Definirea regimurilor democratice.

Tipuri de regimuri democratice: parlamentar, prezidenial, semi-prezidenial.

Parlamentul Guvernul. eful statului.

Republicanism, or Representative Democracy

Republicanism, or representative democracy, is also rooted in the work of the ancients.
Beginning in the fifth century BCE, Romans, inspired by the Greek system of government,
developed a new form of government called republicanism (also known as representative
democracy) to accommodate their ever-growing population (Foot, 2009).
The difference between the Greek and Roman forms of democracy lies in the election of
representatives. Specifically, in the Roman form of democracy, governmental decisions are
made by an elected group of representatives (Mezey, 2008). These elected representatives
consider policy alternatives, and decide by vote among themselves in accordance to the
views of their constituents (Mezey, 2008, p. 1). In other words, in this form of government,
(a) public policy is made by a representative of the citizens and not by the citizens
themselves; (b) representatives are elected by citizens from groups called constituents; (c)
adult citizens
are able to cast a vote, and each citizen has one vote; and (d) representatives are accountable
for their actions to those who elect them and can be replaced by next elections (p. 2).
Specifically, citizens indirectly impact political decisions by electing and influencing the
behavior of representatives who actually make public policy and control implementation (p.
2). For example, James Madison, a founding father of the United States, and philosophers
such as John Locke and Alexis de Tocqueville preferred and advocated this form of
representative government, in which decisions were not made directly by citizens but were
made by their elected and knowledgeable representatives.
These philosophers believed that this system of representation would prevent citizens from
resorting to self-interest during their decision-making process (Yarbrough, 1979).
It is important to mention that Madison aligned republicanism with representation
(Yarbrough, 1979). Madison defined the republican government as one that must be
democratic but not to the point that public matters must be conducted by the citizens in
person (Yarbrough, 1979, p. 62). In general, elected representatives would protect the right

of the people better than the people themselves (p. 62). The United States current system of
government best resembles this form of democracy. Currently, countries such as the United
Kingdom, Germany, Canada, the Netherlands, and Belgium also use this form of democracy
as their governing system.
Majoritarian, orWestminster, Democracy
Majoritarian democracy is a modern form of democracy, termed the Westminster model by
political scientist Arend Lijphart (1999) to denote the Palace ofWestminster in London, where
the parliament of the United Kingdom convenes. Lijphart refers to the United Kingdom as the
best example of this model. Lijphart (1999) provides 10 distinct features to characterize this
modern form of democracy:
1. Concentration of executive power in one party and bare majority: The ruling cabinet
consists of a one party majority and excludes minority parties.
2. Cabinet dominance: The cabinet, composed of leaders of a cohesive majority party, can be
confident of passing legislation.
3. Two party system: Government is dominated by two large parties.
4. Majoritarian and disproportional system of elections: The election system functions
according to single member district plurality, or a first past the post system.
5. Interest group pluralism: Competition and conflict characterize the interest group system.
6. Unitary and centralized government: Local governments are part of the central government,
their powers are not constitutionally guaranteed, and they are financially dependent on the
central government.
7. Concentration of legislative power in a unicameral legislature.
8. Constitutional flexibility: For example, in the United Kingdom, there is no written
constitution, and as such, Parliament can freely change policies or law by regular majorities
and not by supermajorities.
9. Absence of judicial review: Since a written constitution does not exist, there is no written
document by which courts can decide the constitutionality of legislation.
10. A central bank controlled by the executive: In this model, banks are controlled by the
cabinet and are not independent.
Countries with this model of government tend to have homogeneous societies. This form of
government can be seen in countries such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and most of the
British former colonies in Asia, Africa, and the Caribbean after their independence (Lijphart,
1999).

Although majoritarian democracy is quite prevalent in the English-speaking world, Lijphart

prefers the consensual model of democracy in less homogeneous societies (i.e., pluralistic
societies), and in fact he believes that the consensual model would be appropriate for most
societies.
Consensual Democracy
In contrast to majoritarian democracy, consensual democracy is regarded by Lijphart as a
better form of democracy in societies that are culturally heterogeneous (or what he calls
plural societies). Especially in plural societies, majority rule becomes not only
undemocratic
but also dangerous because minorities that are continually denied access to power will feel
excluded and discriminated against and may lose their allegiance to the regime (Lijphart,
1999, p. 32). In most deeply divided societies, such as Northern Ireland, majority rule spells
majority dictatorship and civil strife rather than democracy (p. 33).
As such, consensual democracy is best for less divided but still heterogeneous countries as
well as homogeneous societies (p. 33). Lijphart (1999) provides 10 distinct features to
characterize this modern form of democracy:
1. Executive power sharing in broad coalition cabinets: In this model, all or most of the
important parties share executive power in broad coalition.
2. Executive legislative balance of power: There is a formal separation of power between the
executive and the legislature, allowing for more independence between these two branches of
government. Additionally, the legislature cannot stage a vote of no confidence.
3. Multiparty system: In a pluralist society, such as in Switzerland, parties are divided along
several lines.
4. Proportional representation: This electoral system divides parliamentary seats among the
parties in proportion to the votes they receive.
5. Interest group corporatism.
6. Federal and decentralized government.
7. Strong bicameralism.
8. Constitutional rigidity: A written constitution exists and can be changed only by special
legislative majorities.
9. Judicial review.
10. Central bank: Some degree of independence exists for banks in monetary policy making
decisions.

As we shall see, liberal democratic institutions vary dramatically. Legislatures and executives
differ greatly from country to country, both in comparison to each other and in terms of
legislative-executive relationships. Judiciaries, too, are each quite distinct in their role in the
democratic process. There is tremendous variation in the range and number of political
parties, and this in part is shaped by the myriad of electoral systems
used around the world. Even what we consider basic civil rights and civil liberties differ so
much that what is considered a basic democratic right in one liberal democracy is constrained
in another.

Executives: Head of State and Head of Government

the branch that carries out the laws and policies of a state.
Two distinct roles:
- head of state, a role that symbolizes and represents the people, both nationally and
internationally, embodying and articulating the goals of the regime. The role of foreign policy
or war making is also sometimes considered part of the head of states duties.

- head of government is to deal with the everyday tasks of running the state, such as
formulating and executing policy, alongside a cabinet of other ministers who are charged with
specific policy areas (such as a minister of foreign affairs or agriculture).
Heads of government are usually referred to as prime ministers: they serve as the main
executive over the other ministers in their cabinet. They may serve alongside a head of state,
who may be a monarch or a president.
The distinction, then, runs along issues of direct management of policy and international and
symbolic functions. This distinction is an old one that goes back to the days when monarchs
reigned over their subjects, leaving others in charge of ruling the country.
Primul minsitru poate fi eliminat de parlament prin vot de nencredere. PM responsabil n fa a
parlamentului (rspunztor). PM poate destitui din fc minitrii, este primul i i face singur
guvernul. PM poate fi nlturat dac pierde sprijinul majoritii.
Preedintele poate fi obligat s demisioenze n Romnia prin vot i n SUA prin impeachment
(incriminarea de ctre Camera Reprezentanilor pentru ca senatul s-l judece pe preedinte).
Legislatures: Unicameral and Bicameral
The legislature is typically viewed as the body in which national politics is considered and
debated; it is charged with making or at least passing legislation.
Two types:
-bicameral systems have two houses in the legislature
-unicameral systems have only one.
The idea of bicameralism remained, for two major reasons. First, in some countries an upper
chamber was retained as a check over the lower house, often reflecting a fear that a popularly
elected lower house, too close to the peoples current mood, would make rash decisions. Thus,
upper houses often can amend or veto legislation originating in the lower house. One can also
see this concern in tenure: members of upper houses often serve for longer terms than
members of lower houses. A related element is federalism; federal states typically rely on an
upper house to represent local interests, with members able to oversee legislation particularly
relevant to local policies. In some cases, local legislatures may even appoint or elect the

members of that upper chamber, again reflecting a desire to check a directly elected lower
house.
Mai multe informaii despre partea asta apar la reimuri parlamentare/ semiparlamentare/
prezideniale
Judiciary: Concrete and Abstract Review
All states rely on laws as a means to prescribe behavior and lay out the rules of the political
game. At the core of this body of laws lies a constitution, which is the fundamental expression
of the regime and the justification for subsequent legislation and the powers of executives,
legislatures, and other political actors.
In liberal democracies, however, constitutional power is central to maintaining what we refer
to as the rule of lawthe sovereignty of law over the people and elected officials. As a result,
judicial institutions are important components in upholding law and maintaining its adherence
to the constitution.
Most (but not all) liberal democracies have some form of constitutional court charged with the
task of ensuring that legislation is compatible with the constitution.

Models of Democracy: Parliamentary,

Presidential, and Semipresidential Systems

Parliamentary systems can be found in a majority of democracies around the world. Two basic
elements comprise parliamentary systems: first, prime ministers and their cabinets (the
other ministers that make up the government) come out of the legislature, and second, the
legislature is also the instrument that elects and removes the prime minister from office.
In these cases, we have a division of power between a head of government and a head of state,
with the overwhelming majority of power residing with the head of government (the prime
minister).
In contrast, the head of state may be a monarch or a president who is directly elected, chosen
by the legislature, or has inherited the office. Their powers are typically little more than
ceremonial, particularly in the case of monarchs. They may hold some reserve powers such as
the ability to reject legislation if it is seen as running counter to the constitution. Even in these
cases, however, the powers of the president or monarch are rarely exercised.

Sisteme prezideniale un preedinte care combin funcia de ef de stat cu cea de ef al

guvernului. Este ales (de cele mai multe ori) direct de popor. Este investit cu puteri
considerabile i nu poate fi uor nturat legislativ.
n sistemele parlamentare, eful statului (monarh simbolic sau preedinte slab) este o funcie
deosebit de cea de ef al guvernului (prim-ministru, premeir sau cancelar). Sistemul n care
este ales doar parlamentul, care la rndul su alege prim-ministrul. Alegtorii aleg doar
legislativul, ei nu-i pot mpri alegerile ntre legislativ i executiv. Legislativul alege un
executiv din mijlocul su.
Dac sistemul electoral se bazeaz pe reprezentare proporional este posibil ca n parlament
s fie mai multe partide. Dac niciun partid nu are majoritatea de locuri, este nevoie deo
coaliie ntre partide. De obicei i se cere efului celui mai mare partid aflat la guvernare s
devin prim-minsitru i s formeze un guvern. Cabientul (liderii executivi de rang nalt care
conduc ministere sau departamente majore) i guvernul folsoite akternativ sunt ceea ce
americanii numesc o administraie (liderii executivi numii de preedintele american,
echibalent guvernuluieuropean).

Prim-ministrul, dup consultri cu partidele care sunt dispuse s-l susin numete o echip de
minitri pentru cabinet care ei nii sunt membrii ai parlamentului.. Aceti minsitri ndrum
apoi diversele ministere sau departamente ale guvernului care formeaz ramura executiv.
Prim-ministrul i cabinetul sunt rspunztori n faa parlamentului.
n sistemele prezideniale, preedinii nu sunt responsabili n faa legislativelor. Strnsa
conexiune dintre ramurile legislativ i executiv este ntrerupt. Preedinii sunt alei prin vot
pe cont propriu i aleg ministrii cabinetului sau secretarii departamentelor din afara
legislativului. Cele dou ramuri ale guvernului nu se pot controla, dizolva sau nltura una pe
cealalt ca n sistemele parlamentare. Aceasta le d o mare stabilitate sistemelor preziden iale.
Preedinii pot fi lipsii de popularitate i se pot confrunta cu un congres ostil dar pot totui
guverna cu puterile constituionale i statuare pe care le au deja.

Separaia puterilor- atunci cnd ramura legislativ i executiv se controleaz i se

echilibreaz reciproc. (n America)
Fuziunea puterii executivul deriv din elgislativ (Europa) nu ndreapt ramurile una
mpotriva celeilalte.

Semipresidential Systems
In this model, power is divided between the head of state and the head of government, with a
prime minister and a directly elected president both exercising power. Presidents enjoy fixed
terms while prime ministers remain subject to the confidence of the legislature and, in some
cases, the confidence of the president as well.
In some cases, the prime minister remains relatively separate from the president; while the
president exercises important powers, her control over the prime minister is limited. In other
cases, the prime minister is beholden to both the legislature and the president, giving the
president greater authority over the selection, removal, and activity of the prime minister. In
either case, the president holds power independent of the legislature yet at the same time
shares powers with a prime minister.
Semi presidential. systems often reflect the old distinction between reign and rule that
existed under monarchies. Presidents will often set forth policy but expect the prime minister
to translate those policy ideas into legislation and to ensure that it is passed. Presidents will
also take the lead in foreign policy and serve as commander in chief, representing the country
in international
relations.
In semipresidential systems the role of the judiciary varies. The independence of
constitutional courts is often limited by the fact that they are appointed by the president. At
the same time, however, conflicts between presidents and prime ministers, and a lack of
clarity over which executive has what power, has on a few occasions created opportunities for
more judicial scopeand in some cases effectively prevented the emergence of
semipresidentialism by confirming that power resided with the head of government, not state.
Since the collapse of communism, semipresidentialism has spread into several former Soviet
republics, most notably Russia, and is also used in a few cases in Asia (such as South Korea
and Taiwan).

De ce parlamentar?