Ever since the establishment of today´s well known democratic free elections and its indirect representation´s system, the question of checks and balances has been raised. The institutional approach to the problem of balance between the government and the people lays on the parliament as representative of the late. Sadly the ever more intricate relationship between government, parliaments and pressure groups had let the people without efficient tools of control over the government. This research tries to explore both parliamentary and non-parliamentary control mechanisms and to explain why is it that the first is unable to accomplish its task and the later a much more effective and democratic tool is. Special attention is to be set over direct democracy as the only control mechanism in which the people can express its will not through a collectivist form but as an individual, making this form of participation the most democratic and legitimate.
The electoral process to form a parliament and the control mechanisms that the later possess above the executive are both regarded as a synonym for democracy. However, such mechanisms have many flaws of both procedure and nature. Little research has been done in the science of law about alternative mechanisms of control, the so called “non-parliamentary controls”. This paper explores the advantages of these, such as the media, public opinion, pressure groups, etc., but specially direct democracy through referendums and plebiscites. This is done by comparative research were a highly developed European Parliamentary System (Germany) is to be confronted with an underdeveloped Latin American presidential system (Mexico), coming to the conclusion that both systems could be very benefitted from a higher degree of direct democracy. The inclusion of this form of participation should be a requirement of any modern society to consider itself as democratic.
Table of Contents
1. Democracy as an ongoing struggle.
2. The problem of the perception of democracy
3. The flaws of the parliamentary controls
4. Direct democracy as a non-parliamentary control
5. Conclusions
Objectives and Research Themes
This research investigates the inherent limitations of traditional parliamentary control mechanisms and explores direct democracy as an essential, alternative tool for citizens to exercise meaningful oversight over executive power in both developed and emerging political systems.
- Analysis of the historical evolution and current state of democratic systems.
- Critique of parliamentary and non-parliamentary control mechanisms in Germany and Mexico.
- Evaluation of direct democracy tools, specifically referendums and plebiscites.
- The relationship between the Social Contract, sovereignty, and individual participation.
- Identification of logistical and systemic arguments against direct democratic practices.
Excerpt from the Book
Direct democracy as a non-parliamentary control
The debate about the non-parliamentary controls to the executive relates itself to the necessity of efficiency on such means, which exercises an influence on the decisions of the executive like the media, public opinion, unions, religious groups, lobbies, etc. Some others are actual or can be mandatory, like a referendum. The little or large force that this non-parliamentary controls have is directly proportional to the discontent and unpopularity of the government and its decisions.
One of the most dominating tendency in this debate is to create a tool inside the framework of the representative democracy. In other words, keeping the overall structure of the State as it was meant to long ago by Montesquieu, where the sovereignty still resides on the people but is only to be cast through its representatives; this is the base for parliamentary controls.
The other tendency is influenced by Jean J. Rousseau, and foresees the leaning of the power but not the will of the people. This means that, indeed, the sovereignty will be temporally residing in the parliament but the people keep the capability to use directly this sovereignty at any time, especially when the government plays against the interest of the people. In this regard, the people should exercise a permanent control outside of the State apparatus as it is, through non-parliamentary controls.
Chapter Summaries
1. Democracy as an ongoing struggle.: This chapter provides a historical perspective on the development of democracy, highlighting how it emerged as a counter-power to elitist rule and discussing the foundational limitations of early democratic experiments.
2. The problem of the perception of democracy: This section examines how the concepts of democracy and sovereignty are often conflated with formal, indirect mechanisms, arguing that true participation is frequently reduced to a passive consumer role for citizens.
3. The flaws of the parliamentary controls: The author critiques the efficacy of existing parliamentary oversight in Germany and Mexico, demonstrating how party interests and corruption often render these mechanisms ineffective at curbing executive power.
4. Direct democracy as a non-parliamentary control: This chapter analyzes direct democratic tools like referendums and plebiscites, proposing them as necessary instruments for individuals to bypass collective, representative limitations and exert direct influence.
5. Conclusions: The concluding chapter advocates for a legal revolution that embeds direct democratic participation into the constitutional fabric of nations to ensure accountability beyond periodic elections.
Keywords
Direct democracy, control mechanisms, parliamentarism, sovereignty, referendum, plebiscite, checks and balances, legitimation, political participation, Social Contract, executive power, legal system, constitutional law, accountability, political representation.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this work?
The research focuses on the inadequacy of traditional parliamentary control mechanisms and explores how direct democracy can act as a more effective, non-parliamentary tool for citizen oversight.
What are the central thematic areas?
The key themes include the philosophy of law regarding sovereignty, the historical development of democracy, the critique of representative institutions, and the practical implementation of referendums.
What is the central research question?
The core question asks why standard parliamentary controls often fail to protect citizens from unpopular executive actions and whether direct democratic mechanisms provide a superior alternative for meaningful control.
Which scientific method is utilized?
The author employs a comparative legal research method, contrasting the parliamentary system of Germany with the presidential system of Mexico.
What topics are covered in the main body?
The body covers historical precursors, the theoretical difference between indirect and direct democracy, case studies of failures in oversight (such as the Ayotzinapa case), and logistical arguments concerning the feasibility of direct citizen participation.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
The most relevant terms include direct democracy, non-parliamentary controls, sovereignty, political representation, and executive accountability.
How does the author view the "Social Contract" in modern contexts?
The author argues that the Social Contract implies that sovereignty remains fundamentally with the people, suggesting that delegation to parliament does not constitute a permanent transfer of this power.
Why does the author advocate for a "legal revolution"?
The author contends that current systems are structurally designed to favor ruling classes, necessitating a fundamental change in the constitutional order to prioritize direct citizen decision-making.
What is the author's stance on the logistical arguments against direct democracy?
The author rejects claims that direct democracy is too expensive or complex, noting that modern technology provides secure, low-cost platforms for citizens to express their will on specific issues.
- Quote paper
- Arturo Gallegos Garcia (Author), 2018, The Fear of Democracy. Direct democracy as a tool of non-parliamentary control and correction mechanism, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/455070
