Foreign direct democracy: Advantages and weaknesses.
Introduction
When it is necessary to make the decision on the future or to establish laws, it is possible to be more or less confident that there will be disagreements. People also will judge differently, and desires to have the various. However, the decision should be accepted, the law should be developed. Really, there are only two ways in search of an exit. The first way: it is possible to fight for the correctness, and it will mean that the will of stronger will triumph. The second way: it is possible to achieve the necessary result by belief. It will mean that the arguing parties, talking, try to cover a problem from different directions and that the arguing parties really aspire to reach during conversation of more correct and deep understanding of the reason of the conflict. Proceeding from it, they already in a condition to make the decision which arranges not only the separate person or a separate class but which is fair as a whole. This compromise, as a rule, is reached by voting, i.e. At acceptance the decision the voting, connected with "democracy" realization, we can name it democracy as a first approximation. Concept of democracy. In Brockhaus and Efron's Small encyclopedic dictionary it is found: «Democracy, греч., democracy, the state form in which the Supreme power belongs to all people; there are direct Democracies (ancient Athenes, small cantons of Switzerland) where the power goes all people called on national meeting on which laws are published and officials, or representative Democracies where the people trust the power to the representatives selected it forming parliaments or other authorities are selected; such Democracies are the USA, France, Switzerland as a whole». In the Encyclopaedic dictionary «Constitution of the Russian Federation», we read – «direct democracy - direct realization of the power by the people in nation-wide and local scales, various forms of acceptance by the population (mainly citizens-voters) decisions of the general and local character. Major of such forms is the referendum. Direct democracy distinguish from representative democracy — power realization through the representative bodies selected the people. In a political history there were situations of use of institutes of direct democracy to the detriment of representative and on the contrary. Nowadays also in the certain plan they can be considered in a context of system of controls and counterbalances (for example, cancellation on a referendum of the law accepted by parliament). However in the modern democratic state these two forms urged to supplement first of all each other for maintenance of the democratic forms of government and a political mode. They are closely bound with each other already because elections of representative bodies are the form of direct realization of the power the people.» The present direct democracy which the people itself correct the state through the general national meeting, the Ancient world knew only. The concept of democracy has coincided here with concept the democratic form of government. However, then there was a theoretical substantiation to wider understanding of democracy which has affirmed presently, namely that various forms of the government can be compatible to leadership of the people: democratic, aristocratic, monarchic. I.e. in understanding of democracy as forms the state-people posesses leadership in an establishment of the power and control over it. Democracy also define as «the national form of government in which the people are invested by the higher authority and carries out it or it is direct, or through the selected representatives at a free electoral system». The Ancient Greek politician of Athenes Perikl has told that «our political system carries the name democracy because the power is in hands not at minority, but the majority of a society». One most known and short definition of democracy was given by US president Avraam Linkoln in «the Gettysburg reference». According to the Lincoln, democracy is «the national board which is carried out by the people for the sake of the people». A basis of understanding of democracy is the principle of "democracy" which means that a unique and exclusive source of the power in a democratic society are the people — all full inhabitants of the country. The people — a power basis, and its requirements and interests, safety and well-being — a government priority. Let's disassemble in what ways the people can carry out the power. Forms of direct democracy Allocate following forms of direct democracy: elections, a referendum, the national legislative initiative, a response of elective persons, петиции.иатива, a response of elective persons, petitions. Elections Authorities are formed in the various ways: elective and nonelective (for example, by appointment). In a democratic society and the state the major value has an elective way of realization of democracy. By means of elections parliaments are formed and many heads of the states, local governments, quite often judicial bodies, and in rare instances and the governments are selected. An elective way of formation of many major authorities, regular carrying out of free and fair elections - one of the brightest indicators of the valid democratism of a political system existing in the country, the main criterion of its legitimacy, i.e. признанности a society or it mostly. As (item 2) is marked in the General declaration of human rights of the United Nations, «the will of the people should be a basis of the power of the government; This will should find to itself expression in the periodic and not forged elections which should be spent at the general and equal suffrage, by ballot or by means of other equivalent forms providing freedom of voting ». Similar position contains and in the International pact about the civil and political rights of the United Nations of 1966 (item 25). Elections are such democratic by the nature and essence a way of formation of authorities at which the people or its representatives have possibility to solve a question on the one whom to put in power and whom to discharge of it by the established voting procedure and selection of corresponding persons from two or several candidates. Certainly, elections occur and in not democratic countries, but in them they usually have purely formal character. Certainly, relative density and value of elections in political life of the various countries неодинаковы. So, in Great Britain (House of Commons) and local bodies (councils of administrative counties, cities-counties, municipal and not municipal cities and suburbs) are selected only the lower chamber of parliament. In France the circle of elective bodies is slightly wider. There both chambers of parliament, local authorities are selected the head of the state. Referendum The referendum represents institute of the direct democracy which procedure on a number of parameters is rather close to procedure of elections. Both in elections, and voters participate in a referendum. The basic difference of procedure of elections from referendum procedure consists in object of will of voters. At elections such object is the candidate or on any other post out of representative institution (the president, the mayor etc.) . At a referendum object of will is not the person (candidate), and a certain question on whom the referendum, - the law, the bill, the constitution, the amendment to the constitution, any problem, concerning the international status of the corresponding country is held, an internal political problem. In Latvia the budget and laws on loans, taxes, custom charges, railroad rate, a compulsory military service, the announcement and the war beginning, conclusion of peace, introduction and cancellation of state of emergency, mobilization and demobilization can't be transferred to popular voting, is equal as contracts with the foreign states. In exact sense of a word the referendum represents the reference to the selective case for what final decision (mostly a legislative or constitutional question). Original version of a referendum is plebiscite, i.e. population poll about political destiny of territory on which it lives. In some countries (France) plebiscite is considered wider concept, than a referendum which is considered a plebiscite version. In other countries (USA) don't do distinction between plebiscite and a referendum. On scales of carrying out referenda are subdivided on: national (nation-wide), i.e. spent in all territory of the country; regional, i.e. spent to scales more or less large part of the country (region), local, i.e. spent at municipal level, including within the limits of local government. Under their maintenance referenda differentiate on: constitutional, i.e. under the project of the constitution or amendments to it; legislative, i.e. under projects of laws; advisory, i.e. by an important principle or a line of activity of the state, the government, regional or local authority etc. On degree of necessity of carrying out referenda are divided on obligatory, i.e. constitutions spent on the obligatory requirement or other law at this point in question decision so in Japan the amendment project to the constitution, approved by two thirds of total number of members of both chambers of parliament, should be necessarily presented then on people approval, and facultative, i.e. spent at the discretion of authorities or the population. Referenda can be classified and on other bases. So, on obliging force of the results they are subdivided on solving, i.e. causing obligatory legal consequences, and advisory, i.e. able messages to such consequences, but able and not to cause them. The referendum is spent by the rules established by the law, norms. The right of participation in a referendum all who possesses suffrages, as a rule, have. The initiative of carrying out of a national referendum usually belongs to the higher and regional state structures, groups of deputies and certain number of voters. In France is a president; in Italy – not less than 5 from 20 country councils or a half-million of the voters who have put the signatures under the corresponding requirement; in Hungary – the president, the government, not less than 50 deputies or 50 thousand voters though the decision on carrying out of a national referendum accepts parliament – the State meeting; in Bulgaria the decision on carrying out of such referendum accepts parliament – National meeting, and date after that the president defines; in Slovakia accordingly – the president if there is the decision of National board accepted at the initiative of the government or deputies, or the requirement not less than 350 thousand Voters. Response voters of national representatives Response as the form of direct democracy is a little claimed by voters of national representatives in the modern Russian validity, but enough widespread in foreign countries. In general a response of elective persons – the organization of state-imperious will of the people concerning preschedule, having character of the sanction, the termination of the representative mandate of the member of parliament or elective individual body. On character of the mandate depends, whose interests the member of parliament – the voters or all nation should express. In this connection in the theory and constitutional law practice allocate the imperative and free mandate. The imperative mandate consists in the right of voters to give to deputies obligatory orders for the last and ahead of schedule to withdraw the elects if they these orders don't carry out or carry out badly. The principle of the free mandate is based that parliaments and all their members are representatives of all nation, and nobody has the right to give them obligatory orders. They are connected only by the constitution and the conscience which should them prompt how in concrete cases it is necessary to solve those or other national and local problems. The response institute in the various countries differently is applied. In some democratic countries the response institute in general is absent; it is considered that the careless deputy can to be selected simply on following elections. Besides, if elections are made under party lists of candidates when election districts are very great, the response is complicated both technically, and financially. In Japan, in some states of the USA, and also in a number of other countries for the specified reasons the response institute operates mainly at local level. For example, in the USA the response of elective officials has been applied for the first time in Los Angeles in 1903, and the State of Oregon has appeared the first, included this institute in the Constitution in 1906. Now the response elective and officials is provided in the legislation: almost 15 states, federal district of Columbia and some basic territories. Position about that "the careless" deputy can to be selected "simply" on following elections is deprived sense. Why voters should suffer the person who doesn't execute the functions of the representative of the people assigned to it (people part) on a post of the national representative, doesn't carry out will of citizens which have selected it in country Parliament, taxes for its maintenance pay? Whether easier "simply" to deprive of its powers for offense? Thereupon the Chinese National Republic very imposes. The imperative mandate is entered into the Peoples Republic of China for deputies of any representative bodies: if they break laws, discipline, neglect the deputy duties can be ahead of schedule withdrawn the persons who have selected them or bodies from representative body structure. If the deputy is selected by direct vote, the response is made by voters by special voting. The response is considered taken place if for the offer on it the majority of voters of the given district brought in lists of voters has voted. National правотворческая the initiative The following form of direct democracy – national правотворческая the initiative. As institute of the right of citizens on references in state structures it has long-term history of development. The maintenance of constitutionally-legal institute of a popular initiative is set constitutionally-rules of law, regulating a procedure in the form of obligatory for consideration in the order of the civil initiative directed on acceptance by public authority or local government within the established competence of the regulatory legal act established by the law, not contradicting the Constitution and laws, or decisions it in other form of socially significant question containing in offers of citizens. For the first time this form of will of citizens was recognized in Switzerland. According to item 121 of the Constitution of the Swiss Confederation of 1974 «the popular initiative consists in the requirement shown in 100 thousand of the Swiss citizens, having the right to vote, about inclusion, cancellation or change of certain articles of the operating Constitution». Now the given institute enough widespread in the democratic world, in particular it is provided by constitutions and laws of some the countries. At nation-wide level it operates in Austria, Spain, Italy, Switzerland, on Philippines, on regional – is applied in the USA. It isn't applied in those countries where the concept of leadership of parliament (Great Britain), and also in many Muslim countries dominates. Petitions Last form of direct democracy – petitions. The petition is a version of the collective reference of citizens in public authorities and local governments about necessity of carrying out of public reforms or current legislation change. The rare institute for Russia direct democracy, in foreign countries has started to be applied for a long time. The American convention «About human rights» from November, 22nd, 1969 establishes that «that any person or a group of persons, or any non-governmental organization lawfully recognized in one or more member state of the Organization, can submit petitions to the Commission, containing charges or complaints about infringement of the present Convention by member state». Also the convention establishes the requirements shown to the petition. The right of petitions the Convention on protection of human rights and the basic freedom of 1950, guaranteeing in article 34 has established also the right to collective references. Advantages and weaknesses of direct democracy Let's consider pluses and minuses (advantages and weaknesses) direct democracy on a referendum example. Let's allocate the basic advantages of application of a referendum as with one of forms of direct democracy before democracy representative. Undoubtedly, direct participation of the people in the decision of questions of the state life has positive lines. First, voters acquire the real right to express on the put questions. The people act as the Supreme legislator, to it «give the chance to participate really in political cases, accustom to understand them, give the chance to the people to know the laws which are at the same time expression of desires and requirements of the people». Secondly, it allows voters to bring new ideas in public authorities. Results of a referendum will show (let and in general) the necessary directions of forward development of a society. There is an opinion that national voting is the original game course protecting the state and a society as a whole from the extremely destructive phenomenon in which the discontent of weights can pour out, - revolutions. The right of the people to revolt against the power operating not in its interests, is in some measure extinguished by institute of national voting when the people put in the peace way an end in a question at issue. The referendum is one of important forms of expression of public opinion: if the opinion which has developed at the people concerning the bill, positively it gives to the given statutory act a great prestige and creates moral stimulus for its diligent performance by citizens. From here, thirdly, one more advantage of a referendum: it serves population education, development of sense of justice of the people. It is preceded by explanatory campaign. Also feedback Here is available: the people should reach certain level as the general, and legal culture adequately to estimate a current situation and to accept the right decision. A century ago Swiss Hilti wrote: «Popular voting recovers political life, informs the people feeling of self-esteem, develops in the people a sense of responsibility in the decision of own affairs. Results of a referendum... Give means to understand the valid moral and intellectual level of the people and its formation». Fourthly, supporters of direct democracy are firmly convinced that only it (and a referendum as one of its forms) provides strong легитимацию the authorities, overcomes political alienation of citizens that raises stability of political system. However, at opponents of direct democracy other sight at it. Fifthly, the referendum (as one of kinds of democracy of the specified type) provides public control over political institutes and officials, prevents an abuse of power, a separation of ruling elite from the people. And, at last, sixthly, it promotes local government development. We already mentioned that the referendum can be spent and at local level when the citizens living in certain territory, solve questions, is close their concerning. Certainly that their life will depend on this activity in the future. Thus, real possibility of carrying out of a referendum - jump towards government democratization. We will consider "reverse of the medal" and we will analyse the polar point of view about advantage of the referendum, widely adopted in countries of Western Europe and Americas. Results of a referendum as national voting don't express real will of the people of opinion of a society, and operate on a hand of the populist concept of democracy, being the mechanism of a manipulation the public opinion used by politicians for achievement of definite purposes. The traditional problems of direct democracy inherent in particular and to a referendum, create serious hindrances for correct interpretation of will of the people. It is a problem of the account of voices, a deceit at their calculation («you have won elections, and I — counting of votes». Anastasio Somosa (younger), the president of Nicaragua), payment for the signature at petition. Considering ideological influence of mass media on the population, it is possible to project all it on results of a referendum, and depth of distortion of "the general will» will set thinking even strong supporters of direct democracy. «Democracy encourages the majority to make decisions on questions about which the majority has no representation». John Sajmon. The second lack of a referendum - by results of its carrying out is passed the law which affirms as in public approved decision. In practice split is frequently brought in a society that is favourable only considerable part of political elite. That is the referendum inevitably acts as «the destabilizing factor in a society, promotes the accelerated stratification and opposition of various components of a society each other, generates additional loading». As it is possible to carry to lacks, that answers in bulletins are provided in the form of simple "yes" and "are not present", and the put questions are often too difficult and ambiguous, that the answer was given in a similar way. The skillful formulation of the question which has been taken out on voting, forces to doubt originally democratic character of a referendum sometimes. As a result the person should approve the decision with which he agrees only partially; visibility of conformity between a question exposed on a referendum, and public opinion is created. «Democracy is when it is allowed to you to vote for the candidate who isn't pleasant to you least». Robert Byrne. And one more of lacks – dearness of carrying out of a referendum. Conclusions All is at first sight clear and correct. However if to ponder... Why from all possible forms of direct realization of democracy one is with rare exception applied: any elections? Why the modern electoral system can't put an effective barrier, which would allow if not to exclude then to reduce to a minimum penetration into the power of political adventurists? Why in present conditions of development of democracy it is very difficult, and it is almost impossible to call to account let and selected the people, but the cheat or the liar more often? Why there is no mechanism which would allow the people (if we speak about democracy) in practice, instead of in words to supervise activity of the elects (deputies, mayors, governors, presidents), and also civil servants of all levels and ranks? On all these questions, in my opinion, there are two answers. The first: everywhere, where it is a question of democracy, in a reality we have quasidemocracy (or pseudo-democracy). Original democracy (democracy) isn't present anywhere as in one state of the world the power doesn't belong to the people. The people - a screen for cover of political tricks and gamble which are carried out by true owners of the state: those whom it is accepted to name «political elite» and its ally the state bureaucracy (officials). Look that is created in the world: there are wars, children, old men, women perish; a trade turnover subject between powers become not only the earths and waters, but also terrestrial atmosphere; as during antique times, human trafic prospers; the states, as well as people, have appeared divided into categories (caste): the higher to which everything is allowed, and the lowest by which the right unconditionally is granted to carry out whims of the first... And very often there is all it under a signboard of protection of the rights and freedom of people, for the sake of the statement of democracy, humanism, world peace. Most terrible that in many cases the people considering civilized and free, support an event. They have forgotten one of humanistic postulates: well-being of one can't be built on tears and sufferings of others. The second answer: all it occurs because in the modern world, in the politician as a management skill manipulation art by public consciousness, art of washing of brains left the state on the first place. And each person, the people, the people become interesting to true masters so far as as are object of a manipulation which should give out necessary result as a result of external influences.