Suchergebnisse

The political regime change that occurred in Romania, along with the dismissal of communism, elicited a process of emergence of new political elites and of new patterns in the functioning of the country's political institutions. But new political elites do not emerge ex nihilo and institutional changes are slower in practice than the ambition of change. Given the extensive absence of decision-making or technical expertise among the political actors, the new parties in government conducted a policy of cooption of personnel instituting new patterns of selection. The paper will emphasize the fact that, in the Romanian case, the process of professionalization of governmental personnel took the form of a long process, and that the protocols of the reconfiguration implied divergent strategies in what concerns the governments' ministers and the secretaries of state. It will be shown that although the ministerial careers suggest the institutionalization of recruitment procedures similar to other European parliamentary democracies, the junior ministers' level remained dominated by forms of cooption from outside the political realm.

framed in an optional role under the July monarchy, Tocqueville found an opportunity in the period 1848-1 851 to present its political and historical thinking for implementation. As a member of the Constitutional Commission, he has more influence than has been generally said, and if the arrangements he proposes depend on the circumstances, they are also informed by the analysis of the theorist. But Tocqueville's thinking and action encounter a series of contradictions, owing to its own republican position and the forces of the moment. In addition, in this period there is a problem that has been perceived, wrongly or correctly, as a recurring issue in French history since the Revolution: release the Republican Executive from the monarchic mortgage. This study on Tocqueville helps to put in perspective certain controversy concerning the Fifth Federal Republic. ; Cantonné dans un rôle oppositionnel sous la monarchie de Juillet, Tocqueville trouve dans la période 1848-1851 l'occasion de soumettre à l'application sa réflexion politique et historique. Membre de la commission de Constitution, il exerce plus d'influence qu'on ne l'a généralement dit, et si les modalités qu'il propose sont tributaires des circonstances, elles s'éclairent également par l'analyse du théoricien. Mais la pensée et l'action de Tocqueville rencontrent une série de contradictions, tenant à sa propre position républicaine et au jeu des forces du moment. En outre, réapparaît dans cette période un problème ressenti, à tort ou à raison, comme récurrent dans l'histoire française depuis la Révolution : libérer l'exécutif républicain de l'hypothèque monarchique. Cette étude sur Tocqueville contribue à replacer en perspective certaines controverses concernant la Cinquième Répu­blique.

Government budget is an essential tool for Public Administration, which needs to make good use of it in order to implement policies and achieve its objectives. Budget management is regulated by budget law, which also determines the roles of the Legislative and Executive branches in the stages of the budget cycle: preparation, approval, execution and control. The distribution of powers between the Government and the Parliament and the interactions between these actors regarding the budget may determine if a given political system is more or less democratic. The Parliament's involvement in financial decisions is not only essential to democracy, but also a guarantee of greater transparency and efficiency in public finances. Brazil is a young democracy, one that has been consolidated only since the enactment of the Federal Constitution of 1988. From that moment on, Brazilian budget law has substantially evolved, the enhancement of the level of participation of the Legislature Power and the adoption of a more effective governance model being great examples. However, the relationship between the Legislative and Executive branches is still conflicting. The Executive branch has a tendency to overpower the legislature, especially when it comes to the government budget. The aim of this thesis is to analyze how the Legislative and Executive Powers are involved in the budget cycle and what is the kind of relationship that is established between them in each stage of this cycle. These research questions are intended to shed some light on the often-stated argument that the Executive branch dominates the budget process and to assess to which extent is the Legislative Power responsible for such a dominance. ; Le budget est un instrument essentiel à la gestion publique, à travers lequel l'État peut mettre en place les politiques publiques et atteindre ses objectifs. La gestion du budget est orientée par le droit budgétaire, qui détermine, en outre, les compétences des pouvoirs législatif et exécutif dans les étapes du cycle ...

Government budget is an essential tool for Public Administration, which needs to make good use of it in order to implement policies and achieve its objectives. Budget management is regulated by budget law, which also determines the roles of the Legislative and Executive branches in the stages of the budget cycle: preparation, approval, execution and control. The distribution of powers between the Government and the Parliament and the interactions between these actors regarding the budget may determine if a given political system is more or less democratic. The Parliament's involvement in financial decisions is not only essential to democracy, but also a guarantee of greater transparency and efficiency in public finances. Brazil is a young democracy, one that has been consolidated only since the enactment of the Federal Constitution of 1988. From that moment on, Brazilian budget law has substantially evolved, the enhancement of the level of participation of the Legislature Power and the adoption of a more effective governance model being great examples. However, the relationship between the Legislative and Executive branches is still conflicting. The Executive branch has a tendency to overpower the legislature, especially when it comes to the government budget. The aim of this thesis is to analyze how the Legislative and Executive Powers are involved in the budget cycle and what is the kind of relationship that is established between them in each stage of this cycle. These research questions are intended to shed some light on the often-stated argument that the Executive branch dominates the budget process and to assess to which extent is the Legislative Power responsible for such a dominance. ; Le budget est un instrument essentiel à la gestion publique, à travers lequel l'État peut mettre en place les politiques publiques et atteindre ses objectifs. La gestion du budget est orientée par le droit budgétaire, qui détermine, en outre, les compétences des pouvoirs législatif et exécutif dans les étapes du cycle budgétaire : la préparation, l'adoption, l'exécution et le contrôle. La distribution de compétences entre le gouvernement et le Parlement et les interactions entre ces acteurs vis-à-vis du budget déterminent le caractère plus ou moins démocratique du système politique de l'État. La participation du Parlement à la décision financière apparaît non seulement comme essentielle à la démocratie, mais aussi comme une garantie de plus de transparence et d'efficacité des finances publiques.Le Brésil est un pays dont la démocratie a été consolidée récemment, à partir de la Constitution Fédérale de 1988. Depuis la promulgation de ce texte, le droit budgétaire a beaucoup évolué pour prendre en compte une plus grande participation du pouvoir législatif et adopter un modèle plus efficace de gestion publique. Toutefois, les rapports entre les pouvoirs législatif et exécutif restent toujours conflictuels, l'exécutif ayant tendance à se superposer au législatif, y compris et notamment, en ce qui concerne le budget de l'État. L'objectif de cette thèse est donc d'analyser comment les pouvoirs législatif et exécutif interviennent au sein du cycle budgétaire et quelle est la nature des rapports entretenus entre Gouvernement et Parlement dans chaque étape de ce cycle, de façon à appréhender si le pouvoir exécutif domine vraiment la procédure budgétaire, comme il est souvent affirmé, et dans quelle mesure le pouvoir législatif contribue à la prédominance du pouvoir exécutif vis-à-vis du budget de l'État.