Unit 1

What is Comparative Politics – Meaning, Nature and Scope

All modern comparative studies of politics are essentially governed by the objective of
understanding the processes of politics at work in all the political system. In contemporary
times all the political scientist accepts that for a proper understanding of different political
systems a scientific-empirical comparative study of their all-political structures and functions is
essential.
Meaning –
The study of comparative politics involves conscious comparisons in studying political
experiences, behaviors of political structures and processes of the system of government in a
comprehensive manner. it also includes the study of extra constitutional Agencies having their
immediate connection open or tacit with formal governmental organs. it is therefore concerned
with significant regularities, similarities and differences in the working of political institutions
and in the patterns of political behavior.
Definition –
Comparative politics can be described as the subject that seeks to compare the political
systems which are at work in various parts of the globe, with a view to analyzing and explaining
the nature of politics and building a scientific theory of polities.
According to M.G. Smith, "comparative politics is the study of the forms of political
organizations, their properties, correlations, variations and modes of change"
Comparative politics in its contemporary form involves a comparative study of not only the
formal institutional and mechanistic arrangements but also an analysis of non-institutionalized
and non-political determinants of politics such as culture or the socio-economic arrangements
within which the political systems operate.
Nature –
Comparative politics seeks to analyze and compare the political systems operating in all
societies. In doing so it takes into account all the three connotations of politics - political
activity, political process and political power.
Political activity consists of all activities involved in conflict resolution or in the struggle for
power.
Political process involves the study of all formal as well as non-formal structures, the
governmental and non-state structures through which the political process gets
operationalized. The political process receives information and signals from the environment
and then transforms these into authoritative values.
Finally, politics being a struggle for power and a process of conflict resolution through the use
of legitimate power, it involves a study of power or Power relations in society.
Scope –
comparative politics has come to acquire a wide scope which includes the analysis and
comparison of the political processes, political activities, political functions, political structures
of all political systems; developed as well as developing and European as well as Asian African
and Latin American.
Subject matter of comparative politics –
- Political structures
- Political functions
- Study of human behavior in politics
- Study of similarities and differences in the behavior of political institutions
- Study of all political systems
- Infra-structure of political system
- Study of political processes
- Power, influence, authority, legitimacy
- Political pressure groups and political elites

UNIT 2 – Modernity
The word “modern” stems etymologically from the Latin modernus meaning the “just now.” In
common usage, “modernity” refers to the social, cultural, and intellectual condition that helps
to fix the distinct with Western society. The notion of modernity is most frequently used as an
expression of the condition of the world, often as a replacement for capitalism,
industrialization, rationalization, secularization, the media and communication society, or other
ideological or institutional traits that are believed to be characteristic for the West in contrast
with preceding epochs or more primeval existing civilizations.
As a historical epoch modernity is commonly periodized into different phases with early
modernity lasting between around 1453 with the Fall of Constantinople and the Byzantine
Empire and 1789, classical modernity enduring between the French Revolution in 1789 and
1914, and late modernity lasting between the outbreak of the First World War in 1914 and the
fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989.
Modernity more often signifies an idea or a sense of the present as discontinuous from the
past.
Modernization as a process could be traced back to the beginning of Renaissance roughly from
14th to 17th century that highlighted the power of reason in human life. In political terms,
Renaissance depicted a power shift from spiritual authority to temporal authority whereby the
state emerged as a sovereign entity. It took roots in Italy and was primarily a cultural
movement that marked a transition from medieval to modern Europe. Its scope was far-
reaching and the novel ideas that it introduced permeated the field of art, culture, literature,
politics, music, science, and learning and knowledge creation. Renaissance was followed by the
formation of modern-nation states in Europe that began sometimes during the 16th century.
The division of states on linguistic and ethnic basis led to the creation of a sense of national
identity and cultural homogeneity in West Europe.
The emergence of politically sovereign states with distinct national, territorial and cultural
identities ended the supreme authority of the Roman Catholic Church. The victory of state over
church in West Europe marked the beginning of democracy and modern thought. However, it
replaced the authority of Church with equally powerful centralized monarchies and a highly-
exploitative feudal system. Thus, the emergence of modern-nation states did not create
sufficient ground for the growth of democracy and democratic institutions that forms an
integral component of political modernization.
The concept of modernity gained salience in the intellectual discourse only with the emergence
of Industrial Revolution in England sometimes around the mid of 18th century. The modern way
of life was thus a result of Industrial Revolution that brought freedom and progress with it.
Modernity resulted from capitalism that resulted in the creation of new means and forces of
production.
The trajectory of modernization is thus traced back to the Industrial Revolution that brought
radical changes or transformation in all spheres of human life.
Meaning of modernity -
Modernity in Anthony Gidden’s words refers to a mode of social life or organization that
emerged in Europe around the seventeenth century and has a worldwide influence.
Modernization entails progress in all spheres of life including social, economic, political and
cultural. It is a multifaceted process involving change in all areas of human activity. Primarily,
the concept of modernity highlights a contrast between ‘tradition’ and ‘modern’, a transition
from the traditional to modern ways of life. It involved an overhauling of the past structures
giving way to new modes of thinking and doing
Modernism – it refers to the trend in arts, culture, socio-economics that are characterized by
the development of modern world.
Economic Modernity - Modernization as a process begins with rapid progression in the
economic sphere through industrialization, urbanization, and technological advancement. It
marked a transition in manufacturing processes that involved extensive use of machines and
steam and water power. However, the impact of modernization was not simply confined to the
economic sphere. It had far-reaching affect in other spheres of human activity.
Walt W. Rustow – Stage Theory of Modernization. A historical picture of development and
modernization in Western societies where he identified five successive stages of economic
growth which are as follows: traditional society, pre-conditions for take-off, take-off, drive
towards maturity and finally the stage of high mass consumption. Later, a sixth stage was added
in this unilinear path of development called ‘search for quality’.
At the socio-psychological level, modernity involves a change in the values and orientation of
people. It further involves expansion of knowledge and its dissemination in the society through
mass communication and increasing literacy rates.

David Apter explores the sociological dimension of modernization that implies three
conditions:
1. the ability of social systems to innovate and adopt new practices required for modern
ways of living;
2. differentiated and flexible social structures free of prejudices and biases; and
3. an appropriate social framework necessary for inculcating new skills and knowledge for
sustaining in a technologically advanced world.
In the political sphere, modernization implies building modern democratic institutions and
inculcating modern democratic values like liberty, equality, fraternity and secularism. Political
modernity took its root in Europe as it became the birthplace of the democratic ideal. The
process of political transformation thus started in the industrially advanced countries of the
West and is seen as a ‘syndrome’ by Lucian Pye that has following characteristics:
1. Equal opportunity for participation in politics and government formation
2. Capacity and ability of political system to formulate public policies and implement them
3. Differentiation of structures and function but not overall integration
4. Secularization of political process
Gabriel Almond envisages two main components of political modernization: structural
differentiation and secularization of culture
C.E. Black highlights four assumptions that are held with regard to the concept of modernity.
1. First, it requires the development of capacities that is relevant for modernization. In order to
be labelled modern, societies need to build new capabilities and skills to cope up with modern
ways of life.
2. This is complimented by advancement of knowledge created through technological and
scientific revolution.
3. Third, it signifies the ability of societies to adopt such knowledge and promote development
in social, economic, political and cultural spheres.
4. Finally, confirmation to modern standards necessitates framing policies that modifies the
traditional values and institutions as per modernity requirements and borrow ideas from those
societies that are relatively more modern
Nature of Modernity – C.B Black’s “Grand Processes of Modernization”
1. Revolutionary change – fundamental transformation in patterns of human life
2. Complex process – multifaceted changes
3. Systematic and global process
4. Phased process as every stage is distinct from other in terms of its social, economic and
political structures.
5. Also, it is lengthy because it took centuries for Western societies in passing through these
stages
6. natural tendency in modernity to homogenize political culture and produce convergence
among societies
7. Modernity is irreversible and progressive in its orientation.
Anthony Giddens attempts to understand the nature of modern social institutions in terms of
three discontinuities with traditional institutional forms.
1. The first aspect is the pace of change that is considered to be rapid and extreme in its
form and content.
2. Second, the scope of change is all-encompassing. It implies that the consequences of
modernity are far reaching; it has a word wide impact.
3. Finally, the third aspect concerns the intrinsic nature of modern institutions that is
found to be missing in traditional systems. This includes the political system of the
nation-state, significance of production through inanimate power sources, and
commodification of products and wage labor.
Modernity and Gender
Gender division in society is an age-old phenomenon. It is based upon the assumption that women are
naturally disadvantaged to assume a subordinate status in the society. On these terms, men are seen as
the holders of power and are therefore active players in the public sphere like religion, culture, economy
and politics. Women on the other hand are meant to be confined to domestic or household activities.
Their reproductive power makes them skillful at raising and rearing children at home while men become
the bread-earners for the family.

Concepts and Ideas in Gender Politics The feminist discourse begins with the understanding and
explanation the difference between ‘sex’ and ‘gender’. It challenges the argument of ‘biological
determinism’ that gender division in society is naturally determined which implies that distinctions in
the social roles of men and women are because of their biological formations. In other words, naturally
women are seen as weaker than men. Women, because of their reproductive capacity, are considered
to be most appropriate in the role of child-bearing that involves staying at home and nurturing their
children. On the other side, men are the primary bread-earners of the family. They are active at the
workplace or any public arena.

Such natural or biological differences are also taken as a stereotypical basis to distinguish between the
characteristics of ‘masculinity’ and ‘femineity’. Attributes like power, intelligence, knowledge, rationality
and ability to take decisions on public front are generally associated with masculinity. In contrast,
femineity which gets linked with irrationality, unintelligible, dependence, physical weakness and
emotionality is considered to be inferior in the hierarchical order of psychological traits. The division of
social responsibilities between men and women is driven by these contrasting features that further
becomes a basis for establishing male supremacy is all spheres of human thought and action.

Patriarchy is the outgrowth of a gendered society that firmly established male supremacy and
subordination of women in every sphere of life including, social, cultural, political and economic. It is an
institution that begins to define the relation between men and women in the family as ‘rule by the
father’. This form of male domination then finds its application in other institutions of the society like
civil society, state, political parties, market, and above all the state or the government. The exclusion of
women from these institutions is clearly reflected in their under-representation or miniscule presence in
them

Modernity that triggered democratic processes in Western societies also brought the issue of gender
and women’s rights center stage. It gave rise to the ideology of Feminism that became the driving force
behind women’s movement in advanced capitalist societies. The central themes of gender politics
include the understanding of patriarchy, equality, rights, and social movement. Sex, according feminist is
a natural construct while gender is seen as a socio-culturally constructed term. Women remained
confined to family and domestic responsibilities that constitute the private sphere. Nedelsky argues that
in the 18th and 19th century Europe and England men’s citizenship was justified on the ground of their
rule over women at home and the values and culture of society so demanded that women must focus
on their responsibilities at home. As family was seen as a private realm, the state had no jurisdiction in
the structures of familial power even when such structures authorized domestic violence and deprived
women of their right to education, employment, association and expression.

Modernity thus triggered democratization and provided avenues for challenging the social cleavages
that were the creation of medieval ages. It generated political consciousness in masses especially
amongst those social groups who faced discrimination and exclusion is all forms and in every possible
way. The most visible form of social exclusion was found in case of women who constituted nearly half
of the population in most of the Western societies.

However, it was not until 1960s that the movement assumed political significance as it came to define
the personal arena or family in political terms. Broadly speaking, feminist thought that emerged as a
result of modernization can be divided into three categories: Liberal Feminism, Socialist Feminism and
Radical Feminism.

Liberal Feminism
Liberal Feminist thought and the associated movement found its ideological basis in liberal democracy
that firmly took roots in Modern Europe, especially Britain and United States. It also marked the first
stage of Feminist movement that primarily focused on achieving equality between sexes. It made
forceful claims for extending civil and political rights to women. As individualism is the core theme of
liberalism, Feminist thought during this stage demanded equal entitlement for individuals irrespective of
their sex, race, color, creed and religion. They believed that women’s equality must be the basic aim of
the movement that could be achieved by removing legal obstacles that denied equal opportunities and
rights for women.

Two very significant scholarly works that belong to the liberal tradition and in that sense initiated
Feminist movement are Mary Wollstonecraft’s Vindication of the Rights of Women (1792) and John
Stuart Mill’s on the Subjection of Women (1869). She demanded equal access to education for women
that would have not only open up new opportunities for them in employment but also ensure them a
life of dignity and self-respect. On a similar note, John Stuart Mill advocated extension of civil and
political liberties to women especially the right to vote.

Socialist Feminism

Socialist Feminism as a stream of feminist thought can be located in the writings of Marx and Engels.
The capitalist mode of production is found to be responsible for systematic oppression of women. In the
famous text ‘Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State’ they observe that sexual oppression
arose at a particular stage of social development and was conditioned by two simultaneous processes:
emergence of modern capitalism and origin of patriarchal family. Capitalism has enhanced both wealth
and social status of men and relegated women to domestic work and household responsibilities.
Women became unpaid labor in what Engels calls as the ‘bourgeoisie family’ and also turned into
instruments of reproducing children. Therefore, emergence of modern capitalism became the source of
gender inequality in the society. It created gendered patterns of division of labor and established the
dominance of men in all spheres of human activity. The socialist feminist also find a gendered pattern in
the international division labour. Women are made to perform unskilled or semi-skilled professions that
are normally low-paid in the global capitalist market. Their roles in the international market are again
decided by their qualities of femineity. On this basis, they mostly enter professions like nursing, primary
school teaching, garments industry, receptionists, low-paid household work, baby sitting, and so on that
are considered to be of lesser value. Socialist Feminism thus held modern capitalism responsible for
institutionalizing patriarchal system. Gender inequality was found to be a by-product of class divisions in
a capitalist society and was therefore not understood independent of class analysis.

Radical Feminism

Radical Feminism represent the second-wave of feminist movement that became popular in the writings
of Simone de Beauvoir, Firestone, Eva Figes and Germaine Greer. It indentified gender as separate
from other modes of social stratification like class, race, and ethnicity and therefore required
independent analysis. Gender difference was considered to be significant in itself as women irrespective
of their other identities face collective discrimination and therefore require collective action to
overcome their predicaments.

Radical Feminists during the 1960s and 1970s questioned the established norms and traditions of
Western societies that adhered to the notion of public-private divide and advocated non-interference of
state in the private or family sphere. They raised the slogan of ‘personal is political’ to state that family
involved power politics to establish male supremacy and discriminate against women. Therefore, they
claimed state intervention and regulation of family and marriage through strict laws and policies. Few
radical feminists celebrate the sexual difference and show strong resistance to the idea of considering
the superiority of masculinity or what is often called as ‘manliness’. They hold femininity and
womanhood in high esteem and believe that women should create a world of their own through a
revolution.

Issues and Women movements

Political Rights: Participation and Representation

women’s movement at its take-off stage, that covers the period from the French Revolution to the First
World War, focused on attaining voting rights and political equality. During the French Revolution,
middle and lower-middle classes got voting rights but women remained excluded from general
franchise. Due to the prolonged struggle led by women’s organizations across Europe and America,
political rights for women were legally sanctioned by many countries after the Second World War.

Political rights that appeared as the central demand of women’s movement during the first phase was
directly linked with changes in civil laws that inhibited women’s participation in politics. This mainly
included the revision of marriage and family laws that excluded women from property rights in the
family. However, the movement led by suffragettes became extremely forceful at the beginning of 20th
century by resorting to the techniques of civil disobedience and direct confrontation with the
authorities. Ultimately, after a prolonged struggle of almost two and a half centuries women attained
the right to vote in Britain under the Equal Franchise Act of 1928.

Education and Employment

In England, France and Germany the early phase of women’s movement that could be located around
the mid-17th century remained closely linked with other social reform movements. Besides political
equality, women’s movement made strong claims for equal employment opportunities, improvement of
women’s education, and regulation of prostitution. Amongst these, education was given prime
importance. It was believed that education was a vehicle of change in the status of women. It will open
gateways for employment opportunities and relieve them from their traditional roles at home. Women’s
professional organizations in countries like Germany and Netherlands struggled for equal opportunities
in public employment.

Sexual or Reproductive Rights

Demand and pressures for reproductive rights and sexual liberation by radicals is of recent origin. These
areas received wide coverage in American politics since 1970s especially after the verdict of the
Supreme Court on Roe v/s Wade case concerning the abortion right of women. The state laws that
prohibited abortion on moral and religious grounds were invalidated as abortion was considered to be a
matter of personal choice.

Modernity and Class

In Britain, class identity was linked with occupational status and income group. But the concept of class
is dynamic that drives new meaning with every socio-economic transformative process. Class division in
Western societies is a direct consequence of industrialization and urbanization associated with the
process of modernization. The progress of modernization in the advanced capitalist societies has led to
changes in class configuration. Structural changes in the nature of employment have created new class
relations.

Sociological Theory

The sociological interpretation of the nature of modernity and its impact on class was offered by Karl
Marx and Max Weber. Marx attempted to link class divisions in society with the relations of production.
The owners of means of production during different historical junctures tend to constitute the
‘dominant class’ and rest of the people who were subject to the exploitation and subjugation of the
dominant class were labelled as working class. The dominant class derives its power and strength by
exploiting the repressed class. Thus, class analysis provided a foundation to understand social
stratification in the modern world.

Later, the Neo-Marxism, a modified version of Classical Marxian thought got subdivided into two
braches- Instrumentalist Marxism and Structural Marxism. The Instrumentalist approach considers the
modern capitalist state as an instrument of dominant class. The idea is derived from Communist
Manifesto in which Marx and Engels defines the modern state as a committee to manage the affairs of
the bourgeoisie class. The class interests get reflected in the program and policies of state. Domhoff,
demonstrates how the business elites in the country not only control the economy but were also
actively involved with political parties, government and civic associations.

Structuralist approach which argues that the state instead of being manipulated by the capitalist class
operates according to the development of capitalism. The state has its own mechanisms and agencies
like police, bureaucracy, courts, army that intervenes when required to preserve capitalism and permit
the domination of ruling sections over working class.

Power Elite theory

The theory originated in mid-1960s in the writings of Mosca, Pareto and C. Wright Mills. Its central
argument is that the society is naturally governed by few who can be distinguished from majority of
people by virtue of their social status, power position and wealth. This governing class is called elite
while others constitute the masses. Pareto understood power shifts through circulation of elites in
societies.

On a similar note, Mosca too made a distinction between the ruling class which is less in number,
monopolizes power and appropriates wealth and the ruled, ‘the masses’, who naturally lack
organizational skills and feel contended under the rule of elites. Like Pareto, he highlighted the
possibilities of replacement of old ruling class by a new one. However, the power shifts only took place
between elites although the nature of elites might change.

Class Analysis –

Goldthrope and Ericson (1993) use an economic criterion to understand class and link class-division with
employment relations. Accordingly they recognize the existence of three ‘economic classes in the
advanced capitalist societies: employers who buy the labour in the market; employees who sell their
 labour to others and get subjected to the authority and control of the latter; and self-employed who
work independently without buying and selling labour in the market.

Dahredorf understands class differentiation as resulting from bureaucratization of employer

organizations in the modern societies of 20th century. He categorizes the employee class into two types:
service contract employees and labour contract employees.

Class division in Western societies is a direct consequence of industrialization and urbanization

associated with the process of modernization. The progress of modernization in the advanced capitalist
societies has led to changes in class configuration. Structural changes in the nature of employment have
created new class relations. This has further impacted other areas of human thought and action, but
more specifically the political sphere. The political history of Western societies clearly shows that the
nature of class divisions has been an important determinant of political trajectory of such societies.
It was the rise of manufacturing industry which completed the transition from traditional societies to
the type of modern capitalist societies we know today. One of the immediate results of industrialization
was the growth of the towns. The influx of new inhabitants to urban areas was combined with dramatic
population growth over the country as a whole. This large pool of industrial workers constituted the
‘urban poor population’ living in extremely vulnerable conditions. The mounting oppression and
exploitation of the industrial labor and the resulting class disparities by the middle of 19th century
indicated the inherent contradictions in the concept of freedom and universality linked with capitalism
and modernity.
For Marx, industrialization consolidated the existence of the two new classes which had been
developing from, or to use his own words, 'maturing in the womb' of, the old feudal society. For Marx,
the most important feature of the industrial society he was analyzing was that it was capitalist; that is, it
was based on the private ownership of the means of production (machines, factories, raw materials) by
non-laboring entrepreneurs. Marx called the two new classes the bourgeoisie and the proletariat,
although we might now prefer to use the terms 'capitalists' and 'working classes'. The bourgeoisie now
became the major holders of wealth and the social surplus, and thus the economically dominant class.
In the first part of the nineteenth century, they also attempted to consolidate their social and political
power. Facing the bourgeoisie was the new urban working class, dispossessed of the means of
producing their own livelihood and forced to sell their only possession, their labor, in order to survive.
For Marx these two groups were locked in a relationship that was both dependent and antagonistic.
The rising consciousness amongst the industrial labor spurred trade union activities and labor
movements all throughout Europe. However, there are differences between European nations in the
nature of movement and process of including labor class in the political mainstream. Labor movement
in Europe found its origin in Britain. Political modernization assumed a new dimension with
enfranchisement of the industrial and agricultural labor class. Participation which is the essence of
modernization received a strong impetus with the extension of voting rights under the Reform Acts
initiated in Britain and France in the mid-nineteenth century. Class that was traditionally linked with
social status in feudal times and economic and political control under modern capitalism now became a
source of political mobilization. It not only triggered trade union activities but also created
opportunities for the formation of labor, socialist and radical parties in Europe. In France, Germany and
Italy such parties came up much before the outbreak of the First World War and encompassed radicals
and reformists, revolutionaries and non-revolutionaries, communists and later social-democrats. These
parties made a strong claim for social rights and welfare state. They campaigned against the extremities
of capitalist system and sought state protection of labor rights. Some of their demands included decent
wages, fixation of minimum wages and working hours, contract security, protection at workplace and
during periods of unemployment, progressive taxation, accidental insurance, and pension scheme.
Thus, class and modernity are mutually reinforcing as both impact each other. Modernity created new
productive forces and thus new forms of class division and that the bourgeoisie class itself contributed
towards modernization in economic and political spheres. With the progress of modernity, the class
relations are transforming in Western societies. Class still holds an important place in political
mobilization though ethnic divisions have assumed salience in recent years with the rise of
multiculturalism in Western countries.

UNIT – 3
Constitutionalism: Theory and Practice in Contemporary States

Meaning –

In ordinary parlance, constitutionalism may be defined as a ‘belief in constitutional government.’

Constitutionalism can be defined as the doctrine that governs the legitimacy of government action, and
it implies something far more important than the idea of legality that requires official conduct to be in
accordance with pre-fixed legal rules. In other words, constitutionalism checks whether the act of a
government is legitimate and whether officials conduct their public duties in accordance with laws pre-
fixed/ pre-determined in advance. The latter definition shows that having a constitution alone does not
secure or bring about constitutionalism.

In Political Science constitutionalism would mean the way a state and its authority are constituted. A
Constitution is believed to have the quality of stability and respectability to the extent that the people
expect it to be followed by the members and organs of the Government. This practice of the
Government following the Constitution is called 'constitutionalism'. This means that the Government
cannot be run by any person's whims. A principle of representative government has, therefore, been
universally accepted. Because the representatives have handed over power to rule in future a
constitution becomes necessary to lay down the limits of their power-'the rules of the game,'.

Features –

According to Barnett, constitutionalism embraces –

- limitation of power (limited government),

- separation of powers (checks and balances) and
- responsible and accountable government

We shall thus focus on the following basic elements:

1. Popular sovereignty –

Popular sovereignty envisages the fact that the public is the source or fountain of all governmental
authority. The legitimacy of any governmental power is derived from the consent of the public. In
other words, the government acquires its mandate from the people. In other words, the public is
involved in the decision-making process which may take different forms. The most obvious one is
election of representatives. The public is entitled to elect representatives who represent it. When
the public loses confidence in its representatives and where the latter fail to represent the interest
of the public, representatives may be recalled before the expiry of their term of office.

2. Separation of Powers (checks and balances) –

Under constitutionalism, power is not concentrated in any one organ of the state. It is diffused
(divided) among the three organs of the state i.e., the legislature, the executive and the judiciary. If
power is monopolized by any one organ of the state there could be abuse of power, tyranny and
dictatorship. Nor can there be liberty. For example, the legislature, in addition to its law-making
power is not allowed to exercise the roles of the executive; and the judiciary is not allowed to
execute the laws which it interprets.

a) USA - In the United States of America, the three organs of state and their respective powers and
duties are enshrined in the constitution. Similarly, the system of checks and balances is
embodied in the constitution. According to the US Constitution, Congress (i.e., the House of
Representatives) and the Senate are the sole law-making power. The principal feature of the US
Constitution is that it does not allow an individual to exercise different powers or act in different
capacities at the same time. For example, members of Congress are not allowed to become
members of the Executive or the Judiciary and the vice-versa.
b) France - France is another example where the three organs of the state are identified in the
constitution. There is an “autonomous institution” called Constitutional Council. It is this
institution which is empowered to check the constitutionality of acts passed by the legislature. It
is the Constitutional Council which is entrusted with the power of judicial or constitutional
review. The decision of the Constitutional Council is final and non-reviewable.
c) Germany - The laws passed by the parliament after counter-signature by the federal Chancellor
shall be certified by the president and are promulgated.14 After promulgation, the law may be
subject to constitutional/judicial review. The Federal Constitutional Court is empowered to
check the compatibility of such laws with the Basic law. According to Article 93 of the Basic Law,
even individuals are allowed to lodge their complaint to the Constitutional Court.

3. Responsible and accountable government –

In the democratic nations (countries) people perceive their government as their own servant. The
government is there to serve their interest or act as the steward of their interest. The governments
assume office in the name and on behalf of the public for the benefit of the public. As a government
assumes office in the name and on behalf of the public, it is directly accountable or responsible to
the public. When a government (i.e., the agent) fails to act in the best interest of the public (i.e., the
principal), the latter revokes authorization through the ballot box.

4. Rule of law-
Rule of law denotes a government of laws and not of men. Individuals working within the state
machinery are expected to exercise their official duties and responsibilities in accordance with the
law. In other words, rule of law represents the supremacy of law. The first component of rule of law
is related to the principle of legality. If a certain behavior is not categorized as a criminal act by the
constitutionally mandated lawmaking organ, it is not treated as a criminal act and is not punishable.
It is treated as an innocent act. Secondly for an act to be punishable, the act must be classified or
identified as a criminal act by the legislature through the law-making process enshrined in a
constitution and other laws. Finally, once a certain behavior is classified as a criminal act, the
accused should be tried and punished by the ordinary courts. No one is above the law and Rights are
based on the actual decision of courts.

5. An independent judiciary -

“Judicial independence is the hallmark of liberal democracy”. The rights of individuals are ensured
and respected. Courts play a vital role in ensuring and respecting the rights of individuals. An
independent judiciary is the cornerstone of a free society and rule of law. An independent judiciary
is also necessary to maintain the supremacy of a constitution. If the legislature comes up with a law
which is contrary to the constitution, an independent judiciary, through the principle of judicial or
constitutional review, has the power to declare it null and void.

6. Respect for individual rights –

The incorporation of the rights of individuals in a constitution and other laws is essential, but not an
end by itself. It is a means to an end. It must be seen that these rights are duly respected and
protected.

7. Respect to self-determination –

Self-determination refers to the right of a people living in a territory to determine the political and
legal status of the territory, for example, by setting up a state of their own or by choosing to become
part of another state. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely
pursue their economic, social and cultural development.

8. Civilian control of the military –

In democratic countries, it is the democratically elected officials who are allowed to govern or
control the military, although technical affairs are left to the military personnel.

9. Police governed by law and judicial control –

The prime responsibility of ensuring peace and order is borne by the police. It shoulders the duty of
bringing wrong-doers to justice. However, when the police discharge such duties, constitutionalism
requires them to honor and respect the rights, dignity and freedoms of individuals including wrong-
doers and persons suspected of offences. It is to be noted that a suspect has the right to be
presumed innocent until proved guilty by the competent court. In general, the police are expected
to act according to the law.

Models of Constitutionalism –
British

In Britain, the Constitution being unwritten, sovereignty of the in Parliament is the prevailing
principle of government. That means that the Crown is a part of the Parliament but not a member of
any House. The Crown can address the Houses. No court can review or invalidate an Act of
Parliament even though the British courts interpret Parliamentary enactments quite liberally. There
is no concept of strict separation of power in the British constitutional system.

In the British Constitutional system there is a bicameral legislature the upper chamber -the House of
Lords -is made up of hereditary and nominated Peers and the lower chamber -of elected
representatives of the people. The executive power is vested, nominally, in the monarch but actually
in the Council of Ministers that contains members of both the Houses but is responsible to the
House of Commons. This responsibility-meaning the liability of the Council of Ministers to be
removed from office if it loses confidence of the House of Commons-is an insurance against the
tyranny of the executive. On the other hand, the power of the Council of Ministers to obtain
dissolution of the House of Commons and seek a fresh election is an insurance against the tyranny
of the House. An election means a reference to the voters who are the political sovereign. A possible
conflict between the judiciary is sought to be resolved by the arrangement that the highest court of
the country is the House of Lords and the House of Lords is generally aloof from the humdrum of the
country's politics. This, however, is not strict separation of power. The House of Lords as a whole has
the power to delay the passage of a law at the most.

US Model –

The basic difference between the constitutional systems of Britain and the USA is that, the US
Constitution being written, the constitutional law there has been placed above the ordinary laws,
while in Britain there is no written Constitution and all laws made by the Parliament are of equal
strength. While interpreting the laws in the USA, the Supreme Court places the Constitutional Law
above the ordinary law and overrules any legislation that, in its opinion, conflicts with the
Constitution. A salient feature of the US Constitution that marks it apart from the British
Constitutional system is its federal character. Britain -officially, the United Kingdom -is a unitary
state, governed as one unit. Sovereignty, or the governing power, in the United Kingdom is
exclusively vested in the King/Queen in Parliament. In the United States of America sovereignty is
divided between the Union and the States. The powers the Union are limited by the Constitution.
The residual powers belong to the States. Being the guardian of the Constitution the Federal
Supreme Court is also the guardian of the federal relations. The States have their own courts.

The nominal and the real executive in the USA is the President, elected indirectly by the people. The
legislative power in the USA is vested in the elected, bi-cameral, Congress. There is no responsibility
of the executive to the legislature. But the system works on the basis of control -the concept of
'checks and balances,' as it is called. The President has a team of Secretaries work for him at the
head of each administrative department. His choices are of course subject to ratification of the
second chamber of the US Congress-the Senate or the Council of States. All laws are enacted by the
Congress, but the assent of the President is necessary. The Congress is also the sole controller of the
funds of the Government. The President cannot address the Congress but he, or his secretaries, may
meet the Congressional committees. Legislations and Finance Bills are drafted by the Congressional
Committees.