Content deleted Content added
more comparison between unicameral and multicameral |
m v2.05b - Bot T19 CW#25 - Fix errors for CW project (Heading hierarchy) |
||
| (34 intermediate revisions by 18 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{Short description|Legislature with three or more chambers}}
{{More citations needed|date=April 2021}}
[[File:Unibicameral Map.svg|400px|thumb|{{legend|#38b4d8|Nations with a bicameral legislature.}}
{{legend|#b0e947|Nations with a unicameral legislature and an advisory body.}}
{{legend|#f09c30|Nations with a unicameral legislature.}}
{{legend|#333333|Nations with no legislature.}}
{{legend|#e0e0e0|Data not available.}}]]
{{Legislature}}
In contrast to [[unicameralism]], and [[bicameralism]], '''multicameralism''' is the condition in which a [[legislature]] is divided into
== Prevalence ==
Approximately half of the world's sovereign states are unicameral, and newer democracies and more recent constitutions are more often unicameral than not. More specifically many countries have switched to unicameralism whereas the opposite is rare. Nevertheless, many current [[parliament]]s and [[congress]]es still have a multicameral (usually bicameral) structure, which some claim provides multiple perspectives and a form of [[separation of powers]] within the legislature.{{Citation needed|date=November 2011}}
== History ==
Many societies in Medieval Europe had quasi-legislative assemblies in the form of the [[Estates of the realm|Estates of the Realm]], typified by [[Estates General (France)|those of France]]. Typically, this body had three chambers representing the three grand divisions of society; the clergy, nobles, and commoners; however, this was not universally the rule; [[Medieval]] [[Scandinavia|Scandinavian]] [[Deliberative assembly|deliberative assemblies]] traditionally had four estates: the [[nobility]], the [[clergy]], the [[Bourgeoisie|burghers]], and the [[peasants]]. The [[Sweden|Swedish]] and [[Finland|Finnish]] [[Riksdag of the Estates]] survived the longest of these bodies, having four separate legislative houses. Sweden abandoned its four-chamber parliament in 1866, transitioning to a bicameral [[Riksdag]] for more than a century before moving to today’s unicameral assembly in 1974 (see [[History of the Riksdag]]).
When the [[Grand Duchy of Finland]] was seized by Russia from Sweden, the four-chambered [[Diet of Finland]], of identical structure to the Swedish Riksdag of the Estates, was established. It continued to legislate for Finland until 1906, being the only ancient legislature to survive to the 20th century while maintaining the traditional estates. In that year, the Diet’s four ancient chambers were disbanded and replaced by the modern unicameral [[Parliament of Finland]].
▲[[File:Unibicameral Map.svg|400px|thumb|{{legend|#38b4d8|Nations with a bicameral legislature.}}{{legend|#f09c30|Nations with a unicameral legislature.}}{{legend|#333333|Nations with no legislature.}}]]
The [[Parliament of England]] developed in the opposite direction, merging the two aristocratic estates into the [[House of Lords]], the archetypal [[upper house]],leaving the [[House of Commons of the United Kingdom|House of Commons]] as the elective [[lower house]]; in time, the English and later British parliaments became the standard model on which the modern bicameral legislature is based.
==See also==▼
== Modern multicameralism ==
Of the ancient assemblies in Europe, only Finland’s survived to see the 20th century. As the armies of [[Revolutionary France]] conquered much of Europe in the name of [[liberalism]] and [[popular sovereignty]], most countries’ newly established or re-established legislative assemblies were structured after either the (originally) unicameral French [[National Assembly]] or the bicameral [[British Parliament]]. Since the 19th century, tricameral legislatures have been a rare constitutional curiosity, with the overwhelming majority of assemblies having one or two chambers.
=== Yugoslavia ===
The [[Federal Assembly of Yugoslavia]] originally had five chambers. After [[Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia|Yugoslavia]] adopted a [[1963 Constitution of Yugoslavia|new constitution in 1963]], its legislature was restructured into four chambers each representing the various sectors of Yugoslav society with an additional chamber representing the general population.<ref>[[wikisource:en:Constitution of Yugoslavia (1963)|1963 Constitution of Yugoslavia]] on [[WikiSource]]</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Arhiv Jugoslavije - The Constitution of the SFRY, April 7, 1963 |url=http://www.arhivyu.gov.rs/active/en/home/glavna_navigacija/leksikon_jugoslavije/konstitutivni_akti_jugoslavije/ustav_sfrj_1963.html |website=www.arhivyu.gov.rs}}</ref> The Federal Assembly was the only legislature anywhere with five chambers, and a constitutional amendment added a sixth component described as either a chamber or sub-chamber.<ref>{{cite web |last=Acetto |first=Matej |date= |title=On Law and Politics in the Federal Balance: Lessons from Yugoslavia |url=https://www.pf.uni-lj.si/media/accetto.-.on.law.and.politics.in.the.federal.balance.pdf |access-date=2021-04-07 |website=www.pf.uni-lj.si}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |date=2005 |title=The changing faces of Federalism |url=http://www.inv.si/DocDir/zaposleni/mitja%20zagar/The%20Collapse%20of%20the%20Yugoslav%20federalism%20and%20the%20Viability%20of%20Asymmetrical%20Federalism_m.pdf |access-date=2021-04-07 |website=www.inv.si}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/56875231|title=The changing faces of federalism : institutional reconfiguration in Europe from East to West |date=2005 |publisher=[[Manchester University Press]] |others=Sergio Ortino, Mitja Žagar, Vojtech Mastny |isbn=0-7190-6996-3 |location=Manchester, UK |pages=115 |oclc=56875231 |quote=The council of nations, which was a to reflect a pluralistic ethnic structure and to assure equality among federal units and ethnic communities in the federal parliament, was still a 'sub-chamber' of the federal chamber in the five-chamber federal assembly. Its competences were very limited}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Lapenna |first=Ivo |date=1972 |title=Main features of the Yugoslav constitution 1946-1971 |url=https://heinonline.org/HOL/P?h=hein.journals/incolq21&i=228 |journal=International and Comparative Law Quarterly |volume=21 |issue=2 |pages=209–229 |doi=10.1093/iclqaj/21.2.209 |quote=Ten years later, the Constitution of 1963 completely changed the whole structure of the Federal Assembly and of all the other organs of State authority. It introduced a heavy and complicated system of five or, in some cases, even six "Councils", for which the term "Chamber" seems more appropriate in order to avoid confusion between these bodies and various other councils.}}</ref> Yugoslavia adopted yet [[1974 Constitution of Yugoslavia|another constitution in 1974]], abolishing the Federal Assembly and replacing it with a bicameral legislature.<ref>[[wikisource:en:Constitution of Yugoslavia (1974)|Constitution of Yugoslavia]] on [[WikiSource]]</ref>
=== South Africa ===
Perhaps the best-known multicameral assembly in modern times is the [[Tricameral Parliament]] of the waning days of Apartheid South Africa; established in an effort to stabilize the collapsing [[Apartheid]] system, it was intended to give limited representation to the country’s [[Cape Coloureds|Cape Coloured]] and [[Indian South Africans|Indian]] populations to stabilize white-minority rule. The assembly failed to stem calls for [[universal suffrage]], and was tremendously unpopular with the non-white population. When [[Negotiations to end apartheid in South Africa|apartheid was abolished]], the Tricameral Parliament disappeared with it, replaced with today’s [[Parliament of South Africa|bicameral assembly]].
== Benefits ==
Proponents of multicameral legislatures hold that multiple legislative chambers offer the opportunity to re-debate and correct errors in either chamber in parallel, and in some cases to introduce legislation in either chamber.{{Citation needed|date=April 2021}} Advocates of multicameralism also contend that multiple legislative chambers are (best) able to represent the various important sectors of society (such as culturally or linguistically distinct, geographically different or similarly interested populations that comprise a country - i.e. the various [[List of states and territories of the United States|states]] of the [[United States|United States of America]] or [[Provinces and territories of Canada|provinces]] of [[Canada]], each with their own geographical borders, subcultures, interests and even languages i.e. [[English language|English]], [[French language|French]], [[Spanish language|Spanish]]), which may not be able to be adequately represented by a singular legislative body. Supporters of multicameralism also posit that a critical weakness of a unicameral system can be a potential [[Tyranny of the majority|lack of restraint]] on the [[majority]] ([[mob rule]]) and incompatibility with the separation of powers between the [[Legislative branch|legislative]] and [[Executive (government)|executive]] branches of government, particularly noticeable in [[Parliamentary system|parliamentary systems]] where the leaders of the parliamentary majority also dominate the [[Executive (government)|executive]].
▲== See also ==
* [[Federalism]]
* [[Polycentric law]]
== Reference ==
{{Reflist}}
{{Portal bar|Politics|Law}}
[[Category:Legislatures]]
[[Category:Multicameral legislatures ]]
| |||