Asssignment Responsible Government AND Independent Government System PDF

Preview

Summary

Download Asssignment Responsible Government AND Independent Government System PDF

Description

DEFINITION

OF

RESPONSIBLE

GOVERNMENT

AND

INDEPENDENT

GOVERNMENT SYSTEM Responsible Government Responsible government is a government which has no strict separation of power between executive and legislative branch because of the cabinet type of organization. The executive must come from legislative branch of government. Government is the integral part of Parliament and responsible to their people. They are answerable and accountable to the people. The Ministers that are appointed must be accountable for their actions. They must explain their actions in the Parliament (ministerial accountability). The other members or the Parliament can question the Minister and his department’s actions. Besides, a minister must remain his integrity. If a minister loses support of the lower house, he must resign. Thus, in order to remain in government, a party must maintain the support of the majority of members of the House of Representatives and act fairly and responsibly. This is called the principle of responsible government. It ensures that the government is answerable and accountable to the Parliament and therefore to the people. Thus, the system of responsible government is designed to ensure that the executive who is not self-elected is ultimately responsible to the electors or voters. In Malaysia, the principle of responsible government works together with the principle of separation of powers to guide the way in which law is made and managed. Yang di-Pertuan Agong (YDPA) who is the ceremonial executive, is an integral part of the Parliament. The cabinet which usually controls an overwhelming majority in Parliament tends to dictate its legislative programme. “A government governs but Parliament must rule”. Parliament is seen as the ultimate instrument of democracy because it represents the popular will of people. The Cabinet controls Parliament and has the

1

ability through Parliament to amend the Constitution and indirectly prescribes the jurisdiction of the Courts. The other examples of responsible government are United Kingdom and Canada.

Independent Government Independent government is a government which has clear separation of power between executive and legislative branch. The executive cannot be the members of legislative branch. Example of the independent government is the United States of America (USA). A republican government and democracy in the United States are based on principles of independent government. An agency of the United States government that is created by an act of Congress is independent of the executive departments. Each branch of the government which is executive, legislative and judiciary are independent and provide check and balance towards each other. The US President and his cabinet are not and cannot be part of the Congress. There is a strict institutional separation between the executive and legislative. In the US, the government is separated from the legislature. The President’s advisors do not participate in congressional debates but conventionally they appear before congressional committees to explain policies and programmes. In the US, one party controls the Congress and another occupies the White House. The President as chief executive is neither chosen by nor responsible to Congress, the legislative branch. The President may belong to one political party while Congress may be controlled by another. Cabinet members are appointed by the President and they are responsible to him. The executive naturally enjoys a greater degree of independence from the legislature but it has little control over the enactment of laws.

2

HISTORY OF RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENT AND INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT SYSTEM Responsible Government Responsible government system emanates from the Westminster system of government where the executive is responsible to legislate in the government. The Westminster system is a democratic parliamentary system of government designed after that which developed in the United Kingdom. The term ‘Westminster’ was derived from the London municipality of Westminster which is home to the Houses of Parliament. The House of Commons and the House of Lords both met in the Palace of Westminster. The Palace was the principal residence of the kings of England from the middle of the 11th century until 1512. Much of the original building was destroyed, following a major fire in 1834. Westminster Hall is the only part of the original building that remains. It narrowly missed destruction during the German bombing of 1941. The system is a series of procedures for operating a legislature. It is used, or was once used, in the national legislatures and subnational legislatures of most Commonwealth and exCommonwealth nations upon being granted responsible government, beginning with the first of the Canadian provinces in 1848 and the six Australian colonies between 1855 and 1890. However, some former colonies such as Nigeria, for example, have since adopted the presidential system as their form of government. Other countries such as Ceylon used the system between 1948 and 1972, and Sri Lanka from 1972 until 1978 when the constitution was remodeled into an Executive presidential system. Burma was following independence in 1948 until the 1962 military coup d'état.

3

Independent Government Independent government system comes from the idea of separation of power. It was originated from the writings of a French philosopher named Montesquieu who, in 1748 published a book entitled ‘’The Spirit of Laws’’. He put forward the idea on how government would best work. He believed that all things were made up of rules or laws that never altered and set out to study these laws scientifically with the hope that knowledge of the laws of government would reduce the problems of society and improve human life. According to Montesquieu, there were three types of government: a monarchy (reigned by a king or queen), a republic (ruled by an elected leader), and a despotism (governed by a dictator). He also believed that a government that was elected by the people was the best form of government. He did, however, believe that the success of a democracy, a government in which the people have the power depended upon maintaining the right balance of power. Montesquieu argued that the best government would be one in which power was balanced among three groups of officials. He thought England, which divided power between the king (who enforced laws), Parliament (which made laws), and the judges of the English courts (who interpreted laws) was a good model of this. Montesquieu named the idea of dividing government power into three branches the "separation of powers." He believed it to be most important to create separate branches of government with equal but different powers. That way, the government would elude placing too much power with one individual or group of individuals. He wrote, "When the [lawmaking] and [law enforcement] powers are united in the same person... there can be no liberty." According to Montesquieu, each branch of government could limit the power of the other two branches. Therefore, no branch of the government could threaten the

4

freedom of the people. His ideas about separation of powers became the basis for the United States Constitution.

THE BASIC FEATURES OF RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENT AND INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT SYSTEMS There are several aspects in which the responsible government system differs from the independent government system. The two government systems differ from each other when it comes to the aspects of separation of powers, responsibility to the government, divided government, maintaining confidence, security of tenure, number of terms, popular mandate, split executive, executive-legislative cooperation, dissolution of parliament and cabinet appointments. Malaysia is an example of a country with a responsible government system while the United States is a country with an independent government system. The main difference between a responsible government and an independent government is that in a responsible government, the executive and legislature are one and they are not separate. In Malaysia, Article 43(2) of the Federal Constitution requires the Prime Minister to belong to the Dewan Rakyat and the other cabinet members to belong to either House. This shows that the executive and legislature in a responsible government are not separated. On the other hand, in the US, the presidential system separates the executive and legislative functions of the government. The President of the United States and his Cabinet are not and cannot be part of the Congress. There is a strict institutional separation between the executive and legislative powers. This also provides a check and balance in the system.

5

The two systems also differ in the aspect of responsibility to the government. In Malaysia, Article 43(3) states that the Government is required to be collectively responsible to the Parliament during debates and the daily question and answer session. This means that in a responsible government the Government is accountable to the Parliament. However, in the US, since the Government and legislature are separate, it can be seen as how in congressional debates the President’s advisors do not participate, but conventionally they appear before congressional committees to explain policies and programmes. The next aspect is divided government. In a responsible government such as in Malaysia, the Government must enjoy the confidence of the lower House as a precondition of its accession to and continuation in power. The Prime Minister may appoint members from the Upper and Lower House. This is different to an independent government such as the US, where there is a distinct possibility where one party controls the Congress and another occupies the White House. For example, President Clinton was a Democrat but the Republicans were controlling both Houses of Congress, for much of his tenure. Similarly, both Houses of Congress were controlled by the Democratic Party although President George Bush was a Republican. From the aspect of maintaining confidence, in Malaysia, Article 43(4) permits the Dewan Rakyat to dismiss the Prime Minister and his Government by a vote of no- confidence. No Prime Minister has ever been voted out of office at the federal level. At the state level however Stephen Kalong Ningkan in Sarawak in 1966, Dato’ Hj. Harun Idris in Selangor in 1976 and Dato’ Hj. Nasir in Kelantan in 1977 were dismissed by vote of no-confidence in their State Assemblies. There is also a difference between the two systems in terms of the security of tenure. The Prime Minister of Malaysia and his Government under Article 43(4) may be voted out of office

6

or he may disappear if his supporters “cross the floor” to join the opposition as what happened in the early nineties to Datuk Pairin Kitingan in Sabah. This aspect might raise the issue of instability in responsible governments. In contrary, the President of the United States has security of tenure. Once he is elected, he is guaranteed to a term of four years. He cannot be dismissed by a vote of no-confidence, but only by impeachment (in the Lower House), and by conviction of two-thirds majority (in the Upper House). Concerning the number of terms, there is no limit to the number of terms that a Prime Minister may serve in a responsible government. For instance, in Malaysia, Tun Dr Mahathir served as a Prime Minister for over two decades. This is similar to Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore who served for three decades, and Jawaharlal Nehru and Indira Gandhi of India as well as Margaret Thatcher of the United Kingdom who served as the leaders of their nations for 13 to 15 years. Although an unlimited tenure produce continuity of leadership, when a person holds a power for such long period of time, issues might rise as it also personalise power. The independent government differs clearly in this aspect as seen in the US where the President has a limit to the number of terms in which he may serve. He is limited to two terms of four years each. In terms of popular mandate, in Malaysia, the Prime Minister is appointed by the Yang diPertuan Agong as in Article 43(2) on the ground that he and his party or coalition enjoys the confidence of the Dewan Rakyat. This is different to the American President who is elected by the entire nation, where his popularity among the people plays a role. This is because he is directly elected by the people who vote him to become the President.

7

In terms of a split-executive, the Prime Minister of Malaysia is the Head of Government but he is not the Head of State. The Head of the State in Malaysia is the Yang di-Pertuan Agong. The split-executive prevents the abuse of power by the political executives. However issues might also arise as what happened in Malaysia when the refusal of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to assent to the Constitutional Amendment Bill 1983 which has caused a constitutional crisis that took several months to resolve. Examples of international issues would be as in the dismissals of Prime Ministers Gough Whitlam by Governor-General Sir John Kerr in Australia and as with Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif by the Pakistani President. This is distinguished with an independent government. The President of the US is the head of Government and he is also the Head of State. In view of the executive-legislative cooperation, the executive in responsible governments dominates fiscal and legislative matters to such an extent that many commentators suggest that the Parliament merely legitimates but it does not legislate. Thus, cooperation between the executive and legislature is assured and therefore ensures for a strong and effective government. As for the independent government, since the executive and legislative are two separate bodies, the executive in the US cannot take the Congress for granted when it comes to legislative and financial proposals. This sometimes creates disagreements and clashes between the two bodies which bound to cause delays and deadlocks which often cripple the machinery of the government. For example, a temporary paralysis in the Bush government in October 1990 occurred because of failure to secure the passage of the Budget through Congress. The dissolution of Parliament in Malaysia is provided under Article 55(2) of the Federal Constitution which allows the Prime Minister to advise the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to dissolve prematurely. Article 40(2)(b) however states that the Yang di-Pertuan Agong is not bound by this 8

advice, though, conventionally, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong does not disregard the advice. On the other hand, the American President, even in the times of war, he cannot dissolve the Houses. As for cabinet appointments, in responsible governments, all cabinet posts must be filled by Members of Parliament although the prime Minister can recruit distinguished outsiders if he appoints them to the Senate as a prelude to a Cabinet post. However, Cabinet appointments in the US are from outside the Congress which means that the candidates are nation-wide, as long as it is outside the Congress. In conclusion, it is clear that there are several aspects in which a responsible government differs from an independent government as has been explained. It can also be seen that certain issues might rise in each of the two government systems as shown in the examples provided.

9

THE ADVANTAGES OF RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENT AND INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT SYSTEM

Responsible Government Strong cooperation between branches in the government First, it can be seen through the relationship between legislative and executive. The advantage of this relationship is proven in cabinet government. As example, in Malaysia, the Cabinet is part of the Parliament. As stated in Article 43(3) of the Federal Constitution, “The Cabinet shall be collectively responsible to Parliament” (Federal Constitution, 2015). It shows that during question time, debate and motions Minister are answerable, accountable and responsible to the representative of the people. This means that when all ministers jointly responsible as a team, an individual minister cannot express personal views that contradict the government policy. Second, the relationship between legislative and judiciary also shows the advantages. In United Kingdom, parliament may accept or reject judicial decision. They also can overturn it. They also can remove judges and grant judicial powers to the executive by creating administrative tribunals. So the judicial branch’s power is under control. Thus, the responsible government can avoid the ultra vires. No security of tenure In Malaysia, according to article 43(4) of Federal Constitution, the prime minister and his government may be voted out of office. It stated that “If the Prime Minister ceases to command the confidence of the majority of the House of Representatives, then unless at his request the 10

Yang di-Pertuan Agong dissolves Parliament, the Prime Minister but any Minister may resign his office.” (Federal Constitution, 2015) Furthermore, the Prime Minister’s majority may disappear if his supporters to join the opposition. As example in Stephen Kalong Ningkan case, he was former Chief Minister of Sarawak who was removed from his office by the then Sarawak Governor Tun Abang Haji Openg. He lost “confidence” of a majority of members of the Council Negeri. The next example is in Dato’ Seri Mohamad Nizar’s case. On 4th February 2009, Sultan Perak received 3 separate letters from the members of the legislative assembly expressed their support for Barisan Nasional and they had lost confidence towards Dato’ Seri Mohamad Nizar. On the same day, Dato’ Seri Mohamad Nizar also sent request to Sultan Perak for dissolution of legislative assembly. The court held that, once Dato’s Seri Mohamad Nizar is made to know that he has lost confidence he should take the honourable way out by tendering his resignation. In conclusion, the government member has no security of tenure in their position. If they cannot exercise their position with good credibility and responsibility, they may be voted out of the office.

11

Independent Government

Affective check and balance

In United State, there is existence of check and balance system. Executive, legislative and judiciary are separated and wholly independent as to function, but coordinated for proper operation. The aim to exercise this system is to avoid one branch of government become too powerful. Each branch is restrained by the other two branches in several ways. First, legislative branch checks on the executive in several things such as impeachment power and trial of impeachments, selection of the president and vice president, approval of replacement vice president, declare war and enact taxes and allocate funds. Legislatives also, check on the judiciary branch in senate approves federal judges, initiate constitutional amendments and alter the size of the Supreme Court. Second, executive branch also will check on the legislative. They actually have veto powers. Executive may do the emergency calling into the session of one or both houses of Congress and may force adjournment when both Houses cannot agree on any adjournment. While in judiciary branches they have the power to appoint judges and have the pardon power. Third, as other branches, the judicial branch also has the power to check and balance other branches. The judicial member has the power to make judicial review to the legislature and executive.

12

Limit number of term In United States, term limit is applied at the both federal and state level. Term limit, also known as rotation in offices, restricts the number of terms of an office and office holder may hold. There are many advantages of terms limit. First, an organization with term limits may be better able to attract active and involve members of community who are not able to make long term commitment to the organization. Second, it also allows busy...