollow state which is an approach to policy implementation that relies upon private or nonprofit organizations to deliver certain public goods (1993). Hollow state is an organization that suggests allowing the private non-profiting organizations within the community to participate in the provision of services or goods to the government. In this way, private sectors are helping the whole community to be prosperous.             Education also must not be left behind. It is everybody’s concern to make most out of education. Constant change and improvement of education should be done in every place because it is constantly evolving. Almost everyday, we discover new things that are education oriented. There are changes both in knowledge and in circumstances that may result to constraints because it is in the sense that education is in constant process of invention ( 1998).  A fund must also be provided for this.             If changes are to be done, it must be in equilibrium with the environmental changes so that the revision of the suburban community won’t be left behind. Also while we are at the topic of change, future problems must be put into consideration. Proper time frame and proper fund management should be observed.   Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

Civil Service Commission

Civil Service Commission Civil Service Commission is a program that is usually found in every modern city. “We need to develo...

Ecuador

- Religion Ecuador’s religion comprises around 94% of Ecuadorians as Roman Catholics since they have been colonized by Spain for quite a time.  As Catholics, Ecuadorians practices attending the mass regularly and strongly devotes their faith to Catholicism.  However, in every other Latin American nation, Protestant Evangelicalism has had massive growth and other religious group like the Jehovah’s Witness and Mormons has also seen increasing numbers.  Despite of the decrease in numbers, Ecuadorian people as being traditional, practices being a Catholic will proved to be resistant into shifting to another religion.  In lieu to establishing of religion, it has been embodied by Ecuador’s constitution that guarantees the freedom of religion.  In 1979, in title two article 19 of the constitution states, the following provisions relating to freedom of religion; section 5, all forms of discrimination for reasons of religion are forbidden; section 6, freedom of conscience and religion, individually and collectively, in public and in private.  Persons can freely practice the faith that they prefer, except for the limitations prescribed by law to protect the security, public morality and fundamental rights of the persons. And section 15, the right to privacy concerning political and religious convictions.  No one may be required to manifest his convictions except in cases prescribed.       - Ethnicity/Ethnic Groups   The population of Ecuador is ethically diverse.  Of the estimated 11 million people population of Ecuador, 65% constitutes the majority ethnic group being the mestizos.  Next majority ethnic group consists of the Amerindians ethnic group that accounts the one-fourth of the total population of Ecuador.  The mainly criollos on one hand, accounted for 7% of the major ethnic group.  The small minority of Afro-Ecuadorian like Mulattos and zambos constitutes the remainder fraction of the total population.  Interestingly, in the Amazonian jungle, 3% of the population is of Amazonian Native Americans group.    - Relationships   In terms of relationship with foreign relations of Ecuador, Ecuador emphasized on multilateral approaches in international dealings.  Ecuador including most of its specialized agencies is a member of the United Nations (UN) and the Organization of American States (OAS) and is also an affiliate member on many regional groups in the Latin America region, namely, the Rio Group, the Latin American Economic System, the Latin American Energy Organization, the Latin American Integration Association and the Andean Pact.  All of which tells us that when in comes to foreign relationships; Ecuador has been supported by many organizations and thus, will imply that Ecuador has developed and maintained special ties with the said organizations. In a dispute against Peru, Ecuador for 50 years sustained the 1942 Rio Protocol of Peace, Friendship and Boundaries in spite of which there were several issues unresolved.  Ecuador’s commitment of not engaging into aggressive means of compromise and settlement seem to have centrally flourished to its maximum.  Although, there were at times when hostility had erupted because of the unresolved feud between the two countries but nevertheless, the demarcation issue has been settled in the year 1999 when both Peru and Ecuador had set borders in their respective jurisdictions. However, the relationships in terms of the people, Ecuadorians are being characterized as having close ties that is brought about by the influence the Spaniards have cultivated to the Ecuadorians.  Traditionally, they provide emphasis in the giving of respect to the males, as being the dominant gender in Ecuador.  Further, the relationship is not good for Ecuadorian in spite of having close ties, because Ecuadorian people are being divided into classes.  The higher class gets to have close ties with an Ecuadorian with a high status also but they do not engage in having close ties with the people of the lower class. -       Class Structure In the late 1980’s, the elites of Ecuador includes the Sierra latifundistas (landowners), the Costa agro-exporters, financiers and the industrialists.  The cohesion among the elites continues to strengthen such that there are intragroup ties among the elites such as kinship and marriage between rich families.  The hacienderos as being the elites controls much of the land and are therefore, more likely to get richer.  Ecuador’s large cities and towns comprise the much diverse middle class that in grew in numbers during the 20th century.  Among the middle class are the businessmen, professionals, clerical employees, mid-level bureaucrats and managers, the army officers and teachers.  The lower level of middle class is made up of the upper echelons which are identified and emulated the elite.  Lastly, the peasants that comprises the majority of Ecuadorian populace which came from the rural social life, and are subjects to the control of hacienderos as they are being denied access to lands, if ever they have access to lands, the peasants are still subject with limited options.    - Sources of National Pride In every country in spite of the many dilemmas and the “bad image” one elicits in the world, there exists the sense of national pride of being a citizen of a particular country.  The sense of pride Ecuador can show to the world is their economy.  Ecuadorian economy as being based on petroleum, money transfers and in the exporting of world class products of bananas, shrimps and other primarily agricultural products takes price as being the world’s largest exporter of bananas and shrimps.  In 2002, almost half of its export earnings came from the exportation of oil that accounted for about one-third of public sector revenue.  The completion of the second Transandeal Oil Pipeline enables the expansion of Ecuador’s exports on oil such that it will double the oil transport capacity of Ecuador.  Simply stated, it is the beauty of the natural resources of Ecuador the Ecuadorians takes pride on which comprises 40% of Ecuador.  There are also interesting people who place Equador in the map in the fields of painting and sculpture, poetry, sports and in the entertainment industry.  To name a few famous people that is known not only in Ecuador but also in the world are José Joaquin de Olmedo, Jorge Icaza Coronel, Benjamin Urrutia, Nicolas Lapentti, Jefferson Pérez, Maldonado, Bernardo de Legarda and so on.   - Ratings on Hofstede’s dimensions   The Geert Hofstede analysis for Ecuador shares similarities to other Latin American countries.  The rating of Power Distance Index (PDI) of Ecuador is 78 that are indicative of the high level of inequalities between the power and wealth among the people allowing the gap between the rich and the poor to further widen.  In terms of individualism, Ecuador has low rating on individualism (only 8) that typifies the emphasis placed on close ties Ecuadorian people engages into.  The Uncertainty Avoidance Index (UAI), constitute 67 rating from the Hofstede’s ratings that tells us that Ecuador as a country have low tolerance for uncertainty and ambiguity as shown that Ecuadorians have high concern for rules, regulations and controls and is resistant to change and the risk of adverse negative output.  And the rating for masculinity is high for masculinity since Ecuador’s population is mostly men.  Gender differentiation of roles is considerable of high degree and same as gender stereotyping.      Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

Ecuador

- Religion Ecuador’s religion comprises around 94% of Ecuadorians as Roman Catholics since they have been colonized by Spain for quite a...

The Sakoku “Closed Country Policy” of Japan and Its Opening during the Meiji Period

The Sakoku “Closed Country Policy” of Japan and Its Opening during the Meiji Period This paper discusses how Japan responded to the threat of Western powers through its closed country policy. It also looked into the transition to an open country during the restoration period. Since the early 1600s, Japan has implemented a policy of sakoku or “closed country”. Sakoku is a foreign relations policy of Japan which prohibits foreigners and Japanese in entering and leaving the country. This policy was implemented in 1641 under Tokugawa Iemitsu and has been in effect until 1853. Hence, leaving the country is considered an illegal act until the Meiji Restoration in 1868.             The policy did not totally isolate Japan. It restricted policies that are applied for trade and foreign relations by the shogunates. Based on the policy, the Dutch factory in Dejima Nagasaki is the only European influence allowed in the country. Trades with China are also performed in Nagasaki. Generally, the purpose of the policy was to end the missionary intervention perceived by the Shogunate and the potential corruption caused by contact with foreigners especially the Western “barbarians”. Shogun means “barbarian subduing-general’. His power to prevent Westerners from breaking the seclusion policy of Japan has kept the Shogunate in power. The colonial and religious influences of Spain and Portugal also threatened the solidity of the shogunate and the peace throughout the country. The growing number of Catholic conversion in the Southern region was a significant factor in which the threat was perceived. The incident which triggered the imposition of the sakoku was the rebellion of Christian peasants from 1637 to 1638. The missionaries were charged by the shogunate for starting the rebellion. Consequently, they were driven out of the country and the religion was banned. Tokugawa authorities find it difficult to control the uprising and sought the help of Dutch ships. Rebels even declared their loyalty to Christianity. After the massacre of Shimabra defender, Iemitsu deliberated with his ministers and decided to introduce strict controls over foreign relations. By 1639, a set of measures were enacted commonly called as the sakoku or “closed country” policy (1997 ). During that time and long afterwards they were referred to as kaikin or maritime prohibitions. Although Japan was not entirely closed, external contacts are greatly reduced. Moreover, the policy was also a means of controlling the trade with other countries as well as asserting a position in the East Asian hierarchy. Eventually, it became the defense against the exhaustion of mineral resources to the outside world. From the Japanese point of view, it is not reasonable to trade precious metals for articles which they could do without or replace with local products. Generally, there are major factors that moved to the closing of the country:  to control the trade of minerals and precious metals to the outside world; mistrust of the religion that had flourished in many areas to which Tokugawa had little military strength; and the final trigger from the Shimabara rebellion. As time passed, it has become more difficult to reverse the policy. It became a bulwark of vested interest be it ethical cultural, political or commercial. The long term effect of the sakoku is the seclusion of Japan from great scientific discoveries during the 17th century in Europe and the early phases of the industrial revolution. In 1650, it was almost equal with Europe in terms of technology but this was not the case two hundred years later. On the other hand, the sakoku gave Japan two and a half centuries of peace and remarkable freedom from external conflicts. The closure enabled Japan to be free during those centuries to make significant developments in political and social organization as well as in commerce and culture. Most of all, it did not suffer the same way like other Asian countries regardless if they become colonies or not. It did not have a ruling class that is permeated by the Western culture and influences that eventually became alienated from the masses. Japan remain consistently Japanese and was able to preserve and acquire strength from is national characteristics when hit by the tide of Westernization after 1850.  In short, the Tokugawa policy has allowed the country to prepare itself for modernization on its own way ( 1997). The same can be said of the relations with the neighboring countries. The presence of Westerners in Asia and the rampant colonialism during the nineteenth century is the main reason behind Japan and its policy. The western urge for opening Japan rests on the belief that sakoku deprived the country of foreign trade that is essential for its own good. The growth of free trade upon the removal of sakoku is considered to be the measure of Japan’s loss during the earlier years. It is said that the gains from foreign trade could have been reaped much earlier had it not existed. Even so, this notion overlooked the experiences of the country under the policy. During the 17th century, Europeans had found Japanese goods that they wanted and on the other hand, Japan needed few goods from the outside world. Japan was self sufficient in food and there are no international trades of food in the Eastern part of Asia during those times. The trade arguments that justify western interventions did not take into account the fact that the absence of foreign trade on luxuries substantiated sakoku. The Agricultural productivity grew during the seventeenth century and there are also technological innovations in place. In economic terms, the Tokugawa times was a tale of success. It was at peace with itself. The decade when sakoku was introduced is characterized by years of crisis but it worked thereafter. Without the Chinese intervention, the eighteenth century became a remarkable century of external security. The presences of Western ships were recorded only in 1771 and 1778 and again in 1792 (2003).There were numerous attempts to put an end in the seclusion by the expansion of Western powers in the 18th and the 19th century. American, Russian and French ships tried to build relationship with Japan but they were all rejected. When the fear of western threat recurred in 1780, Japan began studying the politics of the West.  While Japan remained an isolated country, there were studies on the outside world and changes in the framework of the foreign policy. The result was that Japan had some elements of administration of foreign affairs by 1850 with a highly competent knowledge of Dutch and practical understanding of the West ( 2003). Because of this Japan was able to deal with the real challenges that came in. Concessions are kept to a minimum although there appears to be divided opinion as to the extent of the concession.  While the outsiders remain unwanted, a degree of consensus was established with the argument that unnecessary treaties would take time. There was no broad divide in terms of fundamental principles.             This though has changed with the arrival of Perry in 1853 bearing the letter from the American president that seeks the opening of the Japanese ports.  The fleet was intended to overawe the Japanese. The negotiating team which was led by the head of the Hayashi family negotiated well and kept the concessions into a minimum (2003). The treaty provided only for the supplies made available to the ships. Foreign trade remained restricted to the Chinese and the Dutch. Nagasaki was still the only port for doing trade with the old trading partners alone.             However, effective commercial treaties are demanded thereafter. With the example of British and French armed intrusion in China, the benefits of alliance with the united Sates were argued. By the early 1858, American demands became clear and uncompromising and thus divided the Japanese (2003, 180). The issue was not the admittance of foreign ships for non trading purposes or the opening of port other than that of Nagasaki but of going to further concessions. This though would mean the end of the sakoku and the presence of more foreigners and security risks.             The opening of the ports raised difficult concerns as well as the shogunal succession. The real issue is whether Japan will accede to the concessions and the only comfort was to accommodate foreigners temporarily. However, foreigners did not appreciate the extent of the opposition to the treaties. They have regarded Japan as inherently despotic. British on the other hand looked at Japan in the same way with the Chinese. They believe that easterners are impressed with force and that Japan’s capacity for a higher moral civilization is relatively lower than other countries including China (2003).             By 1868, the Tokugawa rule has ended and the full sovereign power was given to the new Meiji Emperor. The oppositions against Tokugawa have long been growing but it is only until the 19th century that shogun attacks existed.  The downfall of the Tokugawa system is attributed with the forceful opening of the closed door by the united Sates and other nations. The arrival of foreigners specifically of Perry’s expedition provided the final trigger for the collapse of the shogunate.             The Meiji Restoration during 1867-1868 experienced civil war for several months. When the Tokugawa rule was ended, the Imperial Restoration was announced. This though signified the start of further struggle to keep the peacefulness in the country. After the announcement of the restoration, the creation of a new government was declared on January 3, 1868. With the resentment of the ex-shogun’s supporters, Shogun Keiki was ruled out from the memberships and his lands were sequestered. As such he was persuaded to take arms and was defeated in the battle of Fushimi. In other places where certain clans remained loyal to the Tokugawa fought firmly.  The last area of opposition was in Hokkaido where the navy’s admiral held out for several months.  This ended the dominance of the Tokugawa which gave Japan 15 Shoguns (2007)             The forces that defeated the shogunates are associated in driving out barbarians.  With their victory, it is expected that more resentment against foreigners will prevail. There were few isolated incidents of anti foreign confrontations before Japan could actually take the issue of modernization. The new government has implemented stiff punishments to those who attacked foreigners. The new men ruling Japan did not favor antagonism much less to expel the barbarians.             Japan realized the role of modernization in its goal to achieve a powerful position in the world. More so, it acknowledged the need to cope up with the technological advancement of the Western countries. However, modernization cannot be achieved without the help from the West.  The Shogunate employed a number of technicians including British, American, French, German and Dutch ( 2007).They were engaged by the government in various areas and at the same time Japanese were sent to Western countries to learn from them. Like the Chinese attitude, Japanese were never too proud to be trained. It appeared that the anti foreign policy became almost pro foreign in due course. The steps that led to the restoration have been very complex. Ultimately, it paved the way for the opening of the country to foreigners.     Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

The Sakoku “Closed Country Policy” of Japan and Its Opening during the Meiji Period

The Sakoku “Closed Country Policy” of Japan and Its Opening during the Meiji Period This paper discusses how Japan responded to the thr...

The Effects Of Civil Society Activism In Kenya

The Effects of Civil Society Activism in Kenya   The civil society activism which comprises of  different groups  in Kenya, such as human rights groups, cooperatives, trade unions as well as the religious groups are rising  now in the  African region particularly in Kenya.  This is to challenge the   African authoritarian government to practice democratic laws specifically in Kenya and Uganda.  The civil society is gathered in one arena in order to express their sentiments against the dominant African state’s unjust and poor governance.  An emerging view of the civil society activism consists of religious ideas from the church sector and non-government organizations are aiming to liberalize their country from the authoritarian political condition.  These people are already fed up with insurgencies, poverty, economic mismanagement and authoritarianism.  And, Chazan (1992:282) noted that the development of civil society is widely prevalent now in Kenya in targeting to reduce the rampant abuses of state power.  They want now government rulers to   be accountable to their state power abuses as well as to establish successfully a foundation of stable democratic government in their country. In this regard, the impetus for the late democratic transitions in Africa has been traced to the growth and political activity of civil society across the continent (Ndegwa, 1996:2). Furthermore, the Christian churches have been involved seriously in Kenyan democratization process for over a decade now.    The Christian churches have been the center of the pressures for democratization of the African government. Subsequently, during this period of transformation in Kenya, the church has the mainstream sector of the society that demonstrate its willingness to reach out to the final goals and objectives of the civil society movement.  The integration and construction of cooperation and solidarity of the various individuals has the ability to combine the both scared and profane resources in Kenya.  However, the deteriorating socio-economic conditions gave the church even more legitimacy as it expanded the social and economic projects that it had instituted since the colonial period.  Another factor that caused the church to become oppressive one party in Kenya is the fact that it remains the only available tool of expression of sentiments and dissatisfactions; as well as the urge for total reform in the country.  In this relation, the church has all the right to protest   when the rights and freedom of the people and the church is violated by anyone or even by the state.  Correspondingly, the church has a special task to give voice to the voiceless groups of people.  In the same way, it has the right to protect and rescue the victims of oppression.  And, in order to do this successfully, the church must do political interventions.     (http://archive.lib.msu.edu/DMC/African%20Journals/pdfs/political%20science/volume7n2/ajps007002006.pdf)   On the other hand, the Grand Coalition Government (GCG) in Kenya has raisin   with various debates and commentaries about the civil society’s ability to influence change and political advancement is often underestimated by the African government.  In spite of the fact that people’s voices are already expressed in other African countries; but in Kenya, people are still muted and controlled by the political elite’s power.  In view thereof, the Kenyan people should follow the successful human rights movements showed by Ghana, Sierra Leone and South Africa have been able to bring significant reforms in the African government in one way or another.   As a result, Kenyan civil society can get support from the outside forces as well as can get inspirations from different international organizations in every part of the globe; but the question is, will the country continuously defiant in the long-road battle against insurgencies of the Kenyan authoritarian state. Nonetheless, many Kenyan citizens strongly believe that the coalition government despite of its many imperfections will transform into a better state because Kenyans want a total reform in their country.   On the other side of the coin, the Kenyan government should  also welcome the fact the  it  is a high time for it to find effective ways and means of reassuring the Kenyan citizens that  the state is willing also to implement reforms for the benefits and advancements of  the entire Kenyan population as well as of the country. The Kenyan government should show to the people its genuine interest to protect the national boundaries of the country and of the people.  Civil society has been aware of the judicial condition that they have ever since in their country.  The national and local peace movements and initiatives are springing up in every place. In the final note, the international  media have been an impression that  Kenya  have been become passive population in the midst of poor management of their   authoritarian government,; and the outside force that have made them now active in    raising their voices is because of the  help of the US ambassador  to Kenya.  (http://www.pambazuka.org/en/category/features/57383)  References: (http://archive.lib.msu.edu/DMC/African%20Journals/pdfs/political%20science/volume7n2/ajps007002006.pdf) (http://www.pambazuka.org/en/category/features/57383)   Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

The Effects Of Civil Society Activism In Kenya

The Effects of Civil Society Activism in Kenya The civil society activism which comprises of different groups in Kenya, such as h...

Recent Political Crisis In Libya

RECENT POLITICAL CRISIS IN LIBYA         The year of 2011 provided the marks of the recent historical events and series of military and political insurgency when people of their country from different areas in Libya unite together to oust one of the most powerful man Colonel Muammar Gaddafi the head of states. The people and their organization created a peaceful protest last February 17 of 2011 but the infiltration of Gaddafi’s military forces have prevented them. Report shows that more than 200 people has been killed and injured in Benghazi because of such incidents that started more fierce rebellious outrage. The protest against the man have spread all throughout the country that even create a stronger forces to oust him but Gaddafi’s long term loyalist and military have counter measure such forces to also create a group of stronger forces on his side.       This situation created a so called Libyan Civil War. The opposition resolution is to remove Gaddafi from his position to form a new government that he has served from 1969 up to 2011 his 42 years of long tenure without replacement have still shown his hunger and greed in power that he will not go down in his position until his last breath that he has even call upon their people to fight for him.  The UN Security Council has also passes a resolution on February 26 to further remind the head of state upon using military forces and weapons of massive destruction in facing his antagonist but Gaddafi has disregarded such council and continue his forces in eliminating those people who tried to oppose his leadership position.       By March they have strong military and loyal forces to penetrate Benghazi’s control over by Gadaffi’s leadership but the rebel forces would fight back to upheld their position. The series of destructive forces and bombing have created a kiosk in most of their community to look back and escape the violence they have been facing there are about 80,000 people who have crossed the borders of Tunisia in whatever way possible in order to live. Refugee from all over the world mostly migrant workers from Sub-Saharan Africa, Philippines, India, China, Bangladesh and other countries have carried their load desperately and willingly just to get out and survive in this chaos.       This incident has brought the UN resolution to provide a military intervention in order to protect the civilian from the wrath of war, during the 19th day of March the UN military forces have declared a “no fly zone”. The military coalition headed by France, United Kingdom and United States to keep strategic control over the areas and borders in order to prevent unnecessary military forces of Gaddafi’s take over. In this area they have provided Jet Fighters and launching a hundred tomahawk missile air strikes in most Libyan tanks in support of “operation odyssey”. By August the Libyan rebel group has regained their power that they have strongly engaged in coastline offense that overthrown Gaddafi’s men and took control on Tripoli. But Gaddafi remained hidden.       On September 16 The U.N. Security Council declared the permission on Libya and the U.N. General Assembly approves the request to authorize interim government representative as Libya’s sole representatives at the United Nation (UN) recognizing the National Transitional Council of Libya (NTC) so that they can have an interim government that is legal. The NTC has also issued a Constitutional Declaration last August of 2011 so that they can establish a democratic system of government. As early as February the NTC have already initiated its intention to act as a revolutionary council that will constitute a transition of government that will form the regulatory government that will be recognized as legitimate in Libya headed by executive board whose Chairman is Mahmoud Jibril from March 5 to 23rd of October and presently the interim Prime Minister of Libya.       Finally on October 20 Colonel Muammar Gaddafi has been captured and killed in his hometown in Sirte although it created confusion and rumors that it is not really his body till it has been proven and so it does. While some believed that this kind of leadership will never happen again in their country. Two loyalist of Muammar Gaddafi has decided to bury his body in a secret place in Sahara Desert so that they can perform a decent burial with the man. This announcement is a monumental history in Libya and this confirmation leads to victory that the long decade of suppression and political supremacy crisis in Libya has finally ended. References: (http://www.analysisintelligence.com/government-analysis/crisis-in-libya-gaddafi-and-the-prospect-of-civil-war/ ) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muammar_Gaddafi)  (http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/worldhaveyoursay/2011/03/the_humanitarian_crisis_in_lib.html) (http://www.voanews.com/english/news/africa/US-Allies-Attack-Libya-118304704.html) (http://thedailycougar.com/2011/10/25/death-of-a-despot/) (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-rt-us-libya-gaddafi-powertre79m13c-20111023,0,6658210.story) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Jibril)     Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

Recent Political Crisis In Libya

RECENT POLITICAL CRISIS IN LIBYA The year of 2011 provided the marks of the recent historical events and series of military and ...

Separation of Powers

Separation of Powers   Separation of Powers:               Separation of powers is a model for the governance of democratic states. The state is divided into branches, and each branch of the state has separate and independent powers and areas of responsibility. It is the division of the legislative, executive, and judicial functions of government among separate and independent bodies. Separation of Power is a method of removing the amount of power in any group’s hands, making it more difficult ton abuse. According to  (2000), the concept of a ‘separation of powers’ is an important one in constitutional thinking. Again it is a concept which has a superficial simplicity but also a deeper complexity, not least because it has both a descriptive and a prescriptive element. The idea has a long history in political thought right back to Aristotle, through Locke and Montesquieu. The conscious adoption of ‘separation of powers’ principles by the framers of the American constitution in the late eighteenth century ensured its importance in subsequent constitution-making. It is based on the idea that there are three classes of governmental function, each carried out by a distinct organ of government. In descriptive terms, these are the – executive function, carried out by the Executive (government), legislative function, carried out by the Legislature (parliament, assembly), and judicial function, carried out by the Judiciary (the courts) ().  The idea of balance was held to be fundamental, producing a practical form of ‘mixed’ government that prevented tyranny while enabling effectiveness. The growing dominance of the Commons was balanced by the influence of the Crown and the Lords, thus securing a constitutional equilibrium. Alongside these ideas of balance and mixture was the concept of a separation of powers (between executive, legislative, and judicial functions) as an axial constitutional principle (2003).     The House of Lords:                         Members of the House of Lords are mostly appointed by the queen, a fixed number are elected internally and a limited number of Church of England archbishops sit in the House. The works of the Lords complement the business of the Commons. It also acts as a revising chamber for legislation. A group of salaried, full-time judges known as Law Lords carries out the judicial work in the House of Lords, which is also the highest court in the United Kingdom. According to (1972), the House of Lords shares most of its functions with the House of Commons, but its judicial functions as the highest Court of Appeal are peculiar to itself (). It is very evident that the House of Commons holds more power. The members of the House of Commons were elected directly by the people to form the Government.       House of Lords Reforms: The Parliament Act 1911 together with the parliament Act 1949 enables the Commons to pass legislation without approval from the Lords but subject to certain time delays. The House of Lords was granted the power to delay legislation but not to prevent it. (1972) The Life Peerages Act, 1958, removed the general disqualification to which women had formerly been subject in respect of membership of the House of Lords. The Act permits the conferring of life peerages on women, but it did not remove the disqualification upon hereditary peeresses from sitting and voting in the House in their own right. This disability was ultimately removed, however, by the Peerage Act, 1963, and a woman holding a hereditary peerage in her own right is now qualified for membership of the House of Lords on the same conditions as a man in similar circumstances (). The Peerage Act of 1963 made Peeresses in their own right admitted to the House, as were all Scottish peers. The Act enabled hereditary peerages to bi disclaimed for life.  The only other serious and Government-inspired attempt to reform the House of Lords prior to the arrival in office of ‘New Labour’ in 1997 was the ill-fated Parliament (No. 2) Bill which was introduced by the second Wilson Administration in 1968. This provided for the creation of a smaller Second Chamber and a two-tier membership consisting of those peers with the right to vote (about 200-250 active Life Peers plus the Bishops and serving Law Lords) and those non-voting peers who would only be entitled to sit and speak (made up of irregularly attending Life Peers and hereditary peers). With the planned creation of about 80 more Labour Life Peers, the idea was that no single party would have a permanent overall majority, but the Government of the day would have a 10 per cent majority over the combined Opposition parties with cross-bench peers holding the balance.             Since 1997, the United Kingdom government has been seeking to reform the House of Lords. Reforming the House of Lords was presented as one of the central elements of Labour’s programme of constitutional reform when it came to power in 1997.To make the House of Lords more democratic and representative, the right of hereditary peers to sit and vote in the House of Lords was ended by statute. Originally, both Houses of Parliament were granted equal legislative powers. The agreement of both Houses was necessary before a bill could be submitted to the Monarch for royal assent. A deal was completed between the government and the Lords in 1999 removing most of hereditary Peers. As a result, the House of Lords Act 1999 was passed leaving among the majority of appointed peers a rump of 92 Hereditary peers until the second phase of reform was completed.  The House of Lords Bill was introduced to remove hereditary peers.             According to (1996), The past century has been punctuated by attempts to reform the Lords, and its survival up to now in its present form is largely because there has been little agreement on how to do it. The main difficulty is that any change may radically affect its status, and consequently, the balance of power in Parliament. At present, the House of Lords is indisputably the less significant House. Though it performs a useful function in examining legislation, and in providing a degree of safeguard against the abuse by a government of a Commons majority, its lack of real legitimacy derived from popular election means that it cannot seriously challenge the Commons. If the hereditary peers were to be replaced by elected members, then the Lords might begin to challenge the primacy of the Commons ().   Present Roles of the House of Lords: <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph; line-height: 200%"> The House of Lords acts as a second pair of eye on bills that have already been debated in the commons. </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph; line-height: 200%"> The Lords also has regular questioning times for government officials.</li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph; line-height: 200%"> The Lords also initiates legislation, which is debated by the commons.</li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph; line-height: 200%"> At present the lords acts as the final court of appeal in Great Britain. This is done by the Law Lords. However, the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 calls for a separate judiciary body. Under the provisions of the Constitutional Reform Act, a Supreme Court will be created. This act aims to promote separation of power by creating an independent and transparent judiciary.</li>             The Lord Chancellor: Past Functions:             The Lord Chancellor was a senior member and an important figure in the government of the United Kingdom. The Lord Chancellor was originally the Speaker or the presiding officer of the House of Lords by right of prescription. The Lord Chancellor formerly heads an office known as the Lord Chancellor’s Office. The Lord Chancellor used to perform several different judicial functions. The Lord Chancellor used to supervise the Court of Appeal of England and Wales, the High Court of Justice of England and Wales and the Crown Court of England and Wales as the President of the Supreme Court of England. He also used to participate in judicial sessions of the House of Lords. The Lord Chancellor used to be a member of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. Present Functions:             The Constitutional Bill was introduced by the government in the House of Lords in 2004. The bill sought to abolish the office of the Lord Chancellor and transfer his duties and functions to other officials. The Lord Speaker assumed some of the Lord Chancellor’s functions such as chairing debates in the Lord’s chamber and speaking for the House on ceremonial occasions.  The Department for Constitutional Affairs was created in replacement of the Lord Chancellor’s Department. The Lord Chancellor was also holds the position of Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs. The creation of a new Judicial Appointments Commission ended the Lord Chancellor’s past position as head of the judiciary and power to appoint judges. The Department for Constitutional Affairs is responsible for constitution reforms. Its concerns are the administration of the Courts, legal aid and the appointment of Judiciary. It is also responsible for issues relating to human rights, data protection and freedom of information.         The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom:             The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom will be created under the provisions of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005. The Judicial functions of the Law Lords in the House of Lords will be taken over by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court will be the final court of appeal in all matters under English law, Welsh law and Northern Irish law. The new Supreme Court will put the relationship between the executive, the legislature and the judiciary on a modern footing. It will also ensure the independence and transparency of the judicial system. The Supreme Court will be independent of other branches of government and would carry a badge of independence and neutrality in the eyes of the people. It is essential to lessen the risk of public perception that the decisions of the judges could be politically motivated. The key objective of creating a Supreme Court is to achieve a full and transparent separation between the judiciary and the legislature.                   Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

Separation of Powers

Separation of Powers Separation of Powers: Separation of powers is a model for the governance of democratic states. The st...

THE COMMONWEALTH PARLIAMENT AND ITS POWER

THE COMMONWEALTH PARLIAMENT AND ITS POWER     I.              Introductions Australia possesses a rather distinct political system as compared to the rest of the existing systems in the world. It has acquired a system which could only be described as a combination of the US and the UK. Basically, the country is composed of a federal government implementing a parliamentary form of leadership. (2003) This means that the parliament of Australia holds a copious level of political influence in the continent. The following discussions will provide specific descriptions on the powers and limitations of these parliamentary powers as stated in the legal regime of Australia.   II.           Sovereignty of the Commonwealth The parliament of Australia came into being with the ratification of Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900. Its constitution is composed of three individual sections legislature, the executive and the judiciary. There are nine Parliaments in Australia which are tasked with the law-making in the continent. ( 2000) These are all answerable to the Commonwealth of Australia, the top legislative body in the land. Theoretically, this branch of the government is tasked to make laws and supervise the legality of the individual actions made by the Executive. In line with the Parliament, the Executive branch also has nine branches scattered all over the federation of Australia. ( 2001) The executive council is normally composed of two kinds: Cabinet and Executive Council. The Judicial branch is manifested in the Commonwealth by the High Court of Australia along with numerous federal courts scattered all though the continent.   In looking at the previous paragraphs, it appears that the constitutional structures and frameworks present in Australia have clearly demarcated the lines separating the powers and responsibilities of each branch of the Commonwealth. To a certain extent, when considering the power of legislation, it has openly rebutted the claim stating that “the Commonwealth Parliament has unlimited power to make whatever legislation it chooses.”     The ascendancy of the Commonwealth in Australia is rather apparent considering most of its responsibilities and powers are ingrained in the Constitution. (2006) For instance, s51 of the Constitution provides a detailed description of the areas on which the Parliament has power over to create laws. These are basically pointed out in the headings of the subsequent contents of the section. Those which are not mentioned in s51 are considered residual powers. These powers remain in the administration of the individual federal states. Seeing the claim of the above paragraph, it shows that individual states do have independence and a level of legislative power to govern their domain. However, the Australian Constitution also ensured the ascendancy of the legal framework made by the Commonwealth. This is manifested in s109 of the Constitution indicating that any inconsistency of the laws ratified and implemented in individual states with any laws ratified and implemented by the Commonwealth, the latter supersedes the former. Other details on the power of the Commonwealth are also provided by judicial interpretations forwarded by the High Courts. For instance, the decision in The Commonwealth v. Tasmania (the Tasmanian Dams Case) (1983) 158 CLR 1 extended the definition the external affairs powers of the Commonwealth. This case is basically an offshoot of the Koowarta v Bjelke-Petersen & Ors; Queensland v Commonwealth [1982] HCA 27 where the Commonwealth wielded its power to supersede the State Governments of Australia.   III.         Conclusion The discussions above have provided a description of the capabilities of the Commonwealth in the context of legislation. Basically, the analyses of the provisions of the Constitution and some legal interpretations on the issue, the paper found out that the statement claiming that “the Commonwealth Parliament has unlimited power to make whatever legislation it chooses” is not entirely true. The power of the Commonwealth could only go as far as those pointed out in the Constitution. In the same regard, checks from both the executive and the judicature are always present to monitor the actions of the Commonwealth. Thus, this shows that though the Commonwealth does wield worldly political influence in Australia, its actions are still limited to those prescribed by the rule of law.           Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

THE COMMONWEALTH PARLIAMENT AND ITS POWER

THE COMMONWEALTH PARLIAMENT AND ITS POWER I. Introductions Australia possesses a rather distinct political ...

Separation of Powers

Separation of Powers   Separation of Powers:               Separation of powers is a model for the governance of democratic states. The state is divided into branches, and each branch of the state has separate and independent powers and areas of responsibility. It is the division of the legislative, executive, and judicial functions of government among separate and independent bodies. Separation of Power is a method of removing the amount of power in any group’s hands, making it more difficult ton abuse. According to (2000), the concept of a ‘separation of powers’ is an important one in constitutional thinking. Again it is a concept which has a superficial simplicity but also a deeper complexity, not least because it has both a descriptive and a prescriptive element. The idea has a long history in political thought right back to Aristotle, through Locke and Montesquieu. The conscious adoption of ‘separation of powers’ principles by the framers of the American constitution in the late eighteenth century ensured its importance in subsequent constitution-making. It is based on the idea that there are three classes of governmental function, each carried out by a distinct organ of government. In descriptive terms, these are the – executive function, carried out by the Executive (government), legislative function, carried out by the Legislature (parliament, assembly), and judicial function, carried out by the Judiciary (the courts) ().  The idea of balance was held to be fundamental, producing a practical form of ‘mixed’ government that prevented tyranny while enabling effectiveness. The growing dominance of the Commons was balanced by the influence of the Crown and the Lords, thus securing a constitutional equilibrium. Alongside these ideas of balance and mixture was the concept of a separation of powers (between executive, legislative, and judicial functions) as an axial constitutional principle (2003).     The House of Lords:                         Members of the House of Lords are mostly appointed by the queen, a fixed number are elected internally and a limited number of Church of England archbishops sit in the House. The works of the Lords complement the business of the Commons. It also acts as a revising chamber for legislation. A group of salaried, full-time judges known as Law Lords carries out the judicial work in the House of Lords, which is also the highest court in the United Kingdom. According to  (1972), the House of Lords shares most of its functions with the House of Commons, but its judicial functions as the highest Court of Appeal are peculiar to itself (p.365). It is very evident that the House of Commons holds more power. The members of the House of Commons were elected directly by the people to form the Government.       House of Lords Reforms: The Parliament Act 1911 together with the parliament Act 1949 enables the Commons to pass legislation without approval from the Lords but subject to certain time delays. The House of Lords was granted the power to delay legislation but not to prevent it. (1972) The Life Peerages Act, 1958, removed the general disqualification to which women had formerly been subject in respect of membership of the House of Lords. The Act permits the conferring of life peerages on women, but it did not remove the disqualification upon hereditary peeresses from sitting and voting in the House in their own right. This disability was ultimately removed, however, by the Peerage Act, 1963, and a woman holding a hereditary peerage in her own right is now qualified for membership of the House of Lords on the same conditions as a man in similar circumstances (). The Peerage Act of 1963 made Peeresses in their own right admitted to the House, as were all Scottish peers. The Act enabled hereditary peerages to bi disclaimed for life.  The only other serious and Government-inspired attempt to reform the House of Lords prior to the arrival in office of ‘New Labour’ in 1997 was the ill-fated Parliament (No. 2) Bill which was introduced by the second Wilson Administration in 1968. This provided for the creation of a smaller Second Chamber and a two-tier membership consisting of those peers with the right to vote (about 200-250 active Life Peers plus the Bishops and serving Law Lords) and those non-voting peers who would only be entitled to sit and speak (made up of irregularly attending Life Peers and hereditary peers). With the planned creation of about 80 more Labour Life Peers, the idea was that no single party would have a permanent overall majority, but the Government of the day would have a 10 per cent majority over the combined Opposition parties with cross-bench peers holding the balance.             Since 1997, the United Kingdom government has been seeking to reform the House of Lords. Reforming the House of Lords was presented as one of the central elements of Labour’s programme of constitutional reform when it came to power in 1997.To make the House of Lords more democratic and representative, the right of hereditary peers to sit and vote in the House of Lords was ended by statute. Originally, both Houses of Parliament were granted equal legislative powers. The agreement of both Houses was necessary before a bill could be submitted to the Monarch for royal assent. A deal was completed between the government and the Lords in 1999 removing most of hereditary Peers. As a result, the House of Lords Act 1999 was passed leaving among the majority of appointed peers a rump of 92 Hereditary peers until the second phase of reform was completed.  The House of Lords Bill was introduced to remove hereditary peers.             According to (1996), The past century has been punctuated by attempts to reform the Lords, and its survival up to now in its present form is largely because there has been little agreement on how to do it. The main difficulty is that any change may radically affect its status, and consequently, the balance of power in Parliament. At present, the House of Lords is indisputably the less significant House. Though it performs a useful function in examining legislation, and in providing a degree of safeguard against the abuse by a government of a Commons majority, its lack of real legitimacy derived from popular election means that it cannot seriously challenge the Commons. If the hereditary peers were to be replaced by elected members, then the Lords might begin to challenge the primacy of the Commons ().   Present Roles of the House of Lords: <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph; line-height: 200%"> The House of Lords acts as a second pair of eye on bills that have already been debated in the commons. </li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph; line-height: 200%"> The Lords also has regular questioning times for government officials.</li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph; line-height: 200%"> The Lords also initiates legislation, which is debated by the commons.</li> <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph; line-height: 200%"> At present the lords acts as the final court of appeal in Great Britain. This is done by the Law Lords. However, the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 calls for a separate judiciary body. Under the provisions of the Constitutional Reform Act, a Supreme Court will be created. This act aims to promote separation of power by creating an independent and transparent judiciary.</li>             The Lord Chancellor: Past Functions:             The Lord Chancellor was a senior member and an important figure in the government of the United Kingdom. The Lord Chancellor was originally the Speaker or the presiding officer of the House of Lords by right of prescription. The Lord Chancellor formerly heads an office known as the Lord Chancellor’s Office. The Lord Chancellor used to perform several different judicial functions. The Lord Chancellor used to supervise the Court of Appeal of England and Wales, the High Court of Justice of England and Wales and the Crown Court of England and Wales as the President of the Supreme Court of England. He also used to participate in judicial sessions of the House of Lords. The Lord Chancellor used to be a member of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. Present Functions:             The Constitutional Bill was introduced by the government in the House of Lords in 2004. The bill sought to abolish the office of the Lord Chancellor and transfer his duties and functions to other officials. The Lord Speaker assumed some of the Lord Chancellor’s functions such as chairing debates in the Lord’s chamber and speaking for the House on ceremonial occasions.  The Department for Constitutional Affairs was created in replacement of the Lord Chancellor’s Department. The Lord Chancellor was also holds the position of Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs. The creation of a new Judicial Appointments Commission ended the Lord Chancellor’s past position as head of the judiciary and power to appoint judges. The Department for Constitutional Affairs is responsible for constitution reforms. Its concerns are the administration of the Courts, legal aid and the appointment of Judiciary. It is also responsible for issues relating to human rights, data protection and freedom of information.         The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom:             The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom will be created under the provisions of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005. The Judicial functions of the Law Lords in the House of Lords will be taken over by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court will be the final court of appeal in all matters under English law, Welsh law and Northern Irish law. The new Supreme Court will put the relationship between the executive, the legislature and the judiciary on a modern footing. It will also ensure the independence and transparency of the judicial system. The Supreme Court will be independent of other branches of government and would carry a badge of independence and neutrality in the eyes of the people. It is essential to lessen the risk of public perception that the decisions of the judges could be politically motivated. The key objective of creating a Supreme Court is to achieve a full and transparent separation between the judiciary and the legislature.                   Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com

Separation of Powers

Separation of Powers Separation of Powers: Separation of powers is a model for the governance of democratic states. The st...