The Term Decentralization Is Used So Commonly And
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
The Cyprus Question and the Role of the UN: an Overall Assessment
The Cyprus Question and the Role of the UN: An Overall Assessment Andreas Theophanous Odysseas Christou Since its creation the Republic of Cyprus has had a very turbulent history. From the outset the geopolitical implications of the Treaty of Establishment, the Treaty of Alliance, and the Treaty of Guarantee on the one hand and the particular characteristics of the Cold War on the other were not fully understood. Domestic tensions as well as foreign interventions led eventually to the cataclysmic events of the summer of 1974. Fifty years after the establishment of the Republic of Cyprus, this island-state faces critical problems and multidimensional challenges.1 The greatest challenge remains the reestablishment of the territorial integrity and unity of the country. Prior to the Turkish invasion of 1974, the basis of the intercommunal negotiations revolved around the establishment of a unitary state with elements of local and communal, self-administration on issues of low level politics. Since the latter part of the 1970s, the model for the solution to the Cyprus problem, according to conventional orthodoxy, has essentially been a bizonal bicommunal federation.2 Yet despite successive and repeated rounds of intercommunal negotiations under the auspices of the UN and the support of the international community there has not been an agreement.3 In fact, the problem remains unresolved while the gap between the two sides is widening. Thus, it is not surprising that to the present day the bizonal bicommunal federation does not yet have a commonly accepted precise definition. Besides it is indeed doubtful whether the implementation of such a model could lead to stability and cooperation.4 Historical Background and Context Cyprus is the third largest island in the Mediterranean, located approximately 70 km to the south of Turkey. -
Presidential Or Parliamentary Does It Make a Difference? Juan J. Linz
VrA Democracy: Presidential or Parliamentary Does it Make a Difference? Juan J. Linz Pelatiah Pert Professor of Political and Social Sciences Yale University July 1985 Paper prepared for the project, "The Role of Political Parties in the Return to Democracy in the Southern Cone," sponsored by the Latin American Program of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, and the World Peace Foundation Copyright © 1985 by Juan J. Linz / INTRODUCTION In recent decades renewed efforts have been made to study and understand the variety of political democracies, but most of those analyses have focused on the patterns of political conflict and more specifically on party systems and coalition formation, in contrast to the attention of many classical writers on the institutional arrangements. With the exception of the large literature on the impact of electorul systems on the shaping of party systems generated by the early writings of Ferdinand Hermens and the classic work by Maurice Duverger, as well as the writings of Douglas Rae and Giovanni Sartori, there has been little attention paid by political scientists to the role of political institutions except in the study of particular countries. Debates about monarchy and republic, parliamentary and presidential regimes, the unitary state and federalism have receded into oblivion and not entered the current debates about the functioning of democra-ic and political institutions and practices, including their effect on the party systems. At a time when a number of countries initiate the process of writing or rewriting constitu tions, some of those issues should regain salience and become part of what Sartori has called "political engineering" in an effort to set the basis of democratic consolidation and stability. -
Comparative Analysis Between the Constitutional Processes in Egypt and Tunisia - Lessons Learnt - Overview of the Constitutional Situation in Libya
DIRECTORATE-GENERAL FOR EXTERNAL POLICIES OF THE UNION DIRECTORATE B POLICY DEPARTMENT IN-DEPTH ANALYSIS COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS BETWEEN THE CONSTITUTIONAL PROCESSES IN EGYPT AND TUNISIA - LESSONS LEARNT - OVERVIEW OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL SITUATION IN LIBYA Abstract The 2014 Constitutions of Egypt and Tunisia, though enacted at the same time and as a consequence of very similar revolutionary forces, are different in style and content. Egypt has fallen back to the structures of the 1971 Constitution and will likely experience further restoration of the authoritarian presidentialism. The Armed Forces continue to play a dominant background role in the political and constitutional life of the country. Tunisia seems to have embraced a new constitutional paradigm that is based on a modern approach to human rights protection and a balanced institutional framework that provides for substantial checks and balances between the three branches of government. The constitutional drafting process in Libya is overshadowed by a pronounced lack of security, the absence of functioning state institutions, societal fragmentation, and the uneven distribution of natural wealth. National reconciliation is a key precondition of successful political and constitutional transition but the process has to date been a very difficult one. There are indications, however, that stakeholders in Libya are trying to build consensus on important aspects of the process. The 1951 Constitution, based on a federal framework, offers the best conceptual framework for the recently elected -
Legal Country Mapping
Legal Country Mapping Republic of Mauritius 08/2020 By: Bryan Ramsamy LEGAL COUNTRY MAPPING, Republic of Mauritius TABLE OF CONTENTS. CHAPTER 1: WATER GOVERNANCE OVERVIEW ....................................................................... 4 A- Preliminary questions: ............................................................................................................ 4 B- The country is member of a regional integration organisation? ............................................ 5 C- Water governance and administration: .................................................................................. 8 CHAPTER 2: INTERNATIONAL AND REGIONAL TREATIES .........................................................10 A. Regional Multilateral/Bilateral Treaties ................................................................................ 10 B. International Treaties ............................................................................................................ 12 Table 3. ILO conventions .......................................................................................................15 C. Regional/Africa ...................................................................................................................... 16 D. Transboundary freshwater resources agreements ............................................................... 17 CHAPTER 3: DOMESTIC LEGISLATION ON WATER ...................................................................18 A-Water law .............................................................................................................................. -
State Structure and Electoral Systems in Post-Conflict Situations
STATE STRUCTURE AND ELECTORAL SYSTEMS IN POST-CONFLICT SITUATIONS Authors Jarrett Blanc Aanund Hylland Kåre Vollan ii PREFACE In contemporary peace processes, almost without exception, the arrangements that bring about transition from conflict to stability include requirements related to elections. These requirements range in level of detail from general calendars to specific, almost legislative requirement for the nature and conduct of the elections. In either case, the electoral requirements are only very rarely subjected to a thorough process of expert review and public consultation. Unintended consequences often result, such as unrealistic timetables (and consequent postponements) in Afghanistan or guarantees for minority representation in Kosovo which, if implemented literally, could have deepened rather than moderated ethnic divisions. In Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Dayton accord introduced strong protection of the three major parties to the conflict, but at the same time created a government at state level which has had difficulty passing laws and making decisions in a reasonably efficient way. In addition, the protection of other groups has been weak. Post-conflict elections often bring conflicting groups back to the positions that created the conflict in the first place. If well designed and managed, elections can create legitimate political structures which promote conciliation and lead to controversial issues being solved through negotiations. If poorly designed and managed, they can simply restart passionate disputes and undermine the peace process. Careful consideration of the closely related issues of state structure and electoral systems is therefore essential at an early stage of any peace process. Identifying the requirements of state structure and electoral system design – such as protection of minority groups with separate identity at a national or sub-national level – can help to achieve robust political solutions. -
Official Language Designation
Official Language Designation Constitution-Building Primer 20 Official Language Designation International IDEA Constitution-Building Primer 20 Sujit Choudhry and Erin C. Houlihan © 2021 International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance International IDEA publications are independent of specific national or political interests. Views expressed in this publication do not necessarily represent the views of International IDEA, its Board or its Council members. The electronic version of this publication is available under a Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0) licence. You are free to copy, distribute and transmit the publication as well as to remix and adapt it, provided it is only for non-commercial purposes, that you appropriately attribute the publication, and that you distribute it under an identical licence. For more information visit the Creative Commons website: <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/>. Cover illustration: © 123RF, <http://123rf.com> Design and layout: International IDEA DOI: <https://doi.org/10.31752/idea.2021.40> ISBN: 978-91-7671-412-6 (PDF) Created with Booktype: <https://www.booktype.pro> Contents 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................ 6 Defining ‘official’ and ‘national’ languages .............................................................. 6 Advantages and risks ............................................................................................... 7 Where -
The Case for Effective Environmental Politics: Federalist Or Unitary State? Comparing the Cases of Canada, the United States Of
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform Volume 51 2018 The Case for Effective Environmental Politics: Federalist or Unitary State? Comparing the Cases of Canada, the United States of America, and the People’s Republic of China Justin Fisch Centre for International Sustainable Development Law Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjlr Part of the Comparative and Foreign Law Commons, Environmental Law Commons, and the Law and Politics Commons Recommended Citation Justin Fisch, The Case for Effective Environmental Politics: Federalist or Unitary State? Comparing the Cases of Canada, the United States of America, and the People’s Republic of China, 51 U. MICH. J. L. REFORM 777 (2018). Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjlr/vol51/iss4/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform at University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform by an authorized editor of University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE CASE FOR EFFECTIVE ENVIRONMENTAL POLITICS: FEDERALIST OR UNITARY STATE? COMPARING THE CASES OF CANADA, THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND THE PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA Justin Fisch* ABSTRACT Federalism, by its nature, is a segmented system of governance. The Canadian and American constitutional orders are divided along very clear lines of jurisdictional authority between levels of government. Environmental issues, by their nature, are holistic in scope—they transcend borders, governments, jurisdictions, and authorities. -
Are Unitary Systems Better Than Federal Systems?
Are Federal Systems Better than Unitary Systems? ABSTRACT Much has been written about the putative virtues and vices of federal and unitary systems of government, but little empirical testing of the impact of such systems on the quality of governance has been conducted. Do federal or unitary systems promote better social, political and economic outcomes? The paper takes up a series of theoretical debates put forth by advocates of federalism, including competition among subnational governments, fiscal federalism, veto points, accountability, and the size of government. In each case, there is room for doubt about the practical impact of federalism on governance. The paper then conducts a series of cross-national empirical tests over several decades of the impact of unitary systems on fifteen indicators of political, economic and human development. In most cases, a strong empirical relationship between unitarism and good governance obtains. To the extent that these constitutional structures make a difference, unitary systems appear to hold distinct advantages over federal ones. John Gerring Strom C. Thacker Carola Moreno Boston University Boston University Boston University Department of Political Science Department of International Relations Department of Economics 232 Bay State Road 152 Bay State Road 270 Bay State Road Boston MA 02215 Boston MA 02215 Boston MA 02215 617-353-2756 617-353-7160 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] DRAFT: Please do not quote or cite without authors’ permission. Comments welcome! June 22, 2007 Decentralization is, quite possibly, the dominant political trend of our time. Significant devolutions of authority from national to subnational levels have occurred in Africa (e.g., Cote d’Ivoire, Ghana), Asia (e.g., Bangladesh, India), Europe (e.g., Belgium, Britain, France, Italy, and Spain), and Latin America (e.g., Argentina, Colombia, and Mexico).1 Several new democracies have emerged with explicit constitutional guarantees for sub-state authorities (e.g., Russia and the European Union). -
Multi-Level Governance and Decentralization in the Unitary States of the European Union
MULTI-LEVEL GOVERNANCE AND DECENTRALIZATION IN THE UNITARY STATES OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. CASE STUDY: FRANCE AND ROMANIA GOVERNAÇÃO MULTI-NÍVEL E DESCENTRALIZAÇÃO NOS ESTADOS UNITÁRIOS DA UNIÃO EUROPEIA. ESTUDO DE CASO: FRANÇA E ROMÉNIA Adrian Ivan1 Natalia Cuglesan2 SUMMARY: 1 Introduction. 2 Regional decentralization and multi-level governance. 3 Why regional decentralization? 4 Why did Romania adopt a regionalization process through the extension of the competences of the local authorities? 5 What are the results of regional decentralization in France? Is it effi cient? 6 The results of administrative decentralization in Romania. 7 Final considerations. 8 References. RESUMO: Atualmente, governança multinível é o modelo mais adequado para descrever a União Europeia. A participação de atores públicos e privados no processo de tomada de decisão representa um fator fundamental para assegurar efi ciência e responsabilidade nas atividades das autoridades públicas. Este artigo aborda o sistema de governaça multinível a partir da perspectiva da distribuição vertical de competências entre as autoridades central, regional e local. O estudo de caso apresenta o modo em que a governança multinível pode ser implantada nos estados unitários, estruturada em três níveis, através da introdução de um nível intermediário entre os dois níveis já existentes (central e local). Este artigo também analisa o processo de descentralização regional que ocorreu na França, comparando-o com o processo de regionalização ocorrido na Romênia, através da expansão das competências das autoridades locais. Enquanto na França a governança multinível levou à descentralização regional e à transferência de competências para os departamentos e municípios, naquilo que pode ser caracterizado como uma complexa parceria entre o Estado e as três coletividades territoriais, na Romênia o Estado manteve seu caráter centralizado e a transferência de competências para os municípios e distritos ainda é limitada. -
Unitary and Federal Government
UNITARY AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENT On the basis of relationship between the centre and the units, the governments may be classified as unitary and federal. In a unitary government, all the powers of government are vested in the central government whereas in a federal government, the powers of government are divided between the centre and the units. Their distinctive feature and comparative merits and demerits are given as follows. UNITARY GOVERNMENT Unitary government is a kind of government system in which a single power, which is known as the central government, controls the whole government. In fact, all powers and administrative divisions authorities lies at the central place. Today most of the government systems in the world are based on unitary system of government. It is slightly different from federal model of government. In unitary government, central government has the power to increase or curtail the power of subnational units. It can create and abolished the same. UK, Afghanistan, Italy, China, Saudi Arabia, Spain, etc., are the important examples of unitary government. The unitary government system is based on the concept of consistency, unity, and identity that’s why the centralization of power and authority system remains at the top priority. The decision-making power rests with the central government that are shared by the government with the lower level government when needed. There are not so many options for change and new innovation as the people have a very limited voice in this government system. There are many merits and demerits of unitary government. It is useful in the term that rules and regulations in this government systems remain consist and equal throughout the country. -
Lithuania OECD
Sigma Public Management Profiles No. 7 Lithuania OECD https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5kmk1869tqg6-en SS IGMA Support for Improvement in Governance and Management in Central and Eastern European Countries PUBLIC MANAGEMENT PROFILES OF CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPEAN COUNTRIES: LITHUANIA 1 LITHUANIA (AS OF SEPTEMBER 1999) Political Background Lithuania regained independence in 1990, when candidates backed by the Lithuanian reform movement won elections to the Lithuanian Supreme Council. During a national plebiscite in February, 91 per cent of voters (76 per cent of all those eligible) voted in favour of an independent, democratic Lithuania. In March 1990, the Council proclaimed the restoration of Lithuanian independence, formed a new cabinet of ministers, and adopted the Provisional Basic Law of the State. The first democratically and directly elected president of the republic was Algirdas Mykolas Brazauskas, who was elected on 14 February 1993. Recent presidential elections were held on 21 December 1997, resulting in the election of Valdas Adamkus. He took office on 25 February 1998. The next presidential elections will be held in 2002. Elections to the Seimas (the Lithuanian parliament) were held in 1992 and 1996. In the 1996 elections the Conservative Party and associated candidates gained 70 out of 141 seats, and another 16 seats went to its coalition partner, the Christian Democrats and associated candidates. The coalition established a new government in early December and won a significant majority in nationwide municipal elections held in March 1997. In June 1999 Christian Democrats unilaterally denounced the coalition agreement. The next elections to the Seimas are scheduled for the year 2000. -
Decentralization in Unitary States
Decentralization in Unitary StateS Constitutional Frameworks for the Middle East and North Africa Decentralization in Unitary States: Constitutional Frameworks for the Middle East and North Africa Decentralization in Unitary States: Constitutional Frameworks for the Arab States Region Center for Constitutional Transitions, International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance and the United Nations Development Project Project Leads: Sujit Choudhry, Founding Director, Center for Constitutional Transisions, I.Michael Heyman Professor of Law and Dean, University of California, Berkeley Richard Stacey, Director of Research, Center for Constitutional Transitions, Assistant professor, Facultuy of Law, University of Toronto Project Team Members: Christopher Beshara, Casey Downing, Matthew Holbreich, Poonam Singh © Copyright 2014 Center for Constitutional Transitions, International IDEA and the United Nations Development Programme The electronic version of this publication (excluding the cover photos) is available under a Creative Commons License (CCI) – Creative Commons Attribute-Non Commercial- Share Alike 3.0 Licence. International IDEA publications are independent of specific national or political interests. Views expressed in this publication do not necessarily represent the views of International IDEA, its Board or its Council members. ISBN: 978-91-87729-87-4 What is International IDEA? The International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (International IDEA) is an intergovernmental organization with a mission to support