Suchergebnisse

From comparative research on the constitutional development in Central & Eastern Europe & also from the long-standing debate on whether parliamentarism or presidentialism best facilitates democracy, it is apparent that there has been & continues to be, a certain degree of confusion concerning the concepts of semi-presidentialism & presidentialism. Different scholars mean different things by the terms & therefore classify countries differently. In this article I argue that the conceptual dichotomy between pro-premiar (premier-presidentialism) & pro-president systems (president-parliamentary systems) provide the best solution to several of the problems related to categorizing constitutional types, most importantly perhaps to the presidential power dilemma. I, furthermore, employ these concepts on the post-communist constitutional systems & try to reveal patterns with regard to presidential power, geographical region & democratzsation. 6 Tables, 3 Figures, 51 References. Adapted from the source document.

Ukraine has repeatedly shifted between the two sub-types of semi-presidentialism, i.e. between premier-presidentialism and president-parliamentarism. The aim of this article is to discuss to what extent theoretical arguments against premier-presidential and president-parliamentary systems are relevant for understanding the shifting directions of the Ukrainian regime. As a point of departure, I formulate three main claims from the literature: 1) "President-parliamentarism is less conducive to democratization than premier-presidentialism."; 2) "Semi-presidentialism in both its variants have built-in incitements for intra-executive conflict between the president and the prime minister."; 3) "Semi-presidentialism in general, and president-parliamentarism in particular, encourages presidentialization of political parties." I conclude from the study's empirical overview that the president-parliamentary system– the constitutional arrangement with the most dismal record of democratization – has been instrumental in strengthening presidential dominance and authoritarian tendencies. The premier-presidential period 2006–2010 was by no means smooth and stable, but the presidential dominance weakened and the survival of the government was firmly anchored in the parliament. During this period, there were also indications of a gradual strengthening of institutional capacity among the main political parties and the parliament began to emerge as a significant political arena.

This paper a study political education to meet presidential elections and vice president of the republic of Indonesia of 2019 in fatsun democracy Pancasila and a deliberative.The results show that in fatsun democracy Pancasila and a deliberative, found the practical discursus, formation public opinion and political aspirations the community, and sovereignty the populace as procedural as the owner of and holder sovereignty highest dealt with in constitutional in Indonesia and can control government decisions that was formed through elections.Political education is a means of to understand rights and obligations and the responsibilities of a citizen in our nation and state, besides the responsibility of presidents and vice president of the republic of Indonesia was elected to carry power as the mandate. The responsibility of in education politics it is it is an obligation of a political party, KPU-Bawaslu, and all elements of the community with the aim of an increase in the understanding of the related the vision mission presidential candidates and a vice president been attained by Indonesia in discursus the public which had bought in accordance with idee and aim of the Indonesia state that is to date it has not yet been attained.

politics is a gray area does not know which is right and falsehood. In the political world is not the technical term is "wrong" all the steps that must be "right" and "systematic" does not care whether the way is used hurt or benefit others. In the political world does not know friend or foe whom is eternally eternal interests. In this paper, Abu Ala Maududi is as one of fundamentalist leaders to write his thoughts on women in pakistan political activities that are not consistent in Mawdudi's view. Maududi never support a woman become president by supporting the candidacy of Fatimah Ali Jinnah became President of Pakistan, and on the other hand he states that women should only work in the domestic sector where she should not be working in the public sector, including the President and Parliament. This shows that the political purpose for anyone, including the interests of fundamentalist Mawdudi.