The 5th meeting of the Association of
European Senates Prague, October 6. - 8. 2003
Answers to the questionnaire on "Different composition of
chambers in bicameral parliaments as a prerequisite of their
effectivity?"
Belgium
When Belgium acquired
its independence in 1830 the main argument for the Senate has been
the moderating influence its supporters were attributing to it. Made
according to the pattern of the aristocratic chambers the Senate has
been established to temper the revolutionary zeal of the Chamber of
Representatives. It was supposed to provide a counterweight to the
political chamber, considered as too prone to demagoguery. The
Senate according to Blargnies, a member of the Constitutional
Assembly (the National Congress), had to ´submit the decisions of
the representatives of the people to the review and the sanction of
a power fundamentally tempering whose fate is to serve as an
obstacle for the people to the throne and for the throne to the
people.´ To be elected senator you had to pay as direct tax in
the minimum amount of 1000 florins. Only 400 people were
eligible!
The choice favouring
bicameralism was as well partly guided by pragmatic reasons. The
country was in a fragile situation. The Belgian revolution had
really directly confronted the existing balance of power in Europe.
Belgium was supposed to align itself on the bicameralism where
France and England were setting the example for it, unless, as Paul
Devaux, another member of the National Congress, had observed,
´the impact would be devastating on the spirits of influent men
of these two countries who are showing to us most sympathy
today´.
During the 20th
century the push of electoral waves and the evolution of ideas have
led in the whole of Europe to question the aristocratic chambers. In
some counties they were quite simply abolished; elsewhere they
underwent a capitis diminutio. In Belgium the Senate got more
democratic.
Thanks to two reforms
in 1893 and 1921, the eligibility poll tax for senators was reduced
and then abolished. This development ended in the creation of a
non-differentiated and egalitarian bicameral system in which the two
chambers were appearing both through their composition and powers in
an almost identical way. Being so similar the second chamber ended
up being mixed up with the first one. It became a copy of it. This
is the reason why some were for a long time advocating a deep
overhaul of the bicameral system, essentially in the Senate. The
articles of the Constitution on the Senate were repeated in all the
declarations of Constitutional revision between 1892 and 1991.
On May 5, 1993 the
Belgian federal Parliament has undergone the most important reform
of its history. Both its composition and functioning were
fundamentally revised. This reform means the outcome of a twin
process.
On one hand during
the last thirty years the unitary Belgian State slowly turned itself
into a federal State. Federated authorities have been established;
they have gradually obtained an ever-growing measure of
self-government. This process of ´defederalization´ of the State had
an important impact on the composition of the federal Parliament. It
was necessary to set up a form of bicameralism fitting for a federal
type of State. The Senate was transformed, at least partly, into "a
chamber of the States", in order to ensure a representation of the
federated authorities in the federal Parliament. In a federal State
the national representation alone is not sufficient. The more a
State is diversified in its components, the more the need is felt to
associate them to the decision-making. This participation represents
a very important factor of stability.
In parallel to the
process of transformation of the Belgian State another factor
contributed to the reform of the federal Parliament. The evolution
of Belgian parliamentarism has ended up as described above in the
founding of a bicameral egalitarian system.
The reform of May 5,
1993, attempted to end the slowness and redundancies inherent to an
egalitarian bicameralism. It performed to this end a specialization
of the assemblies and rationalized the law-making process. In such a
way the political control of the government and of public finances
has been entrusted to the Chamber of Representatives. The Senate has
been transformed into a "chamber of reflection", guaranteeing the
quality of the legislation. Since the 60´s already the Senate had
played a first-rate role in the review and resolution of many social
issues: divorce, matrimonial regimes, abortion and contraception,
filiation and adoption, bio-ethics, euthanasia. This feature would
mark the Senate until today. Both chambers had been assigned a joint
competency for all matters concerning the fundamentals of the
Belgian State.
As a conclusion, the
Senate today fulfils in substance the same role as the one it played
in 1831. It appears as a factor of compromise. It is a moderating
element in the representation regime. Through more than 170 years of
a stormy history the Senate has managed to adapt itself to the deep
transformations that the Belgian society has been through because it
continued to play its role, fundamental in any parliamentary system,
of a counterweight the constitutionalist had assigned to it in the
beginning.
Czech Republic
After gaining State
independence in 1918 the bicameral Parliament has been established
three times. First in the inter bellum Czechoslovakia (1920-1939),
them when Czechoslovakia was federalized (1969-1992) and finally
after the birth of the independent Czech Republic.
In the first case the
second chamber, the Senate, was supposed to restrain the possible
excesses of the first chamber, the Chamber of Deputies. However, the
concept of the Senate as a conservative chamber, partly appointed,
or rather filled with de iure members was refused. Thanks to an
identical electoral system and timing of the elections the
composition of the chambers did not differ much: a strict party
discipline moreover eliminated more serious conflicts between the
chambers.
In the second case
the Federal Assembly was an expression of the recognition of the
equality of two constitutive nations: while the Chamber of the
People expressed the civic principle, the 150 deputies of the
Chamber of the Nations represented both republics on a parity basis.
However, for a long time the real activity of the Federal Assembly
has been defined by the hegemony of the ruling communist party.
After 1989 as well the practice of joint sessions of the chambers
prevailed, thanks to it the Federal Assembly behaved rather like a
unicameral body with the interdiction of outnumbering in voting one
or the other national part.
In the third case
quite an interesting debate took place in which references to the
works of F.A.Hayek played an important role. According to some of
his advocates the Senate was supposed to be the chamber of private
law, while the Chamber of Deputies was to be the chamber of public
law. Others favoured the representation of the regions. The winning
group of the defenders of Czech bicameralism relied on the
argumentation of the strengthened division of power (K.
Loewenstein), by the need to review the legislative activity of
the Chamber of Deputies and the need of the agreement of two
different bodies when making particularly serious decisions (e.g.
adopting constitutional acts or deciding on the state of war).
Moreover, it was expected that senators compulsorily older than 40
years of age should be more experienced and hopefully even more
restrained than deputies; their mode of election should contribute
to a lesser dependence on political parties. The Senate should thus
be a guarantee of the stability of the constitutional system and the
quality of the legislation as well as a platform for more factual
and less party profiled politicians. With time the de facto
connection between the Senate and municipal politics has been
registered.
France
The creation of a
second Chamber in 1795 has been inspired by the wish not to relive
what happened in the 1793-1794 period, i.e. the dictatorship of a
committee stemming from the single Chamber. The regimes that have
succeeded each other afterwards all kept the second Chamber,
adapting it each time to the nature of the system.
A brief return to the
single Chamber took place between 1848 and 1851. But the permanent
antagonism between this single Chamber and the president of the
Republic ended up with a coup. The second Chamber took its present
shape in 1875, following the return of the Republic. Since this date
it has been elected through indirect suffrage.
In conclusion this
second Chamber has historically been motivated above all by the need
for a restraining power, protecting the citizens from the possible
abuses of the single Chamber.
Today, this
motivation is not any longer the only one. The decentralization
process started since 1982 gives more importance to the function of
the representation of the local authorities. (The second Chamber had
as well this role since 1875, but the strong centralization limited
its scope).
Italy
The Constituent
Assembly extensively debated the possibility of creating a single
house parliament, but in the end the bicameral system prevailed.
Some argued that a second House should have acted as a counterweight
or check on the other, according to other opinions a second house
would have acted as a Chamber of representation of the regions as
administrative and geographical units, others argued for a Senate
composed of representatives of some segments of productive society.
The definitive option
towards the bicameralism was the result of long debates, that
opposed the ones that supported a single house's system (most of the
Left) to the idea of a corporations' Chamber (arisen from some
important representative of the Centre). A third proposal focused on
a true regional basis of the Senate's representation. This last one
was considered impracticable at that time because the regions as
political districts hadn't come into existence yet.
At last the principle
of a second House was accepted as a kind of compromise among various
proposals expressing various political opinions. The system adopted
by the Constitutional Assembly after long debates was of a "perfect"
bicameralism, with only small differences between the two chambers,
that constituted a strong Parliament as a whole.
Discussions and
proposals have recently arisen on constitutional changes. Following
the 2001 constitutional reform of the State - based on the
principles of autonomy and subsidiarity - a debate is currently
under way on strengthening the relation between the Senate and the
Regions, and introducing different competences for the two Houses.
Luxemburg
Due to its small area
the first democratic Constitution in Luxembourg dating back to 1848
did not opt for the institution of the Senate. The striving to
constantly improve the terms of laws has caused the creation of a
specialized and independent body, i.e. the Council of State of the
Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, created in 1856. At the time the
constitutionalist declared that "for the legislation the Council
of State shall function as a second chamber; its action shall become
a guarantee for the maturity of laws". The quality of the
legislation, both as for the substance and for the form, thus has
been and still remains a basic mission of the Council of State
operating as the second chamber insofar as it is invested with a
suspensive right of veto of 3 months maximum for any law.
Poland
In the late 1980s,
the Polish situation was bordering on catastrophe, both internally -
advancing erosion of the political system and continuing economic
crisis, as well as externally - growing anarchy in the former
communist countries, particularly in Russia.
In April 1989, Polish
rulers and the opposition grouped around the Solidarity trade
movement came to an understanding that went into history as the
Round Table Accord. Among many agreements reached at that time -
agreements that started political and social transformations - the
reinstatement of the Senate, i.e. a return to a bicameral parliament
after 50 years, comes to the forefront in terms of importance.
Here is an excerpt of
the Round Table Accord of April 5, 1989, which refers directly to
the role and significance of the future Senate:"The Sejm remains
the highest organ of legislative power. It shall deliberate in a
continuous manner and the presence therein of opposition deputies
shall change the way it has functioned to date. The new
institution of the Senate shall constitute an important
reinforcement of legislative power. The Senate shall be entitled to
propose legislation and shall consider draft bills adopted by the
Sejm. If it rejects them, they will require a 2/3 majority in the
Sejm in order to be passed. Additionally, candidatures to
Sejm-appointed positions of Commissioner for Civic Rights and
President of the Supreme Chamber of Control shall require Senate's
approval. The Senate shall amend and adopt the Constitution jointly
with the Sejm.
The Senate and
the Sejm shall jointly constitute the National Assembly which shall
elect the President for the first term of office. [...] To be valid,
presidential candidatures must be submitted by at least 1 of
deputies and senators. The Senate elected by the will of a sovereign
Nation shall play an important controlling role, particularly in the
field of human rights and the rule of law, and in the country's
socio-economic life..."
Polish constitutional
experts are correct in saying that the re-establishment of the
Senate as the Second Chamber of Parliament was not at the beginning
a reflection of the vision of the State system but rather a result
of a compromise reached between various political factions. In the
opinion of Dr. Wojciech Orłowski, "the appointment of the Senate
was a result of the will to reform the Sejm and other State organs,
whereas the direct reason behind its recreation rested in a
political consensus to hold non-confrontational elections and
establish the institution of President." In the opinion of Prof.
Garlicki, "the Senate was treated instrumentally, as a type of
'democratic substitute'", whereas Prof. Kruk-Jarosz
stated that "the Senate chosen in free and competitive elections
was meant to balance the 'contract' nature of the Sejm, where 65
seats had been given to the governing coalition." These
statements show that, at least at the beginning of the
transformations, the origin of the Senate was perceived first and
foremost as an effect of a political arrangement that "reconciled
the rulers with the opposition" and not as a "restitution that
presumed a certain conscious line of action."
In addition, the
Senate was perceived, particularly after historic elections of June
1989 (in which the opposition won almost 100% of votes), as a
"sort of a Chamber of Resistance whose main purpose was to
control decisions taken at the Sejm and influence the direction of
actions taken by the government or the President."
Moreover,
conservative and independentalist circles viewed the rebirth of the
Senate as a link to the tradition of Polish parliamentarianism,
particularly to the period between the two world wars, and the
significance of that view was more than sentimental.
The constitutional
debate on the role, tasks and competencies of the Senate, in other
words, the merits of a bicameral parliament, flared up for good in
1994, when the National Assembly (both chambers of parliament) began
work on the shape of the future constitution and on the place
reserved in it for the Senate. Five out of seven constitution drafts
proposed by various political factions presumed the Senate's
establishment. Generally speaking, only the left was in favour of
keeping a unicameral parliament.
We believe that we
should provide a few examples of how the need to establish the
Senate as well as its role and position were justified in those
drafts of the future constitution that in addition to reflecting
political intentions of their authors provided a certain systemic
vision of the functioning of the main organs of governance. In most
such drafts, the main task reserved for the Senate as the Second
Chamber of Parliament was to "care for the quality of
legislation" or "ensure the development of good
legislation", whereas the role of the Senate itself was to
"stand guard of the law" without "participating in current
political debacles", "balance out the legislative power" and
constitute a "chamber of contemplation". The Senate would
also "monitor the legislative process" and "oversee
controlling institutions".
One draft contained a
unique proposal of a constitutional clause giving the Senate the
power to "have direct control over the activities of the
government and its administration".
Other suggestions
referred to creating an organ that would "closely collaborate with
the Sejm", i.e. some type of a self-governing or economic chamber
composed of appointed meritorious members of the society. These
proposals, however, were never clearly specified. The opinion at the
time was that "nobody really knew how such organs would function or
what would be their tasks and range of competencies".
It is also proper to
quote at this point the arguments against the existence of the
Senate which appeared in the debate on the future constitutional
shape of the State system. Here are the main ones:
- "In a unitarian state (such as Poland), the existence of
the Second Chamber of Parliament makes no sense since there are no
clearly defined reasons justifying its functioning". "If both
chambers are voted into office by way of democratic elections,
then there will be two unnecessary representations of the same
type and of a similar political composition". The Senate
"replicates the political arrangement created in the Sejm."
- "The establishment and maintenance of the Senate in Poland
is contrary to the tendency present in democratic systems of
moving toward a unicameral parliamentary structure."
- "The Second Chamber lengthens and needlessly complicates
the legislative process, which is a particularly important reason
against it when, under the conditions of a fundamental
reconstruction of the legal system (i.e. systemic transformation),
there is a need for a speedy adoption of a large number of new,
efficient, legal acts". Moreover, "the need for a bill to
pass through two chambers would be an additional factor imposing
an excessive haste on the legislative process, often contrary to
Sejm regulations and at a clear detriment to the quality of legal
acts under development."
- "The existence of the Second Chamber weakens the
legislative branch - a very unconstructive proposal when all over
the world the executive branch is growing in importance and
solutions are being sought to reinforce the role of
parliaments."
- "The existence of the Second Chamber is not needed to the
improvement of the quality of new laws under deliberation."
This objective can be achieved "by way of other, less expensive
means, such as improving the skills and effectiveness of Sejm's
legislative services, better legislative planning and more
effective coordination of the legislative activities of the legal
service of the Council of Ministers (which introduces legislative
initiatives most often) and the legislative service of the
Sejm."
Ultimately, the
current constitution (adopted in 1997) contains a model of a
differential, with a greater number of competencies and entitlements
reserved for the Sejm.
Austria
The main reason given
for installing a second chamber was the consideration that the
federalistic principle of the Austrian Constitution demanded the
existence of a second chamber representing the Federal Provinces in
the process of the federal legislation.
Slovenia
The National Council
was constituted according to the Constitution of the Republic of
Slovenia in the year of 1991. The Constitution does not establish
the bicamerality of the representative body, however it establishes
two constitutional bodies that take an active part in the field of
legislation.
In spite of the fact
that at the beginning of nineties predominating view of the
constitutionality was the unicameral system, constitutional
theoreticians acknowledged the National Council as upper chamber.
For the most part constitutional law theoreticians advocate
bicameral system for the benefits it offers.
The most picturesque
definition of the constitutional law theory in Slovenia could be
presented by the following quotation of professor dr. Ciril
Ribičič: 'The existence of lower chamber, representative body,
legislative body that forms a government is not disputable. It does
not work any other way. The condition of the upper chamber is just
the other way. It is the supplement of the lower chamber and
additional complication of the system, additional cost something
that annoys the government as well as the lower chamber. Above all,
it is possible to get along without the upper chamber. It is for
this reason that the discussions about the upper chamber remains
open; the opponents that tend to abolish it are always to be found
as well as the supporters that tend to introduce preserve and/or
strengthen its role. I myself belong to the latter ones.'
By all means at
present one could find more supporters of bicamerality than at the
time of the Constitution enforcement in the year of 1991. It would
be necessary to alter at least legal if not constitutional
regulation of the National Council for its effective function. An
ingenious answer that could enable larger modifications is hard to
be found in Slovenia. These modifications of the National Council
competencies are: the possibility to propose an amendment to a bill,
competencies in the constitutional-review procedure, etc.
Romania
Subsequent to the
Revolution of December 1989, in Romania - as in other former
socialist countries - there was a need to choose between a mono or
bi-cameral system. The wish to reinvigorate the democratic
traditions of the country, as well as the unfortunate experience
with the mono-cameral system from the socialist period led to the
adoption, within the Constituent Assembly, without any sort of
difficulties, of the bicameral system.
When choosing the
bicameral system, it was deemed necessary to ensure a system of
perfect equality between the two Chambers (according to the Italian
system). It was estimated that such a mechanism was preferable to
the mono-cameral option, thus ensuring a political balance, a wiser
reflection on the legislation to be adopted. At the same time,
within the debates at different levels on the various options and
democratic solutions, the bi-cameral choice received full approval
in view of the future development of the country.
The experience of the
13 years of Romanian parliamentary activity raised recently the
following discussion: the adoption of the Italian system, namely,
the perfect equality of Chambers, with identical prerogatives and a
legislative process inevitably repeating itself at all levels,
didn't prove to be a functional policy for our country.
That is why, in order
to increase the efficiency of the parliamentary activity in its
legislative dimension, the proposal of amending the Constitution -
currently under debate at the Chamber of Deputies - puts forward the
solution of separating the legislative attributions of the two
Chambers.
This formula is
obviously much more valuable as it confers to each of the
Parliamentary Chambers its own personality as well as a distinctive
role.
The legislative
proposal for amending the Constitution envisages the introduction of
a new text according to which the Chamber of Deputies receives for
debate and adoption at a first reading, the following: draft laws
and legislative proposals for ratifying the treaties or other
international agreements as well as the legislative measures ensuing
from these treaties or agreements; draft organic laws referring to
the public radio and television services, categories of civil
servants who may not join political parties, exemption from
compulsory military service of Romanian citizens; - organic laws
regulating the states of siege and emergency, the status of civil
servants, the general legal status of property and inheritance,
general rules covering labour relations, trade unions and social
security, the establishment and organisation of the Legislative
Council; the organization of the Government, the incompatibilities
with the function of member of the Government, the establishment of
autonomous administrative authorities, the structure of the national
defence system, the information services and other components of the
armed forces, the competence of the judicial authorities, the terms
under which the composition of the Constitutional Court is
periodically renewed.
The Constitutional
Committee in charge with elaborating the draft did not consider
necessary to include other elements differentiating the two
Chambers, except for the situation already mentioned, namely, the
obligation to submit to the first Chamber the draft laws or
legislative proposals concerning certain specific fields. During the
public debate held in the last years on the amending of the
Constitution, there were alternative proposals pleading for specific
competencies for the Senate so as to differentiate it even more from
the Chamber of Deputies.
Russia
The different
composition of the chambers of the Federal Assembly is one of the
prerequisites for their efficiency. The mode of constitution of the
State Duma has foreseen right from the beginning a strong
politicisation of the lower chamber of the Russian parliament. The
Rules of Procedure of the State Duma foresees the creation of
parliamentary groups. Hence, deputies become mostly the promoters of
the political interests of their voters. On the other hand, the
members of the Council of the Federation represent the interests of
the whole population of the different subjects of the Federation.
This allows the Federal Assembly to have a global approach for each
federal bill it considers. The bill is analysed not only as far as
the majority of deputies is concerned as it is linked to some of the
political groups, but also from the point of view of its timeliness
for each region of Russia.
The impossibility to
dissolve the upper chamber as well as the set mandate to 4 years of
deputies and the gradual renewal of the members of the Council of
the Federation according to the local elections in the subjects of
the Federation allow the Federal Assembly to be stable and to ensure
the continuity, increasing in such a way the efficiency of both
chambers.
For a country as
large and as multinational as Russia the bicameral system has always
been more efficient than the unicameral one as it ensures more
stability to the Parliament as well as to the whole of the public
administration. At once, it allows bringing as close as possible to
the federal centre the problems and the interests of the regions. A
similar approach has been still typical for the Soviet period of the
Russian State.
Federal Republic of Germany
The decision to
create a bicameral system in the Federal Republic of Germany in 1949
can be best understood when taking a closer look at German
history.
At the end of the
18th century when major European powers such as France or England
were already national states with central governments, central
Europe was a patchwork of different German territories. Germany
became a national state very late, when in 1871 the empire was
established. Until then German political and cultural life had
flourished in many different sovereign territories, among which
Prussia and Bavaria were the largest. The constitutions of the
empire (1871 - 1918) and subsequently the Weimar republic (1919 -
1933), reflected this historical development and granted the German
states joint powers of participation. Already in 1871, this also led
to the creation of a bicameral system. Apart from the Reichstag, the
first chamber, predecessors of the current Bundesrat were
established, whose members were not directly elected but usually
appointed by the different state governments. Germany's federal
structure was eliminated during the National Socialist period (1933
- 1945), a centralised state was created and the states'
parliamentary representation dissolved.
With the support of
the Allied Powers the experience of the dictatorship period led to
the re-establishment of a federal system, at first in West Germany
only. The states were given a stronger position with the intention
to implement democratic and constitutional law principles on all
levels thereby ensuring that totalitarian power structures would not
gain foothold again. The decision was justified by the fact that
after the collapse of the Hitler dictatorship in 1945 national and
political life developed first on the level of the states (the
Laender), which had been quickly restructured after the end of the
war.
With the German Basic
Law coming into force on 23 May 1949, the Federal Republic of
Germany was established as a federal state. In comprehensive and
intensive consultations, the Parliamentary Council, preparing the
constitution in the years 1948 and 1949, diligently weighed the
question as to how the participation of the states should be
structured within a second parliamentary organ besides the
Bundestag. Among the models proposed was that of the Senate of the
United States of America, whose members are elected. Finally, a
broad majority favoured Germany's traditional form of a Second
Chamber, a Federal Council or Bundesrat, into which the members are
sent by their respective state government. The main reason was that
this system - in addition to the classical horizontal division of
power between the legislative, the executive and the judiciary -
also implied a further vertical division of political power between
the federation and the federal states and that this dual division of
power was seen as an effective means of preventing abuse.
This decision and the
justification for a bicameral system in Germany is still valid and
widely accepted by the majority of the German population.
Nevertheless, there are discussions in Germany going on with the
view to reform the federal system and to reconsider the role and
especially the competences of the Bundesrat. Most critics argue that
over the years the Bundesrat has become too powerful and that the
number of bills requiring the consent of the Second Chamber should
be limited. Otherwise the Bundesrat could in effect block important
legislative projects.
Spain
Under the 1978
Constitution Spain was organised as highly decentralised state with
political autonomy being granted to the Self-Governing Communities.
A second chamber was therefore set up, called the Senado, the
Senate, and defined in section 69.1 of the Spanish Constitution as
the House of territorial representation. This situation still
obtains today.
Switzerland
The Constitution of
the United States has served as a model for the Swiss bicameral
system. The basic principles of federalism are balance and
compensation among the cantons with a high and low number of
inhabitants, among the large and small cantons. This situation is
guaranteed by the preservation of equality between the two
chambers.
Belgium
Article 42 of the
Constitution stipulates: "The members of both chambers represent
the Nation and not merely those who elected them." Senators,
although they draw their legitimacy only from a part of the
citizens, are according to the Constitution the representatives of
all. It is on the basis of that they take part in the debates of
their assemblies. The whole of the senators, majority and
opposition, is qualified to talk and act on behalf of the Nation.
This principle applies to all members of the Senate, regardless of
their mode of appointment.
However, the
principle of the national representation must be slightly qualified.
The present composition of the Senate is hybrid and indicates the
will to ensure at least partly the representation of the federated
authorities.
The Senate numbers 21
senators designated by the Parliaments of the communities. According
to the federal logic these senators represent within the federal
Parliament the three communities of the country, the Flemish
community, the French community and the German-speaking community.
These senators remain members of the Parliament who appointed them
and as a consequence perform two mandates, sitting both on the
federal level and also on the level of the federated communities.
Only these communities are represented as such in the Senate. The
other federated political authorities, the Flemish region, the
Walloon region and the region of Brussels-Capital City, are not
represented there. Moreover, community senators do not perform a
binding mandate and they cannot be revoked by the Parliament that
appointed them.
The election of the
40 directly elected senators is, to some extent, characterized by
the same care for a community representation. Indeed, electors are
grouped into two bodies of electors, the French body of electors, to
whom voters in the Walloon constituency belong and who elects 15
senators, and the Dutch body of electors, grouping voters in the
Flemish constituency electing 25 senators. Voters in the
Brussels-Hal-Vilvorde constituency choose when voting the body of
electors where they belong. Directly elected senators enjoy thus a
great amount of legitimacy as they are elected by the whole of their
community.
Finally a last
feature of community representation has to be stressed. The Senate
is divided into two language groups. All the Dutch-speaking senators
form the Dutch language group, while all the French-speaking
senators form the French language group. This dividing up in
language groups is important. Some laws, defined as "with a special
majority", require, besides the two thirds overall majority, also a
majority within each language group. We may thus consider that
senators represent when voting these laws on the same level the
interests of their community as well as those of the Nation.
The senator appointed
by the Council of the German-speaking community does not belong to
either of the language groups.
Czech Republic
Senators represent
the citizens, or according to the Constitution the whole people. In
fact they feel to be mostly the representatives of their
constituency; the constituencies are 81, each of them has approx.
120 thousand inhabitants.
France
According to the
Constitution the senate represents "the territorial authorities
of the Republic". All the territorial authorities (communes,
departments, regions) participate in its election. However, in the
body electing the Senate, the representatives of the communes are
much more numerous than the representatives of departments and
regions.
Italy
According to art. 57
of the Italian Constitution, the Senate of the Republic is elected
on a regional basis, though this does not include any limit in
representation. According to art. 67, each member of Parliament -
which consist of the Chamber of Deputies and of Senate of the
Republic - represents the Nation, and carries out his duties without
constraint of mandate. A Senator represents the Nation as a whole,
exactly as a Deputy.
Luxemburg
The Council of State
is not an institution representing the political, territorial, and
professional or other interests. The members of the Council of State
are appointed and dismissed by the Grand Duke, they are not elected
by the people.
Whenever a vacant
seat has to be occupied, the renewal is performed alternatively and
in the following order:
- through direct appointment by the Grand Duke,
- through appointment of one of the three candidates submitted
by the Chamber of Deputies,
- through appointment of one of the three candidates submitted
by the Council of State.
As derogation to
these rules the members of the ruling family are always appointed
through a direct appointment by the Grand Duke.
In practice the
composition of the Council of State takes into account to some
extent the representation of the political parties in the
Parliament, but above all the diversity of the qualifications and
professional experiences of the councillors. Thus, the Council of
State has among its members besides some high officials and
magistrates personalities from the private sector, although they do
not represent interest groups.
Poland
Elected senators
(100) represent voters (citizens) residing in 16 provinces, which
are divided into electoral districts. Two to four senators are
elected in each district. In this sense, senators represent
provinces as well as parts thereof. However, constitutionally (Art.
104 of the Constitution in convergence with its Art. 108), senators
are "representatives of the Nation". Elections to the Senate are
characterized by three adjectives: universal - every citizen has the
right to participate actively and passively in elections; direct -
every citizen votes for a specific candidate personally and
directly; and secret - which guarantees free, safe and unencumbered
voting.
Pursuant to these
principles of the Act on Elections to the Sejm and Senate of the
Polish Republic, a majority system has been adopted in Senate
elections. Those candidates who receive most votes are
elected.
Austria
According to Art. 34
para. 1 of the Austrian Federal Constitution, the Federal Provinces
are represented in the Federal Council in proportion to the number
of citizens in each Federal Province.
Slovenia
The National Council
is, in accordance with the Constitution, the representative of
social, economic, professional and local interest groups. The
forty-member National Council comprises 22 representatives of local
interests, six representatives of non-commercial activities (health
care, science, education, social security, etc.) four
representatives of employers, four of employees and four
representatives of farmers, crafts and trades and independent
professionals (there are two the representatives of
farmers).
Romania
The Senate represents
the Romanian citizens.
Russia
According to federal
legislation the Council of the Federation brings together the
representatives of the subjects of the Federation with one
representative of the territorial assembly and one of the executive
of each subject of the Russian Federation. Hence, the members of the
Council of the Federation represent the subject of the Federation
and defend its interests in general.
Federal Republic of Germany
The Bundesrat
represents the interests of the 16 German Laender or states at the
federal level and, indirectly, at the level of the European Union.
The Laender appoint members of their governments as members of the
Bundesrat thereby guaranteeing a direct participation of the
individual federal state governments in decisions taken by the
national state.
Spain
The citizens elect
208 of the 259 Senators (sections 69.2, 3 and 4 of the Spanish
Constitution). The remaining Senators, 51 at the moment, are
designated by the Parliaments of the Self-Governing
Communities.
Switzerland
The second chamber
represents the cantons and their population.
Czech Republic
The experiences with
the not too successful activity of the bicameral Parliament in inter
bellum Czechoslovakia resulted in a commonly shared conviction about
the necessity to ensure a different composition of the chambers as a
prerequisite for a successful fulfilment of their roles. The
differences were to be reached through a differentiation of the
electoral systems, the right to be elected, the length of the
mandate, the mode of renewal (the Chamber of Deputies entirely, the
senate partially) and the non-dissolvability of the Senate. In
practice the different election dates were added to it (the Chamber
of Deputies in June, the Senate in October and November).
The debate on the
differentiation of the titles of the chambers was not too broad. The
Senate as the representative of the regions was refused among other
things in view of the fact of the dissolving federal State; fears of
similar processes inside the Czech Republic were present.
France
In 1875 the
constitutionalists had wanted to give to the second Chamber a
democratic basis, so it would have a sufficient legitimacy to play
the role of a counterweight against the first Chamber; at once, they
have thought that if the second Chamber had the same mode of
election as the first one (direct universal suffrage), it could not
play the mitigating role entrusted to it. This is why they have
chosen the solution of the indirect suffrage where the
representatives of local authorities elect the Senate.
Italy
Since under the new
Republic system in Italy the legitimating of both Parliament's
houses takes its origin directly from the people, it was argued that
there was no reason for differentiating their respective roles,
being their composition almost the same. The Chambers have so the
same powers and functions. The advantage of such bicameralism was
that it enabled multiple consultations on draft legislation. The
presence of two houses with the same powers and functions was
positively considered also for its 'cooling effect', because a
double reading of the bills would enable the various actors at the
parliamentary stage to examine better their positions and reach
fairest solutions, thus improving the quality of
legislation.
Poland
There is a debate
among constitutionalists, political scientists, law historians and,
of course, politicians themselves about a "possible reform of the
Upper House or about parliamentary bicameralism" - in other words,
on the role, tasks and range of competencies of both chambers in the
shaping of the political and economic reality of the State. As we
have already stated, earlier debates, particularly those taking
place in mid-1990s, included suggestions of the "appointment of a
Self-Governing Chamber" which would "represent territorial
self-governments". There were other proposals to create the Second
Chamber that would "represent other types of self-governments, such
as professional self-governing bodies". Still other suggestions
called for a "Senate that would combine a political and a
self-government chamber" and a "chamber representing territorial
self-governments and professional self-governing bodies, as well as
scientific institutions, higher educational establishments and
cultural associations". All these discussions had then and still
have today a political character. They come back on the occasion of
successive parliamentary elections. That is when the topic of having
or not having the Senate returns. However, there has been a recent
perceptible tendency not to question the need for having the Second
Chamber anymore but rather focus on what that Second Chamber should
represent.
Austria
In the course of the
debates on the Austrian Federal Constitution also the advantages of
a differentiation of the representation titles of the parliamentary
chambers were discussed. Besides the federalistic issue also the
question of the representation of economic interests was introduced
into the discussion but did not play an important role.
Slovenia
Numerous
undistinctnesses that concern the status of the National Council and
its relation towards the National Assembly derive from two facts:
immediately before the enforcement was the Constitution supplemented
by the institution of the National Council; some changes were also
made about the composition and competencies of the National Council.
This organ was potentially always present in the formal scheme of
the constitutional wording. Yet it was not taken into consideration
as a real option, for parliamentary parties proceeded from two
conceptions: some of them were in favour of the pure unicameral
system while the others argued for bicameral system with regional
representation and limited competencies within the upper chamber.
The National Council was, so to say, the compromise between both
options, however the defenders of the direct regional representation
won the increase of the number of representatives of local
interests. The representation of different interests in the National
Council was originally meant to be such like that none of the
interest group itself could represent numerical superiority.
Romania
The theses that
served as basis for the elaboration of the new Constitution -
adopted in 1991 by national referendum, had initially previewed a
certain specialization between the two Chambers; for instance, the
Chamber of Deputies should adopt the budget, pass motions of
censure, approve the structure and program of the Government etc.,
whereas the Senate should ratify the treaties, appoint the Advocate
of the People, the director of the Romanian Information Service.
However, as the debates advanced, the idea of creating such a
division was abandoned. There was no question as to differentiate
the Chambers from the point of view of their representativeness, but
in terms of the way in which they are constituted and their
competencies.
Russia
From the very
beginning different ways of constituting the two chambers have been
planned.
The preliminary
discussions on the electoral mode of the State Duma deputies
concerned the issue of the selection of the electoral system:
majority principle, proportional representation or a mixed solution.
And in the event of a mixed system, what should be the percentage of
the elected deputies in federal constituencies (slate vote) as
compared to the single mandate constituencies (majority vote).
As for the mode of
constituting the Council of the Federation, it is not defined in the
Constitution of the Russian Federation. The discussions on this
theme continue until today. Since more than 10 years of the
functioning of the Russian Parliament 3 modes of constitution have
been already tried.
- Election of the members of the Council of the Federation based
on the majority principle.
- Membership ex officio in the Council of the Federation of the
heads of the executive and of the presidents of the territorial
assemblies (or their chambers) of the subjects of the Federation.
- Appointment of the members of the Council of the Federation by
the bodies of the representative and executive powers of the
subjects of the Federation.
Federal Republic of Germany
The decision to have
a different composition of the Bundesrat where members are appointed
by the state governments as opposed to the Bundestag where members
of parliament are directly elected was mainly based on the historic
development in Germany (see above Question 1). Furthermore, the
present system guarantees that the Bundesrat is both, an effective
counterweight to the Bundestag and the Federal Cabinet and a link
between federal and state governments. It ensures that the political
and administrative experience of the Laender finds its expression in
the Federation's legislation and administration.
Spain
The rationale behind
this bicameral system is the different representational nature of
each chamber: the Congreso de los Diputados, the Congress,
represents the citizens as a whole while the Senate is the House of
territorial representation. Nonetheless, the open formulation given
by the 1978 Constitution to the territorial distribution of power
makes it difficult to give an exact definition of the Senate's
territorial representation.
Switzerland
It is quite
deliberate that the composition of the Council of States (CS) is
different, and it is all the same deliberate that both chambers
enjoy the same powers.
Belgium
The number of the
members of the federal Parliament is set in the Constitution (art.
63, §1 and art. 67, § 1).
The Chamber of
Representatives is made up of 150 deputies elected directly in 11
electoral constituencies. A 5 % eligibility threshold is
applied.
The senate numbers 71
elected members divided in three categories. 40 senators are elected
directly in three electoral constituencies, the Flemish
constituency, the Walloon constituency and the bilingual
Brussels-Hal-Vilvorde constituency. A 5% eligibility threshold is
applied. Besides the 40 directly elected senators the Senate is as
well gathering 21 senators appointed by the three community
Parliaments, 10 by the Flemish Parliament, 10 by the French
Community Parliament and 1 by the Council of the German-speaking
Community. Finally the Senate includes 10 co-opted senators: 6 are
nominated by the whole of the other Dutch-speaking senators, and 4
by the French-speaking senators.
Deputies and senators
are elected according to the principle of the proportional
representation (the D´Hondt method).
To have a full idea
it is necessary to specify that the children of the King, or in
their absence, the Belgian descendants of the royal family called to
rule, are senators by rights after reaching the age of 18. In
practice they refrain from all political activity.
The right to vote is
restrained to citizens having reached the age of 18. In Belgium
voting is compulsory.
To be elected deputy
or senator you have to be a Belgian citizen, enjoy civil and
political rights, be 21 of age and have a permanent residence in
Belgium. This is a limitative list: no other eligibility condition
may be requested.
The members of the
Chamber and of the Senate are elected for four years. The Chamber of
Representatives and the Senate are re-elected as a whole. The
election of the 40 directly elected senators coincides with the
general election of the Chamber of Representatives.
The Constitution
foresees the possibility of an early dissolution of the Chamber of
Representatives on the initiative of the King in the event of a
political crisis. The Chamber is indeed the only competent in the
area of the political control of the government. The dissolution of
the Chamber of Representatives triggers the dissolution of the
Senate.
Moreover, both
chambers are automatically dissolved when the legislative power
adopts a declaration of revision of the Constitution. In practice
this mode of dissolution has become the rule, as Belgium is being
involved in a permanent process of institutional reform.
Czech Republic
Both chambers of the
Parliament of the CR are elected in direct, general and secret
elections, on the basis of the principle of the equality of votes.
The Chamber of Deputies is elected according to the principles of
the proportional electoral system, meaning specifically the election
of 200 deputies in 14 regions according to the D´Hondt method of the
conversion of votes to mandates. 81 senators are elected in single
mandate constituencies according to the absolute majority principle:
in the first round of voting the candidate with more than 50 % of
the cast votes wins, if there is no such candidate, a second round
is organized with the two most successful candidates of the first
round; the winner is the one obtaining the majority of votes.
All deputies and
senators are elected. Appointed senators were discussed in 1920, but
this idea has been in the post-revolutionary atmosphere rejected as
insufficiently democratic. In recent years we sometimes hear that
the presidents of regions as top representatives of the
self-government of 14 regions could be appointed senators.
The right to vote is
for both chambers identical: state citizenship and having reached 18
years of age. The conditions of its implementation differ: it is
possible to vote for the Chamber of Deputies as well at embassies
abroad, for the Senate only in the Czech Republic.
The right to be
elected differs by the age limit: for deputies reaching 21 years of
age is sufficient, for senators it is 40 years.
Deputies are 200,
senators 81. The number is definitely set by the Constitution, in
the case of the Senate it may however differ between the vacancy of
a mandate during the electoral term (resignation, death) and the
by-election.
The Chamber of
Deputies is renewed entirely every four years, unless it has been
dissolved previously (this being quite difficult); discontinuity is
a rule between the electoral terms. The Senate is renewed by thirds
(27 senators) every two years. The two-years term, designated as a
term of office, is appearing as the period for which the Senate
officials are elected and the members of the Senate bodies (personal
discontinuity). However, the Senate is functioning without
interruption and continues in the consideration of bills,
international treaties etc. regardless of the elections.
While the Chamber of
Deputies is elected for four years, the session of the Senate is
considered as "eternal", i.e. uninterrupted since its establishment
in December 1996. Both chambers are established fully independently,
neither regular elections nor the dissolution do affect the
existence of the Senate. Moreover, a practice established in 1996
seeks to differentiate the election dates, the Chamber of Deputies
being elected in June, as opposed to the Senate elections taking
place in October - November.
Only the Chamber of
Deputies may be dissolved.
France
The National Assembly
is elected through uninominal suffrage (577 constituencies),
according to a majority, two rounds system. The Senate is elected
through indirect suffrage. The department is the constituency. The
number of senators in each department depends on the number of
inhabitants (the least populated department has 1 senator, the most
populated has 12). The voting system is proportional in the
departments electing four and more senators; in the departments
electing three senators and less the voting system is a majority,
two rounds one. The body of electors of the Senate is composed in
each department:
- of representatives of the communes (their number depends on
the population of the commune);
- of the members of the department assembly;
- of the members of the regional assembly representing the
department within it;
- of national deputies elected in the department.
The communes'
representatives account for more than 9/10 of the electoral
body.
There are no
appointed or life-long senators.
As indicated above
the suffrage is direct for the National Assembly, indirect for the
Senate. To be elected deputy the age of at least 23 is required. To
be elected senator the age of at least 30 years is required.
There are 577
deputies and, today, 321 senators. Law sets this number. An act has
just been adopted that will gradually increase the number of
senators from 321 to 346 between 2004 and 2010.
Deputies are elected
for 5 years. Applying a law that has just been passed senators are
elected for 6 years; the senate is re-elected by halves every three
years (so far senators were elected for 9 years and the Senate
had been re-elected by thirds every three years; the new act
foresees transitory provisions).
The National Assembly
may be dissolved. The Senate cannot be dissolved.
Italy
It is possible to say
that in the Italian bicameralism there are no appreciable
differences between the two Houses of the Parliament either in
structure or in functions. As said above, the two houses of the
Italian parliament are essentially founded on the same type of
representative mandate and exercise the same powers.
The terms of office
of both Chambers, according to the Constitution, are of five years.
Since they are absolutely equal, the occurrence of their election is
simultaneous. The number of Parliament members is defined directly
by the Constitution.
The Chamber of
Deputies has 630 members, 475 of whom (75%) are elected in single
member districts (majority system). The remaining 155 (25%) are
elected in constituencies with a proportional representation system.
The division of seats among the electoral districts, with the
exception of the number of seats assigned to the Overseas
Constituency, is obtained by dividing the number of inhabitants of
the Republic, as shown by the latest general census of the
population, by six hundred eighteen and distributing the seats in
proportion to the population in every electoral district, on the
basis of whole shares and the highest remainders.
Of the 315 electoral
members of the Senate, 232 (75%) are elected applying the majority
system, 83 (25%) on proportional representation. In spite of this
duality the voters have a single ballot, that affects the allocation
of both majority and proportional seats. Indeed, the candidates of
both types of seats are the same. The proportional representation
seats are allocated to the 'best losers' in the single-members
districts. In the Chamber each voter has two ballots, and can
express two votes. One vote is for the selection of the candidates
in the single-members district, the second vote goes to party lists
for the proportional representation seat allocation at the
constituency level.
In theory, this would
permit different majorities in the Chamber and in the Senate. In
reality this has not occurred although the composition of the
parliamentary Groups in the two chambers is not exactly the
same.
Concerning the
Senate, in particular, article 57 of the Italian Constitution reads:
"The Senate of the Republic is elected on a regional basis, with
the exception of the seats assigned to the Overseas
Constituency.
The number of
Senators to be elected is three hundred and fifteen, six of which
are elected in the Overseas Constituency. No Region may have fewer
than seven Senators; Molise shall have two, Valle d'Aosta one. The
division of seats among the Regions, with the exception of the
number of seats assigned to the Overseas Constituency is made in
proportion to the population of the Regions as revealed in the most
recent general census, on the basis of whole shares and the highest
remainders". There are, actually, 20 regional constituencies
plus the Overseas constituency. In two regions, exactly Valle
d'Aosta and Molise only majority representatives are elected in
single-member districts, due to the little amount of population in
the regions.
There may be a few
senators (up to five, over the number of 315) appointed for lifelong
terms by the President of the Republic because of their outstanding
merits, chosen among the citizens who have honoured the country with
their outstanding achievements in the social, scientific, artistic
or literary fields. Besides, each President of the Republic becomes
by right a Senator for life at the end of his mandate. The Senate
therefore may include, and usually includes, more than 315
members.
Despite the perfect
equality of the two chambers as for their functions and the
political representation they express, there are some differences
between them concerning the electorate. All Italian citizens who
have attained the age of eighteen are entitled to vote in the
Chamber elections. All voters who have attained the age of
twenty-five on the day of elections are eligible to be Deputies. As
for the Senate, article 58 of the Constitution reads: "Senators
are elected by universal and direct suffrage by voters who are
twenty-five years of age. Voters who have attained the age of forty
are eligible to be elected to the Senate".
The original
bicameral design envisaged different terms for the two Houses (five
years for the Chamber, six years for the Senate), but in 1963 these
terms were unified at five years for both Houses, with the precise
purpose to reduce the differences between their political
composition that would have been produced by separate and
increasingly distant elections.
The chambers can be
dissolved by the President of the Republic, having heard the
Presidents of the Houses, before the expiration of the legislature
terms. It usually happens when the Government appears no further
supported by the majority in one or both the Houses of the
Parliament. According to article 88 of the Constitution, the
President can even dissolve only one chamber. So happened in the
first three legislatures following the coming into force of the
republican Constitution. At the expiry of the Chamber of Deputies
the President dissolved the Senate too, with the main purpose -
according to the experts - to hold comprehensive general elections,
smoothen the differences in the political composition of the
chambers and avoid the electorate going to the polls too frequently:
it was, according to some experts, merely a 'technical' matter, not
a political one.
Luxemburg
The deputies of the
Chamber of Deputies are elected directly on the basis of simple
universal suffrage, from slates of candidates according to the rules
of proportional representation, in accordance with the principle of
the smallest electoral quotient and according to the rules set by
law. The country is divided into four constituencies: the
constituencies South, Centre, North and East (art. 51 of the
Constitution).
The Councillors of
State are appointed according to the rotation system described above
(see 2, par. 2) for a continuous or discontinuous period of 15
years.
To be elected as
deputy or be appointed as a member of the Council of State, you have
to be a citizen of Luxembourg, enjoy civic and political rights, be
a resident of the Grand Duchy. While the minimal requested age for
passive voting rights is set at reaching the age of 18, the age
requirement to enter the Council of State is having reached 30
years. While there is no age limit for deputies, the function of
member of the Council of State expires when the person concerned has
reached the age of 72.
The mandate of a
deputy is incompatible with among other things the position of
member of the government, member of the Council of State, magistrate
of the judiciary, member of the Supreme Audit Institution, civil
servant and career military in active duty.
The function of
member of the Council of State is compatible with any other function
and any profession, except the position of member of the government
and mandates of deputy, of a member of a trade chamber or of the
Economic and Social Council as well as the positions of justice at
the Administrative Court or at the Administrative Tribunal or
official of the Secretariat of the Council of State.
According to art 51
of the Constitution the Chamber of Deputies is made up of 60
deputies. An act voted in the presence of at least 3 of the members
composing a chamber sets the number of deputies to be elected in
each of the constituencies. To be valid an act must gather at least
two thirds of the overall vote.
The Council of State
whose composition is set by the Act of July 12, 1996 concerning the
organization of the Council of State, includes 21 councillors out of
whom 11 are holding a law doctor title or are holding a law
doctorate or holding a foreign higher education grade in law. This
amount does not include the members of the ruling family who may be
members of the Council of State.
The Chamber of
Deputies is entirely re-elected. The mandate of the deputy cannot be
renewed.
The mandate of the
councillor of State cannot be renewed to ensure its independent
performance.
Deputies are elected
for five years (see art. 56 of the Constitution), while the function
of councillors of the State ends in principle after a 15 years
period from the day they were appointed. Thus, there is no direct
link between the constitutions of both institutions.
Both the Chamber of
Deputies and the Council of State may be dissolved by the Grand
Duke, and this may happen as well separately. Since its creation the
Chamber has been dissolved three times, always on political grounds,
while the only dissolution in history of the Council of State goes
back to 1945 and was a result of the war events.
Poland
Article 95 of the
Polish Constitution states that "legislative power in the Republic
of Poland shall be exercised by the Sejm and the Senate". Both
chambers are independent from other organs, which ensues from the
fundamental principle of the division of powers between three
branches of government. The Sejm, similarly to the Senate, does not
hold a dominant position with respect to other State organs, which
in turn ensues from the principle of balance of power between the
legislative, executive and judicial branches of government.
The method of holding
elections to the Sejm and Senate is anchored, first and foremost, in
the constitutional provisions and described in detail in the Act on
Elections to the Sejm and the Senate of the Polish Republic.
Elections to the Sejm
are characterized by five adjectives: universal, egalitarian,
direct, secret and proportional. Voters choose political parties
and, concurrently, check off favourite candidates from political
party lists. As we have said earlier, elections to the Senate are
characterized by three adjectives: general, direct and secret. The
majority vote system applies. Votes are cast on specific candidates
who can belong to different political parties.
The institution of
appointing meritorious members of the society to the Senate does not
exist at present (there were failed attempts to introduce it during
the writing of the constitution in 1921). Current provisions do not
presume the possibility of appointing parliamentarians.
Article 62 of the
Constitution states that the right to vote for the President of the
Republic and for representatives to the Sejm and Senate and organs
of local self-government - i.e. the right to an active participation
in elections - is granted to Polish citizens who, no later than on
the day of the vote, have attained 18 years of age.
This means that the
Constitution does not condition the right to an active participation
in elections on any other requirement than age.
However, while the
Constitution is unrestrictive with respect to the right to an active
participation in elections to the Sejm and Senate, it does establish
conditions with respect to those citizens who wish to take advantage
of the right to be elected - i.e. the right to a passive
participation in elections. Pursuant to Article 99 of the
Constitution, "every Polish citizen who has the right to vote and
who, no later than on the day of the elections, has attained the age
of 21 years, shall be eligible to be elected to the Sejm, and every
Polish citizen who has the right to vote and who, no later than on
the day of the elections, has attained the age of 30 years, shall be
eligible to be elected to the Senate".
There also exists an
important requirement whereby persons who wish to take advantage of
the right to passively participate in elections (i.e. candidates for
election) must have resided on the territory of Poland for at least
five years.
The right to vote and
run in elections is denied to persons who are incapacitated, either
partly or fully, by a binding decision of a court of law due to
mental illness or retardation, who are deprived of public rights, or
who by decision of the Tribunal of State are deprived of the right
to vote.
Article 96 of the
Constitution states that "the Sejm shall be composed of 460
deputies", whereas its Article 97 states that "the Senate
shall be composed of 100 senators". These constitutional
provisions are confirmed in regulations that specify the principles
of preparing and conducting parliamentary elections (respectively
Article 132 and 189 of the Act on Elections to the Sejm and Senate
of the Republic of Poland).
Both the Sejm and the
Senate are elected for a determined period (the term of office of
both chambers is four years). Consequently, during a term of office,
the composition of the parliament rests essentially unchanged, with
the same members chosen in elections conducted at the same time. The
term of office begins for both chambers on the day on which the Sejm
assembles for its first sitting and continues until the day
preceding the assembly of the Sejm of the succeeding term of office.
In practical terms, that eliminates the period between terms of
office and takes care of the principle of parliamentary
continuity.
Terms of office of
the Senate and the Sejm are the same. Senate powers expire at the
same time as those of the Sejm. This applies to an expiry of a
regular term of office (after four years) and to its shortening by
resolution of the Sejm or by order of the President.
In accordance with
Article 98, Section 3 of the Constitution, the Sejm may shorten its
term of office by a resolution passed by a majority of at least
two-thirds of the votes of the statutory number of Deputies.
Shortening the Sejm's term of office also means shortening that of
the Senate, as well as the latter's dissolution.
The President also
has the constitutional power to shorten the term of office of both
chambers. By virtue of Article 98, Section 4 of the Constitution,
the President, after seeking the opinion of the Marshal of the Sejm
and the Marshal of the Senate, may, in those instances specified in
the Constitution, order shortening of the Sejm's term of office.
Whenever the term of office of the Sejm has been so shortened, then
the term of office of the Senate shall also be shortened.
The reasons for which
the President may exercise this right are:
- When a vote of confidence is not granted to the Council of
Ministers (Article 155, Section 2 of the Constitution);
- When the draft budget is not adopted after four months from
the day of its submission to the Sejm (Art. 225 of the
Constitution).
Austria
The electoral
principles regarding the National Council are laid down in Art. 26
of the Austrian Federal Constitution. Under Art. 26 para. 1, the
National Council is elected by the people in accordance with the
principles of proportional representation on the basis of equal,
direct, secret, and personal suffrage for men and women who have
completed their 18th year of life. According to Art. 26 para. 2, the
distribution of seats takes place at three levels: at the level of
regional constituencies, at that of provincial constituencies, and
by way of a so-called proportional balance at the federal level.
The members of the
Federal Council, under Art. 35 of the Federal Constitution, are
elected by the Provincial Diets for the duration of their respective
legislative periods in accordance with the principle of proportional
representation, but with the modification that at least one seat
must fall to the party having the second number of seats in the
respective diet.
Neither in the
National Council nor in the Federal Council there is the institute
of virile or appointed members.
Art. 95 para. 2
determines that the electoral regulations for the provincial diet
elections may not impose more restrictive conditions for suffrage
and elegibility than does the Federal Constitution for elections to
the National Council (in Art. 26). This implies that they may be
less restrictive.
The number of the
members of the National Council (at present 183) is laid down in
section 1 para. 1 of the National Council Electoral Act. The number
of the members of the Federal Council (at present 62), under Art. 34
para. 3 of the Federal Constitution, is laid down after every
general census by the Federal President according to the regulations
of Art. 34 para. 2 of the Federal Constitution: The province with
the largest number of citizens delegates twelve members to the
Federal Council, every other province as many as the ratio in which
the number of its citizens stands to that of the first-mentioned
province. Every province, however, is entitled to a representation
of at least three members.
Whereas the National
Council, under Art. 27 para. 1 of the Federal Constitution, is
re-elected as a whole after the end of its legislative period which
in principle lasts four years, the Federal Council, in accordance
with the above-mentioned regulations of Art. 35 para. 1 of the
Federal Constitution, is re-elected partly after every election to a
Provincial Diet; that is why the terms of office of the members of
the Federal Council corresponding to the legislative periods of the
Provincial Diets have no uniform length (mostly five, in case of the
province of Upper Austria six years).
The legislative
period of the National Council, under Art. 27 para. 1 of the Federal
Constitution, lasts four years, but under Art. 29 the National
Council can be dissolved either by the Federal President or by a law
adopted by the National Council itself. The Federal Council, due to
the above-mentioned principles of its partial renewing, has no
distinct term of office at all. Therefore, there is no link to the
constitution of the first chamber.
Under Art. 29 para. 1
of the Federal Constitution, the Federal President can dissolve the
National Council, but he can do so only once for the same reason.
Under Art. 29 para. 2, the National Council can vote its own
dissolution by simple law. In contrast there is no constitutional
possibility of a dissolution of the Federal Council.
Slovenia
Both chambers differ
in the number of members, representation, competencies, manner of
the composition, method of elections, mandate length, feasibility of
dissolution etc.
The election for the
National Assembly is the direct one. Proportional voting system is
applied. Mandate partition is in the first place executed on the
constituency level where the Droop's quotient is used while d'Hondt
system is used on the state level. National Council members are
elected not on the grounds of a general right to vote but of a
special right to vote, determined with a separate law for every
interest group, on the basis of belonging to an individual interest
group or local community.
The persons who are
entitled to vote and to be elected as members of the National
Council as a representative of employers, employees, farmers, small
businesses and independent professionals, and non-profit making
activities (functional interests) are those who perform a
corresponding activity or who are employed.
National Council
members belonging to these interest groups may be elected by
foreigners under the same conditions as the citizens of Slovenia,
i.e. that they are performing a corresponding activity or are
employed in Slovenia. However, they may not be elected as National
Council members.
There are no
appointed members neither in the National Assembly nor in the
National Council.
All citizens of the
Republic of Slovenia who have reached the age of 18 years on the day
of the ballot and who are not subject to a legal incapacity to vote
have the right to vote and to be elected as a member of the National
Council or the member of the National Assembly. National Council
members are elected not on the grounds of a general right to vote
but of a special right to vote, determined with a separate law for
every interest group, on the basis of belonging to an individual
interest group or local community.
The persons who are
entitled to vote and to be elected as members of the National
Council as a representative of employers, employees, farmers, small
businesses and independent professionals, and non-profit making
activities (functional interests) are those who perform a
corresponding activity or who are employed. Unlike for the National
Assembly, foreigners who practise corresponding activity, have the
right to vote for the National Council.
The total
constitutionally defined number of the National Assembly members is
a 90 and 40 member of the National Council.
The National Assembly
and the National Council are elected as a whole on general
elections.
The duration of the
term of office for the National Assembly is four years and for the
National Council five years.
The President of the
Republic can dissolve the National Assembly in accordance with the
Constitution (Constitution Articles No.111 and 117) but on the other
hand can not dissolve the National Council. Therefore it is a
permanent representative body without major competencies in the case
of the National Assembly dissolution.
Romania
According to the
Constitution and the Electoral Law, the Chamber of Deputies and the
Senate are elected by universal, equal, direct, secret and freely
expressed vote. Thus, the deputies and the senators are elected in
constituencies on the basis of scrutiny lists and independent
candidatures, according to the principle of proportional
representation. There is no institution of appointed members.
Organizations of
citizens belonging to national minorities, which fail to obtain the
number of votes for representation in Parliament, have the right to
one Deputy seat each, under the terms of the electoral law. The same
normative act stipulates that in case the legally constituted
organisations of citizens belonging to a national minority have not
obtained in the elections at least one Deputy or Senator mandate
shall have the right, together, to a Deputy mandate, if they have
obtained throughout the country at least five percent of the average
number of validly expressed votes throughout the country for the
election of one Deputy.
The new amendments to
the Constitution envisage substantial changes of the electoral law
(still at a stage of negotiation among the parliamentary parties).
If approved, it is likely to adopt the uninominal scrutiny for the
elections for the Senate.
According to the
Electoral Law in force, there are no differences between the two
Chambers as regards the right to vote.
The Senate counts 140
Senators whereas the Chamber of Deputies counts 342 Deputies. The
number of the members of the two Chambers is decided in relation
with the population of the country. According to the Electoral Law,
the number of Senators and Deputies is established by referring the
number of inhabitants of each constituency to the representation
norms (for the Senate, one senator to 160, 000 inhabitants; for the
Chamber of Deputies, one Deputy to 70,000 inhabitants) to which it
shall be added one Deputy or Senator seat for what exceeds half the
representation norm, provided that the number of Deputies is not
smaller than four, and that of the Senators is not smaller than
two.
In case the
amendments to the Constitution are adopted, the Government envisages
essential adjustments to the electoral law, which aim, among others,
at adjusting the representation norms. Thus, the number of
parliamentarians will decrease significantly as a result of the
increase of the representation norm.
The Chambers are
entirely re-elected.
The Chamber of
Deputies and the Senate are elected for a term of office of four
years, which may be prolonged by organic law, in a case of war or
catastrophe.
The two Chambers are
elected on the same date.
According to art. 89
of the Constitution, after consultation with the Presidents of both
Chambers and the leaders of the Parliamentary groups, the President
of Romania may dissolve the Parliament, if no vote of confidence has
been obtained to form a government within 60 days after the first
request was made, and only after rejection of at least two requests
of investiture. During the same year, the Parliament can be
dissolved only once. The Parliament cannot be dissolved during the
last six months of the term of office of the President of Romania,
nor can it be dissolved during a state of siege or emergency.
According to the interpretation of the Constitutional text, we can
only refer to the dissolution of both Chambers, and not to the
dissolution of one of them.
Russia
At present the
Council of the Federation is composed of representatives of the
subjects of the Federation with one representative of the
territorial assembly and one of the executive of each subject of the
Russian Federation. The deputies of the State Duma are elected based
on the majority and proportional electoral system: 50 % of them are
elected in federal constituencies (slate electoral system) and 50 %
are elected in single mandate constituencies.
During the period
called "transitional" by the Constitution of the FR (1993-1995) the
members of the Council of the Federation have been elected for 2
years according to the majority electoral system. They were called
deputies of the Council of the Federation. Between 1995 and 2001 the
heads of the executive power and the presidents of the territorial
assemblies (or their chambers) of the subjects of the Federation
were becoming ex officio members of the Council of the
Federation.
Presently the members
of the Council of the Federation are appointed by the decision of
the bodies of the executive and representative power of the subjects
of the Federation for the period of their mandates. However, a
member of the Council of the Federation appointed in such a way may
be at any time revoked by the respective decision. The institute of
permanent members in one of the chambers of the Federal Assembly is
not foreseen.
At present the
difference in the implementation of the right to be elected deputy
of the State Duma and the one to be appointed member of the Council
of the Federation consists in the difference between the way these
two chambers are formed: election or appointment.
According to the
Constitution the State Duma groups 450 deputies and the Council of
the Federation is composed of two representatives of each of the
subjects of the Russian Federation, one representing its body of the
representative power and the other - the executive branch. In such a
way the 178 members of the Council of the Federation must represent
the 89 subjects of the Federation in the upper chamber of the
Russian Parliament.
The deputies of the
State Duma are elected for 4 years and the chamber is re-elected as
a whole. The members of the Council of the Federation are not
elected. The exception being the deputies of the Council of the
Federation of the 1st legislature elected for 2 years.
The mandate of the
deputies of the State Duma is for 4 years. The mandate of the member
of the Council of the Federation is limited to the length of the
mandate of the representative or executive body of the subject of
the Federation that has appointed him or her to represent the
subject of the Federation to the upper chamber of the Russian
Parliament. The constitution of the Council of the Federation has no
link with the elections of the deputies of the State Duma.
The President of the
Russian Federation may dissolve the State Duma in two cases.
1) After 3 negative
votes of the State Duma on the candidate for Prime Minister of the
RF proposed by the President of the Russian Federation;
2) After the second
vote of no confidence of the State Duma to the government of the RF
(within 3 months).
The possibility to
dissolve the Council of the Federation is not foreseen in the
federal legislation.
Federal Republic of Germany
|