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
The members of the
German Bundestag (first chamber) are elected for a 4-year term. One
half of them is directly elected by a so-called first vote meaning
one candidate for each constituency, the other half is determined
through a second vote for a list of candidates of the different
political parties allotting each party a certain number of
candidates in proportion to the election outcome.
The Bundesrat on the
other hand is composed of members of state governments. The state
governments decide on their own who to send to the Bundesrat.
However, each state can only appoint as many members as it has votes
in the Bundesrat. The remaining members of the state cabinets are
usually sent to the Bundesrat as deputy members.
Since the members of
the Bundesrat are not elected, the Bundesrat does not have
legislative terms as such. In constitutional parlance it is a
"permanent body" changing its composition as a result of state
elections. This means that state elections, which are held at
different times, always have nationwide political significance
since, whenever a state electorate determines the composition of the
given state assembly and state cabinet, it indirectly determines who
will represent the state in the Bundesrat.
The right to vote and
to be elected to the Bundestag is linked to the age of 18 years
(Art. 38 paragraph 2 of the German Basic Law).
As there are no Bundesrat-elections but only
elections to the Laender parliaments which determine the Laender
governments, who finally appoint the Bundesrat's members, each land
has its own electoral code, which also links the right to vote and
to be elected to the age of 18 years.
Simultaneous membership in the Bundestag and the
Bundesrat is excluded by law.
According to the
Federal Electoral Law the Bundestag has 598 members. Nevertheless,
in the current electoral term the Bundestag has 603 members. The
total number may vary according to the relation of candidates
elected by first and second vote (see above 4. a)). Constituency
seats which a party obtains in addition to the seats to which it is
entitled to on the basis of the second votes cast for it, are called
overhang mandates and can lead to the fact that the number of 598
members provided for by the Federal Electoral Law is exceeded.
The Bundesrat has - according to Article 51 of the
German Basic Law - a total of 69 members.
Since the members of
the Bundesrat are not elected but appointed by the Laender
governments, the Bundesrat does not have legislative terms as such.
It is a "permanent body" that only changes as state elections take
place, which are all held at different times. Thus members of the
Bundesrat can not be re-elected but only re-appointed, if a
government has been confirmed in the Land elections. Moreover, the
membership in the Bundesrat is not necessarily linked to the
legislative terms in the respective Laender, as the
Minister-President has the possibility to change his cabinet at any
time in the course of the legislative period and thus to appoint new
members of his government as members of the Bundesrat.
There are no terms of
office in the Bundesrat. The legislative period in the Bundestag is
4 years.
As the Bundesrat is a
permanent body it can not be dissolved. The Bundestag can be
dissolved by the Federal President on request of the Federal
Chancellor if a motion for a vote of confidence put forward by the
Chancellor fails in the Bundestag.
Spain
The Congreso de
los Diputados is made up by 350 diputados or members
elected by universal, free, direct and secret suffrage in provincial
constituencies. Each province is allocated a minimum of two
Diputados (there are 50 provinces), the remainder being
distributed in proportion to their population. Seats are assigned to
the parties on the d'Hondt rule.
The Senate members,
for their part, are elected by means of a twofold procedure:
Most of them (208)
are elected in provincial constituencies; the voters of each
province elect four Senators by universal, free, direct and secret
suffrage (section 69.2 of the Spanish Constitution). Each of the
major islands, however, Gran Canaria, Mallorca and Tenerife, elects
3 Senators and the remaining islands or groups of islands elect one
(section 69.3 of the Spanish Constitution). The cities of Ceuta and
Melilla elect two Senators each (section 69.4 of the Spanish
Constitution). Electors can vote for a maximum of three candidates
in the provincial constituencies, two in Gran Canaria, Mallorca,
Tenerife, Ceuta and Melilla and one in the remaining island
constituencies. The seats are won by those obtaining the greatest
number of votes.
The Self-Governing
Communities are additionally entitled to appoint one Senator and a
further Senator for each million inhabitants in their respective
territories. The appointment is incumbent on the Legislative
Assembly of the Self-Governing Community, as provided for by its
Statute, which shall in any case guarantee adequate proportional
representation (section 69.5 of the Spanish Constitution). The
number of Senators elected by this method, depending on the
population of each Self-Governing Community, may vary over time. At
the moment there are 51 Senators appointed by the Self-Governing
Communities.
No distinctions are
made between those who can vote and those who can stand for office;
all citizens of legal age (over 18) are eligible for both.
The only slight exception to this rule is that the
legislation in some Self-Governing Communities calls for persons
standing as Senators to be members of their Legislative
Assembly.
Section 68.1 of the
Spanish Constitution lays down a minimum number of 300
Diputados for the Congreso de los Diputados and a
maximum of 400. The Electoral Act (Ley Electoral) has established
the number at 350.
The Senate is
currently made up by 259 Senators, 208 by direct election and 51
appointed by the Legislative Assemblies of the Self-Governing
Communities (section 69, paragraphs 2, 3, 4 and 5).
The Congreso de
los Diputados is wholly renewed with each general election. As
for the Senate, the 208 Senators from the provincial constituencies,
the islands, Ceuta and Melilla are elected in the general elections.
The Senators appointed by the Legislative Assemblies of the
Self-Governing Communities, with a few exceptions, are appointed
after the corresponding elections in each Self-Governing Community,
leading to a partial renewal of the House.
The term of office
for both Houses is four years. The constitution (election) of the
Second House is in no way linked to that of the First House, nor
vice versa.
The two Houses can be
dissolved by the President of the Government (section 115.1 of the
Spanish Constitution), either simultaneously or separately. The
uniform practice to date has been simultaneous dissolution.
Switzerland
4a. - no appointed
members
- proportional electoral system:
National Council (CN)
-
majority electoral system: Council of the States (CS)
-
defined mandate (4 years)
4b. The election of
the members of the Council of States is provided for by cantonal
laws. The cantons may foresee some provisions/conditions such as the
incompatibility of mandates (i.e. State Council/Council of the
States, i.e. cantonal executive/federal legislative).
4c. 200 in the
National Council, 46 in the Council of the States; these numbers are
set in the Constitution art. 149+150).
4d/e. The National
Council: complete renewal every 4 years; the election and
re-election takes place as well every 4 years; however as elections
are organized on the cantonal level, they do not take place in all
the cantons together with the elections to the National Council (the
exceptions in the cantons of Zug, Graubünden and Appenzel R.I.).
4f. No.
Belgium
The key choice of
bicameralism in 1830 should have granted a distinctly different
profile to each of the chambers, as they were supposed to reflect
the social and political dichotomy present in the revolution. The
Chamber of Representatives had been conceived as a ´people's´
assembly, geared mostly towards the new generation of intellectuals;
the Senate on the other side as the privileged spot of the nobility.
This theoretical, sociological choice, but above all a political
choice: the class difference in both assemblies corresponds as well
to reciprocal spheres of influence. Even if in 1830 constitutional
provisions are liberal and the eligibility conditions not very
restraining, the parliamentary mandate remains for a long time a
male privilege, reserved to a social class little representative of
the whole society. The establishing of universal suffrage for men,
moderated by plural voting at the end of the 19th century and the
introduction of proportional representation (1899) generate a first
democratisation wave in the hemicycle. One has to wait for the
establishing of the unqualified universal suffrage for men at 21 in
1919 to see a truly perceptible democratisation. Not only because
the number of the nobility and landowners is decreasing, but also
because the representation of the working classes increases.
Since 1921, women
were as well eligible to the Senate. Marie Spaak-Janson has been
between 1921 and 1936 the only woman in the Senate, and until 1929,
it was even the only woman sitting in either of the chambers. The
number of elected women is increasing only very slowly, following
the granting of the right to vote to them in 1948. The number of
women senators has increased from 3,3 % in 1971 to 31 % in 2003. In
1948 women obtained the right to vote, but this did not have an
immediate effect on the number of women in Parliament that remained
fairly low until the beginning of the 70´s. With the general
election in 1974 in sight, the National Council of Women and the
Coordination Committee of Women launched on a large scale a campaign
against the under-representation of women in politics. Their slogan
had been "Vote woman". This initiative had been successful. In the
Senate the representation of women increased from 3,9 to 7,6 %.
Since 1974 shifts happened in the composition of the representation
of women in the Senate. The co-opting had been from the very
beginning an important recruiting basis for women senators, but
alongside directly senators and provincial senators gained more
importance. The proportion of directly elected women continued to
grow without interruption from 1974 to 1981. At that time there were
13,2 % directly elected senators and 12 % co-opted ones. Among
provincial women senators the proportion increased from 6 % in 1974
to 10 % in 1978. A slight setback appeared in 1981. In 1985 the
proportion of women directly elected to the Senate fell back to 6,6
%, a level already reached in 1974. The Smet-Tobback Act of May 24,
1994 meant a significant stage to eliminate under-representation of
women in politics. This Act had modified the Electoral Code to
introduce quotas for women. This piece of legislation, applicable to
all elections, formulates the following restriction: "On one slate,
the number of candidates of the same gender shall not exceed a share
of two thirds of the total formed by all the seats to be filled by
the election and the maximum authorized number of proxy candidates".
In such a way, at least one third of candidates to the elections are
women. Obviously the law shall produce its results only when the
political parties shall be ready to grant to women a sufficient
amount of eligible positions on their slates. The law does not
impose any duty to place women in eligible positions, the political
parties keep their initiative in this area. Since the beginning of
the 90´s the position of women has grown a lot, as the following
table is showing:
Year |
Chamber of Representatives Percentage of women |
Senate Percentage of women |
1981 |
5,6 |
11,6 |
1985 |
7,5 |
11,4 |
1987 |
8,4 |
8,1 |
1991 |
9,4 (20 out of 212) |
10,8 (20 out of 184) |
1995 |
12,0 (18 out of 150) |
23,9 (17 out of 71) |
1999 |
23,3 (35 out of 150) |
26,7 (19 out of 71) |
2003 |
34,7 (52 out of 150) |
31,0 (22 out of 71) |
Presently the
proportion of women in the Chamber of Representatives is even
higher.
Czech Republic
The differences in
the political composition of both chambers are already given by the
different electoral systems. Although among senators the
representatives of political parties present in the Chamber of
Deputies prevail, representatives of smaller regional parties and
independent senators are as well present. In the Chamber of Deputies
deputies non-affiliated to a political group are an absolute
exception - they are usually not more than two, i.e. 1 % (they have
in general left their political group), in the Senate non-affiliated
senators to a political group are quite common - they are 8 at
present, i.e. 10 %.
In 2002 the
Independents´ political group has been established in the Senate
that you would not find in the Chamber of Deputies, another of the
political groups is formed by representatives of one of the ruling
political parties, but also by representatives of small political
parties or non-affiliated senators. The strong communist party group
in the Chamber of Deputies never had a partner in the Senate, the
same can be said today about the non-parliamentary extremist
republican party. The shares of the groups of the different
political parties in both chambers moreover differ quite often: the
typically government social democrats have 70 % deputies, i.e. 35 %
of the total number of deputies, but only 10 senators, that is about
12 % pf all the senators.
It would be much more
difficult to assess the voting and other coalitions of the
senatorial political groups. Their alliances may reproduce similar
power situations (e.g. summer 1998 - summer 1999, as far as the
constitutional majority of social democrats and civic democrats, the
pro-government majority in the years 1996 - 1998 and less evidently
also after 2002). However, it cannot be just said that the
government coalition in the Chamber of Deputies is simply copied in
the Senate, or that the government would "control" the Senate; the
situation there is always somewhat more tricky. On one hand, the
distinctly lower party discipline is among other things contributing
to it, on the other the self-reflection of senators as members of an
institution described as the chamber of reflection: on many
important occasions deputies and senators of identical political
parties vote differently.
Should we take into
consideration the left-right axis, we could see a constant
strengthening of the positions of the left in the Chamber of
Deputies since 1996, as opposed to the Senate being during its whole
existence right-of-centre with a decreasing share of the left
(approx. 27 senators of the left in 1996, today approx. 13 -15).
As far as other
differences are concerned, the average age of senators varies
between 52 and 53 years of age, the average age of deputies in the
years 1996 - 1998 varied around 46 years. There were never more than
10 women among senators (approx. 12 %); women deputies are now a
record 34, i.e. 17 %.
France
Even if we consider
only the evolution after 1958 (date when the present Constitution
came into force) it is difficult to compare the political
composition of the two Chambers, because the political groups have
never been quite the same in the National Assembly and in the
Senate.
However, a few
general observations can be made:
- while the left has had the majority in the National Assembly
several times (1981 - 1986, 1988 - 1993, 1997 - 2003), it had
always been in the minority in the Senate;
- in the Senate centre political groups (left-of-centre and
right-of-centre) have always occupied a major position, while
their place was far less relevant in the National Assembly;
- the extreme right had never been represented in the Senate;
- the communist party has had for a long time a more reduced
representation in the Senate than in the National Assembly.
Today (since 2002)
the political groups are almost the same in the National Assembly
and in the Senate, but their proportions are different, as it is
shown on the table below:
Political orientation |
National Assembly |
Senate |
Right |
63 % |
51 % |
Centre |
5 % |
9 % |
Left-of-centre |
- |
5 % |
Socialist |
26 % |
26 % |
Communist |
4 % |
7 % |
Other |
2 % |
2 % |
The share of women is
12,2 % in the National Assembly and 11,2 % in the Senate.
The
socio-professional composition of both Chambers is not very
different, as it is indicated in the table below:
|
National Assembly |
Senate |
Trade and industry |
10,2 % |
9,4 % |
Education |
16,5 % |
25 % |
Public Servants |
23 % |
14,4 % |
Professions in agriculture |
3,1 % |
9,7 % |
Professions in the judiciary |
13,5 % |
11,6 % |
Medical professions |
11,4 % |
11,6 % |
Employees |
20,2 % |
13,8 % |
Other |
2,1 % |
3,5 % |
Italy
The two houses of the
Italian Parliament have since the beginning been equal in functions
and structure. Their political composition, based on electoral rules
very similar to each other's makes them almost identical as for
concerns the political majority. There may well be slight imbalances
in parties' representation, and differences in the name or number of
parliamentary Groups.
Imbalances of gender
representation, or the representation of social or professional
categories don't depend on the constitutional rules, neither on the
electoral system, that assert the absolute equality of all citizens
before the law.
The responsibility of
providing a fair representation for all social categories rests on
the political parties, that are the sole intermediaries between
society and politics. Generally speaking there is very little
difference in the socio-professional composition between the two
Chambers.
All long the story of
the republican Parliament the women's representation has been very
low. In the Senate it has grown from 4 women in the 1st Legislature
to 25 in the current one (but ten years ago they were 31). The first
woman appointed by the President as life senator is Professor Rita
Levi Montalcini, in the current legislature.
In the Chamber of
Deputies the same situation can be observed as a percentage (the
number of deputies being doubled, there are more women deputies than
senators).
Actually, the parties
that take part in the political competition are the same, and they
seem to apply the same criteria to the lists' composition both for
the first and the second chamber.
Luxemburg
Although the
councillors of State perform their function besides their
profession, they do not represent specific professional groups in
the Council of State. Similarly, in spite of the political affinity
of the majority of the councillors of the State with one or the
other political party, they do not represent, as opposed to
deputies, this party in the Council of State. So the influence of
professional groups and political parties remains thin in the
council of state and very indirect at the utmost. We have to regret
that share of women both in the Chamber of Deputies (11 women out of
60 deputies) and in the Council of State 3 women out of 21
councillors of State) remains insufficient.
Poland
The response to
Question 5 is based on statistical data which gives a picture of the
past 14 years of the functioning of both chambers of the Polish
Parliament in a new political reality. Owing to a high frequency of
political changes occurring in successive configurations of
parliamentary (i.e. governing) majority and opposition minority, it
is very difficult to compare the political composition of both
chambers and seize trends in the political evolution of
parliamentarians and its influence on the shaping of political
reality. Therefore, we will focus on a brief comparison of the
composition of both chambers from the angle of the contribution of
men and women, as well as selected occupations, to the work of the
Parliament.
Sejm of the 10th
Term (1989-1991) and Senate of the 1st Term (1989-1991)
- Deputies by gender: women - 64, men - 396
- Senators by gender: women - 6, men - 94
- Deputies by education level: higher - 394, secondary
vocational - 42, secondary general - 7, other - 17
- Senators by education level: higher - 87, secondary vocational
- 7, secondary general - 6
- Deputies by selected active occupation: farmers - 59,
scientists (all fields) - 42, non-technical specialists - 105
- Senators by selected active occupation: farmers - 16, lawyers
- 14, scientists (all fields) - 23, doctors - 7
Sejm of the 1st
Term (1991-1993) and Senate of the 2nd Term (1991-1993)
- Deputies by gender: women - 44, men - 416
- Senators by gender: women - 8, men - 92
- Deputies by education level: higher - 355, secondary general -
63, secondary vocational - 24, other - 18
- Senators by education level: higher - 87, secondary general -
5, secondary vocational - 8
- Deputies by selected active occupation: farmers - 52, lawyers
- 22, private entrepreneurs - 90, doctors - 20, academic
instructors - 38
- Senators by selected active occupation: farmers - 9, lawyers -
22, doctors - 18, scientists (all fields) - 10, enterprise owners
or co-owners - 11
Sejm of the 2nd
Term (1993-1997) and Senate of the 3rd Term (1993-1997)
- Deputies by gender: women - 60, men - 400
- Senators by gender: women - 13, men - 87
- Deputies by education level: higher - 361, secondary
vocational - 70, secondary general - 18, other - 11
- Senators by education level: higher - 85, secondary general -
5, secondary vocational - 6, other - 4
- Deputies by selected active occupation: farmers - 60, lawyers
- 17, private entrepreneurs - 17, doctors - 13, academic
instructors - 14
- Senators by selected active occupation: farmers - 22, lawyers
- 12, private entrepreneurs - 10, doctors - 12, academic
instructors - 13
* A new
"occupational group" was established among senators - managers and
directors of private companies - 12
Sejm of the 3rd
Term (1997-2001) and Senate of the 4th Term (1997-2001)
- Deputies by gender: women - 62, men - 398
- Senators by gender: women - 12, men - 88
- Deputies by education level: higher - 383, secondary - 70,
other - 7
- Senators by education level: higher - 87, secondary - 11,
other - 2
- Deputies by selected active occupation: farmers - 33, lawyers
- 75, doctors - 23, teachers - 11
- Senators by selected active occupation: farmers - 8, lawyers -
5, private entrepreneurs - 3, doctors - 12, academic instructors -
11, managers and directors of private companies - 10.
Sejm of the 4th
Term (2001 - ) and Senate of the 5th Term (2001 - )
- Deputies by gender: women - 93, men - 367
- Senators by gender: women - 23, men - 77
- Deputies by education level: higher - 372, secondary - 74,
other - 14
- Senators by education level: higher - 91, secondary - 9
- Deputies by selected active occupation: - no data
- Senators by selected active occupation: farmers - 8, lawyers -
17, private entrepreneurs, managers and directors of private
companies - 12, doctors - 9, academic instructors - 8.
This selected
statistical data shows a significant growth of the number of women
parliamentarians in recent terms of office. There also has been a
noticeable growth of the proportion of parliamentarians with a
higher education, particularly among senators, and a gradual
appearance of a separate so-called "managerial" group (enterprise
owners, directors, managers).
Austria
See surveys of the
development of the share of women among the members of the National
Council of the Federal Council, and of the present composition of
the National Council and the Federal Council along professional
categories.
Percentage of
women in the National Council in the beginning of the term
office
|
Total number of members |
Number of women |
Percentage |
Interim National Assembly |
208 |
0 |
0 |
Constituent National Assembly |
159 |
8 |
5 |
1. term of office |
175 |
9 |
5,1 |
2. term of office |
165 |
8 |
4,8 |
3. term of office |
165 |
6 |
3,6 |
4. term of office |
165 |
11 |
6,7 |
5. term of office |
165 |
9 |
5,5 |
6. term of office |
165 |
8 |
4,8 |
7. term of office |
165 |
9 |
5,5 |
8. term of office |
165 |
8 |
4,8 |
9. term of office |
165 |
9 |
5,5 |
10. term of office |
165 |
9 |
5,5 |
11. term of office |
165 |
9 |
5,5 |
12. term of office |
165 |
8 |
4,8 |
13. term of office |
183 |
11 |
6 |
14. term of office |
183 |
14 |
7,7 |
15. term of office |
183 |
18 |
9,8 |
16. term of office |
183 |
17 |
9,3 |
17. term of office |
183 |
21 |
11,5 |
18. term of office |
183 |
36 |
19,7 |
19. term of office |
183 |
40 |
21,9 |
20. term of office |
183 |
47 |
25,7 |
21. term of office |
183 |
49 |
26,8 |
22. term of office |
183 |
62 |
33,9 |
Percentage of
women in the Federal Council in the beginning of the term office of
the National Council
1. term of office |
46 |
3 |
6,5 |
2. term of office |
50 |
3 |
6 |
3. term of office |
48 |
3 |
6,3 |
4. term of office |
48 |
5 |
10,4 |
5. term of office |
49 |
0 |
0 |
6. term of office |
48 |
1 |
2,1 |
7. term of office |
44 |
1 |
2,3 |
8. term of office |
48 |
6 |
12,5 |
9. term of office |
47 |
6 |
12,8 |
10. term of office |
51 |
7 |
13,7 |
11. term of office |
51 |
6 |
11,8 |
12. term of office |
54 |
9 |
16,7 |
13. term of office |
51 |
9 |
17,6 |
14. term of office |
55 |
11 |
20 |
15. term of office |
55 |
9 |
16,4 |
16. term of office |
60 |
10 |
16,7 |
17. term of office |
61 |
12 |
19,7 |
18. term of office |
58 |
12 |
20,7 |
19. term of office |
62 |
13 |
21 |
20. term of office |
60 |
12 |
20 |
21. term of office |
61 |
8 |
13,1 |
22. term of office |
62 |
16 |
25,8 |
Percentage of Occupations within Political
Parties
in the Federal Council
Occupations |
ÖVP |
SPÖ |
FPÖ |
Greens |
A |
Agriculture |
12.9 |
.0 |
.0 |
.0 |
.0 |
Industry |
4.8 |
1.6 |
1.6 |
1.6 |
.0 |
Banks, Transport, Business... |
8.1 |
3.2 |
4.8 |
.0 |
.0 |
Professions |
.0 |
.0 |
1.6 |
.0 |
.0 |
Public Service |
14.5 |
21.0 |
8.1 |
.0 |
.0 |
Political Parties, Interest Groups |
4.8 |
8.1 |
.0 |
1.6 |
.0 |
Others |
1.6 |
.0 |
.0 |
.0 |
.0 |
|
46.8 |
33.9 |
16.1 |
3.2 |
.0 |
Percentage of Occupations within Political
Parties
in the National Council
Occupations |
SPÖ |
FPÖ |
ÖVP |
Greens |
A |
Agriculture |
.0 |
1.1 |
9.8 |
.5 |
.0 |
Industry |
4.9 |
2.2 |
3.3 |
.5 |
.0 |
Banks, Transport, Business... |
2.2 |
2.7 |
7.1 |
1.1 |
.0 |
Professions |
4.9 |
.5 |
4.9 |
1.6 |
.0 |
Public Service |
12.0 |
1.6 |
7.7 |
2.7 |
.0 |
Political Parties, Interest Groups |
11.5 |
.5 |
8.2 |
2.7 |
.0 |
At home |
.0 |
.5 |
.0 |
.0 |
.0 |
Others |
2.2 |
.5 |
2.2 |
.0 |
.0 |
|
37.7 |
9.8 |
43.2 |
9.3 |
.0 |
Slovenia
The composition of
the National Council is the reasonable one. It can, in accordance
with its competencies, manifest various interests who are not
represented in the National Assembly since it is a nation's
representative body. The national councillors perform their duties
non-vocationally. They remain employed at the posts they performed
previous to the election. In such a manner national councillors stay
closely linked with their interest organisation or sphere of
activity they represent. Many initiatives, proposals and claims
originate from their field of work, which is less characteristically
for members of Parliament.
The composition of
both chambers differs exceedingly, which is the result of different
mode of elections. The differences represent important quality of
bicameral representative body and at the same time they contribute
to the progress of democracy. The National Council was not drafted
as a political representation; it was drafted as an interest
representation. The parties' influence on candidate selection is
minor in the case of the National Council than it is in the case of
National Assembly. The civil society sphere (associations, unions
and other organisations) perceives a strong influence on the work of
the National Council. Parties interfere mostly in the field of local
interests' election. The ground for this case lies in the fact that
both electors and candidates for local interests are voted in
municipal councils that are under strong political influence.
Romania
From the point of
view of the political composition, in each legislation subsequent to
the year 1992, the party winning the elections got about 40-45%,
with a difference of 1-2% between the two Chambers. In time, the
number of political parties decreased and the number of the current
parliamentary political parties ranges to 6 ( Social-Democratic
Party, Greater Romania Party, the National Liberal Party, the
Democratic Alliance of Hungarians in Romania, the Democratic Party
and the Romanian Humanist Party). This evolution is due to the
imposition of the electoral threshold and to the development of the
political and parliamentary life. It has been noticed that, during
the last two years of the parliamentary mandate, some senators quit
the party through which they acceded to Parliament, and according to
the Senate's Regulations become independent.
From the point of
view of gender representation, the number of women representatives
has increased from a legislature to the other. The current
Parliament counts 12 women in the Senate (out of the total number of
140) and 38 women in the Chamber of Deputies (out of the total
number of 342). At the Senate, the number of women has increased by
4 times as compared to the previous legislation (3 women out of a
total number of 143 members).
The dominant
professional category at the Senate, in all legislatures, was that
of engineer (the current Senate counts 45 engineers), followed by
professors (27), lawyers (26), economists (18), physicians (11),
writers (3), military officers (2), architects (2), priests (2),
electricians (1), psychologists (1), sociologists (1), chemists (1),
artists (1). The professional composition in the previous
legislature (1996-2000) was the following: 36 engineers, followed by
lawyers (29), professors (26), physicians (15), economists (14),
military officers (5), artists (2), mathematicians (2), researchers
(2), geologists (1), curators (1), diplomats (1), physicists (1),
journalists (1), priests (1) and electricians (1).
Therefore, from the
point of view of the structure on professional categories, the
Senate's structure didn't suffer essential adjustments.
Russia
The differences in
the composition between the two chambers of the Russian Parliament
depend a lot on the way they are formed. As a rule the share of
women among the State Duma deputies is higher than the one in the
Council of the Federation. Within some fluctuation it is almost
always around 4 % in the Council of the Federation, while at the
State Duma it is higher than 10 %.
Concerning the
professional aspect the majority of the members of the Council of
the Federation and of the deputies of the State Duma are co-workers
of the structures of the State administration as well as members of
diverse social movements.
As for the political
composition of the State Duma and of the Council of the Federation
it would be difficult to provide a comparative analysis based on the
fact that the rules of the Council of the Federation forbid to
establish parliamentary groups linked to political parties.
Federal Republic of Germany
The composition of
the Bundesrat and the Bundestag can only be compared concerning the
political majorities in both chambers. In the history of the
Bundesrat there have been only rather short periods with the same
political majority in both chambers. Once a new government was
formed on the basis of a political majority in the Bundestag, which
corresponded with the majority in the Bundesrat - the following
state elections regularly led to a change in the composition of the
second chamber. It is most likely that this development will
continue in the future and that in a long-term perspective the
Bundesrat might generally be a political counterweight to the
Bundestag.
With regard to other
criteria such as the percentage of women or professional categories
no long-term perspectives can be given.
Spain
As regards the
political makeup, the experience since 1978 has shown that, despite
the differences in the election systems of the two Houses, the
biggest party in the Congreso de los Diputados also obtains a
majority, perhaps even larger, in the Senate.
There are no
appreciable differences in the number of women in the two Houses,
nor in the presence of professional groups. Senators are more likely
to have a double term, however, because many of them are at the same
time Mayors, Presidents of Provincial Councils (Diputación
Provincial) or Members of the Legislative Assemblies of the
Self-Governing Communities.
Switzerland
Composition:
We shall restrain ourselves to a summary concerning the four basic
political parties ("the cabinet parties", i.e. those forming the
Federal Council) during the last 7 legislatures, i.e. since
1975:
Between 1975 and 1991
Christian-Democrats formed the largest political group in the
Council of States (in 1975 17 mandates, in 1999 15 mandates); since
1991 Radicals are holding the strongest proportion of seats (in 1975
15 mandates; in 1999, 18). These two groups are gathering the
"lion's share" having on average 32 of the 46 elected seats in the
Council of States. The Centre Democratic Union (UDC) has 7 members
in the present legislature and has had between 4 and 5 during the 6
previous ones. The proportion of the Socialist Party members has
fluctuated more with a peak at 9 members during the 1979 - 1983
legislature, then a decrease to 3 members from1991 until 1995 and 6
in the present legislature (the average thus being of 5
members).
The National Council
has quite a different composition (200 seats). In this chamber the
Radicals´ share has changed from 54 seats in 1983 to 43 in 1999. The
Socialist Party has sent 47 members in 1983, 51 members in 1999. The
UDC has increased its number of seats constantly from 23 to 44,
while the PDC that still had 42 mandates in 1983 holds only 35 in
1999.
The share of
women: In 1971 the Council of States had only one and only
woman. Since these days the representation of women has steadily and
slowly grown. Since 1999 women are nine. As for the National
Council, while it had 11 women in 1971, it numbers 46 of them in
1999.
Socio-professional
categories: A broad array of professions is represented in both
chambers. Lawyers - attorneys, notaries, i.e. 19 members - form a
professional group quite broadly represented in the Council of
States; the second group in size has been for a long time the one of
the members of the canton executives (State councillors), i.e. 7-8
members in average, but their number has decreased to 3 during the
present legislature. In the National Council lawyers are as well the
most broadly represented profession (40 members), followed by
farmers (23;they are not represented in the Council of States, but
in the past they were 2 in average), teachers and faculty (their
share has shifted from 32 in 1987 to 20 during the present
legislature; their average number is 3 in the Council of
States).
Czech Republic
The Senate is never
completely passive, in the event of a similar power situation it
focuses on its review role, i.e. improving the quality of the
submitted bills. The highest share and absolute number of returned
bills fall within the years 1998 - 2000 when the so-called
opposition agreement, i.e. an agreement of civic and social
democrats dominated in both chambers, but was mostly relying on an
agreement about fundamental issues of the shaping of the political
system, and thus nothing prevented to return massively less
sensitive bills of legislation.
We may say on the
opposite that a more distinct difference of the political
composition of the chambers fosters conflicts on more fundamental
issues, including constitutional issues. At this time you would see
as well more rejecting resolutions of the Senate.
It does seem that the
level of success of the amendments proposed by the Senate during
their consideration in the Chamber of Deputies would be directly
connected only with different compositions of the chambers. A whole
set of influences as at play there such as prestige conflicts
between the chambers, lobby interests, the majority or minority
format of the government, etc.
France
The table below is
showing the proportion of the amendments introduced by the Senate
and taken up by the National Assembly.
This proportion is
substantially lower when the two assemblies have majorities with
opposed political majorities (1981-1986, 1988-1993, 1997-2002
period). Even in this case this rate remains generally higher than
50 %. We can thus estimate that bicameralism works fairly well in
all cases.
Years |
Rate of Approval of Amendments of the Senate in the
National Assembly |
1970-1971 |
68 % |
1971-1972 |
75 % |
1972-1973 |
73 % |
1973-1974 |
73 % |
1974-1975 |
93 % |
1975-1976 |
85 % |
1976-1977 |
85 % |
1977-1978 |
86 % |
1978 |
86 % |
1979 |
79 % |
1980 |
77 % |
1981 |
57 % |
1982 |
45 % |
1983 |
44 % |
1984 |
52 % |
1985 |
50 % |
1986 |
89 % |
1987 |
88 % |
1988 |
58 % |
1989 |
60 % |
1990 |
64 % |
1991 |
52 % |
1992 |
53 % |
1993 |
91 % |
1994 |
88 % |
01/01/-30/09 1995 |
78 % |
1995 |
87 % |
1995-1996 |
87 % |
1996-1997 |
88 % |
1997-1998 |
46 % |
1998-1999 |
54 % |
1999-2000 |
48 % |
2000-2001 |
50 % |
2001-2002 |
65 % |
Italy
Each house of the
Italian Parliament performs exactly the same functions, concerning
the law making process, the control over the Government, the power
of making inquiries. They have adopted internal Rules that are
largely comparable and are based on the same principles. They work
very often together through the means of Bicameral Committees, that
are bodies of inquiry and control.
There are no relevant
differences in their composition, so that in the relationship with
the Government it can expect to face consistent behaviours in both
chambers. The Government bills can be submitted for the first
reading to either chamber, and can be amended at any stage of the
parliamentary iter. Each time a bill is amended, the new text
must be approved by the other chamber without any change, and so on
until they both agree on the same text. The Government may put a
confidence vote on a bill, either in the Chamber of Deputies or in
the Senate. (Article 70 of the Constitution reads: "The
legislative function is exercised ... by both Houses". This
marks their absolute equality in the law-making process.)
When the new
Government is appointed by the President of the Republic, it comes
before the Houses - both of them: first one, then the other,
alternatively - to obtain their confidence. The first draft of the
Financial bill - one of the most important acts of the Government -
is submitted to either chamber in turn; one year to the Chamber of
Deputies, next year to the Senate, and both of them have to examine
it.
The few above
examples, showing the "perfect" equality of the two chambers of the
Italian Parliament, do not necessarily mean that the Chambers always
share the identical point of view on the same problems: in many
cases, comparing the different opinions that may have arisen in the
Chambers has resulted in improvements in the legislative
texts.
Luxemburg
In principle the
changing composition of the Chamber of Deputies does not affect the
activity of the Council of State.
First, the 15 years
mandate of councillors allows some continuity in their work.
Then the opinions of
the Council of State are characterized above all by a legal and
juridical review. The respective law imposes indeed to the Council
of State to perform the control of the conformity of bills as well
as by-laws to higher legal norms (Constitution, international
treaties and conventions, general principles of law). Hence the
Council of State performs a control ex ante of the
constitutionality of laws. But beyond this control it proceeds for
each bill to the examination of the legal quality of the draft, of
its smooth integration into the legislation in force as well an
analysis of the political timeliness of the planned measures.
Therefore the changing of the majority within the Chamber of
Deputies has no influence on the wording and the content of the
positions of the Council of State.
Each member of the
Council of State has anyway the right to submit a separate opinion
that may be supported by one or more members of the Council of
State. But it is only quite exceptionally that the councillors of
State use this right. Such a separate opinion is always brought to
the knowledge of the government together with the main opinion.
All the resolutions
of the Council of State are voted on the basis of the majority of
votes. When there is a split opinion, the different opinions are
brought to the knowledge of the government.
Poland
The changing
composition of both chambers and interaction between them has an
obvious impact on the nature and quality of parliamentary
activities. The arrangement of political factions in both chambers
often determines the topics and direction of legislative
changes.
In a situation where
the political makeup of both chambers is similar (the Sejm majority,
which as a rule forms the government, follows the same or similar
line as the Senate majority), political as well as strictly
legislative collaboration between them is essentially good. An
example of this is provided by the current Sejm and Senate, where in
both cases the left is in majority (as many as 75% of senators
represent that option). That collaboration is best tested by the
Sejm's attitude to amendments submitted by the Senate. Because
senators who represent the political left are in majority, they can
amend bills already passed by the Sejm in a way that matches the
original intention of their initiator - the government.
Austria
Of course, answering
the question regarding a correlation between the composition of a
parliamentary chamber and its political activities would require a
systematic analysis by political scientists, which does not exist
for the National Council and the Federal Council. However, the
Austrian Federal Council is not entitled to propose amendments to
the legal enactments by the National Council (as implied in your
question); that is why such a systematic survey of the political
activities of the Federal Council and its differentiation compared
with that of the National Council would have to by primarily based
on a text analysis of the debates in the Federal Council.
Slovenia
For the Slovenian
variety of bicameral representative body is characteristically that
activities of upper chamber do not relate to different structure of
the National Assembly and the National Council. The latter functions
less politically and mostly supports constructive initiatives,
proposals and claims.
The competencies of
the National Council are weaker comparable to the competencies of
the national Assembly. Therefore the latter does not take upper
chamber's opinions into consideration. Suspensory veto can be
outvoted with absolute majority. This is also very easy in the case
of strong governmental coalition. During the last duration of the
term of the National Assembly (1996-2000) not many vetoes were
outvoted. The public and media consensuses stand for an additional
argument of support for the veto.
Romania
It cannot be
estimated whether the change in the composition of the Chambers is
reflected in the activity or within the legislative process, in the
amendments proposed or adopted or in exercising the chambers' role
of control over the Executive. From a political point of view, the
two Chambers have an extremely similar composition and thus, the
rare divergent positions reflect discrepancies that are only of
legislative and technical nature, and not of political
nature.
Russia
The mode of
constituting the two chambers of the Federal Assembly has been
identical only in the years 1993-1995. However, in spite of the
congruency or non-congruency of the constitution of the chambers,
the deputies of the State Duma represent in the first place the
interests of their electors, and the members of the Council of the
Federation represent those of the specific subject of the Russian
Federation.
Moreover, it should
be noticed that a half of the deputies of the State Duma is elected
on the slates of political parties and form parliamentary groups of
political parties. The deputies elected according to the majority
principle in the single mandate constituencies are as well entitled
to join them. The other deputies are also authorized to unite in
parliamentary groups with at least 35 members. This situation
foresees a substantial politicisation of the proceedings of the
lower chamber of the Parliament. On the other hand, the creation of
parliamentary groups of political parties is not foreseen by the
Rules of Procedure of the Council of the Federation.
Moreover, each
chamber of the Parliament has beside legislative competencies other
powers that are specific and do not correspond to those of the other
chambers.
These differences in
the status of the parliamentarians, in the modes of constitution of
the chambers and their competencies define imperatively the
difference in the motives when the chambers adopt a position.
However, it does not mean that these positions are always different.
The possible conflicts are usually settled anyway through
commissions with an equal representation of both chambers.
Federal republic of Germany
Generally speaking,
the changing composition of both the Bundestag and the Bundesrat
does not have a major effect on the activity of the Second Chamber.
The main reason therefore is that the Bundesrat represents more the
basic interests of the Laender at federal level than the aims of
political parties. In case the majority in the Bundesrat differs
from the majority in the Bundestag and the political composition of
the Federal Government, the Bundesrat can be a political
counterweight or an effective instrument of control, which has the
right to veto nearly half of the legislative initiatives proposed by
the Bundestag or the Federal Government.
Decisions of the
Bundesrat are not automatically considered in a more favourable
light by the Bundestag, when the political majorities are identical.
As the Bundesrat principally represents the interests of the Laender
there may be decisions which in effect do not correspond to the
governments' or the Bundestag's point of view, but were adopted by
the same political majority. Therefore the nature of the amendments
proposed by the Bundesrat does not necessarily depend upon the
question of a coincident or different political composition of each
chamber. However, as a matter of fact, amendments proposed by the
Bundesrat with a different majority can effectively influence
central or controversial bills introduced by the government.
Spain
The different mode of
election and the consequent different makeup of the Houses do not
seem to be reflected in the legislative or control function.
Switzerland
Both Chambers are on
an equal footing and share the same powers. Both presidents set on
the basis of common agreement the items to be dealt with first in
the respective chamber and care for a balanced spread of the agenda
(balanced distribution of the burden, attribution as to the
political importance of the item,
etc.). |