Russians Approve Constitutional Amendments

2020 ◽  
Vol 72 (027-028) ◽  
pp. 3-7
Keyword(s):  
Constitutional Amendments

In A Fix: Fixed-Term Parliaments in the Australian States

2013 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 265-298
Author(s):  
Peter Congdon
Keyword(s):  
Western Australia ◽  
Prime Minister ◽  
New South ◽  
New South Wales ◽  
South Australia ◽  
Constitutional Amendments ◽  
South Wales

Constitutional systems of Westminster heritage are increasingly moving towards fixed-term parliaments to, amongst other things, prevent the Premier or Prime Minister opportunistically calling a ‘snap election’. Amongst the Australian states, qualified fixed-term parliaments currently exist in New South Wales, South Australia and Victoria. Queensland, Tasmania and Western Australia have also deliberated over whether to establish similar fixed-term parliaments. However, manner and form provisions in those states' constitutions entrench the Parliament's duration, Governor's Office and dissolution power. In Western Australia and Queensland, unlike Tasmania, such provisions are doubly entrenched. This article considers whether these entrenching provisions present legal obstacles to constitutional amendments establishing fixed-term parliaments in those two states. This involves examining whether laws fixing parliamentary terms fall within section 6 of the Australia Acts 1986 (Cth) & (UK). The article concludes by examining recent amendments to the Electoral Act 1907 (WA) designed to enable fixed election dates in Western Australia without requiring a successful referendum.

CONSTITUTIONALISM AND AMENDMENTS TO THE BASIC LAW OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION 2020: POLITICAL ANALYSIS

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (6) ◽  
pp. 103-118
Author(s):  
O.A. SIDENKO ◽  
◽  
D.V. SOSUNOV ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Language ◽  
Constitutional Amendments ◽  
Expert Opinions ◽  
Political Analysis ◽  
Basic Law ◽  
Expert Assessments ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Existence Of Value ◽  
Transitional Constitutionalism ◽  
The Impact

The purpose of the article is to reveal the contradictions of the Russian transitional constitutionalism of the 2020 model as perceived by experts. It is achieved by presenting a palette of experts' views on the phenomenon of constitutionalism, expert assessments of the impact of the 2020 constitutional reform on constitutional principles, the distance between citizens and authorities, as well as expert opinions on the existence of value consolidation between the state and civil society in modern Russia. It is extremely important that the constitutional amendments, contributing to adaptation to changing realities, remain within the framework of the system of constitutionalism. There is no relevant developed methodology for political and legal assessment in the Russian-language scientific literature. The research group, having resorted to an expert survey, proposed their own version. The results obtained indicate not only the importance of value connotations in the perception of constitutionalism by experts, the weakening of all groups of constitutional principles (negative assessments prevail over positive ones), the manipulative nature of the process, but also a potential increase in the distance between the governors and the governed. Nevertheless, the threshold values that could indicate the interpretation of constitutional novels by experts as leading to going beyond the framework of constitutionalism are not identified. Since the project is pilot and generalizations are based on expert estimates, the conclusions are debatable.

scholarly journals The proposer or the proposal? An experimental analysis of constitutional beliefs

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-25
Author(s):  
Kenneth Mori McElwain ◽  
Shusei Eshima ◽  
Christian G. Winkler
Keyword(s):  
Experimental Analysis ◽  
The State ◽  
Survey Experiment ◽  
Prior Beliefs ◽  
Constitutional Amendments ◽  
Citizen Preferences ◽  
Government Authority ◽  
Relative Salience ◽  
Constitutional Issue

Abstract In many countries, constitutional amendments require the direct approval of voters, but the consequences of fundamental changes to the powers and operations of the state are difficult to anticipate. The referendums literature suggests that citizens weigh their prior beliefs about the merits of proposals against the heuristic provided by the partisanship of the proposer, but the relative salience of these factors across constitutional issue areas remains underexplored. This paper examines the determinants of citizen preferences on 12 diverse constitutional issues, based on a novel survey experiment in Japan. We show that support for amendments is greater when its proposer is described as non-partisan. However, constitutional ideology moderates this effect. Those who prefer idealistic constitutions that elevate national traditions tend to value proposals that expand government powers, compared to those who prefer pragmatic constitutions that constrain government authority. These results highlight the significance of constitutional beliefs that are independent of partisanship.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document