Competence of legislative power at the present stage of society development

Keywords: Legislative power, representative mandate, functions and powers.

Abstract

The purpose of the article. In this work the author examines in detail the functions and competence of the legislature. The analysis was carried out taking into account legislative innovations and current trends in the distribution of powers observed in the world.
The scientific novelty of this study is to consider the competence of the legislature, which is a set of social functions and powers that constitutions give parliaments. At the present stage of development of society, the powers of the legislature tend to be reformed by the executive branch. Therefore, the author considers the main functions and competence of the legislature, analyzing the prevailing trends in the distribution of power in the modern world.
Conclusions. Parliaments are limited in their financial rights, in the right to control the activities of the government. Parliament does not determine the political program of the government. Discussion of government statements is limited to a formal expression of wishes to the Cabinet. An important means of influencing the government in parliamentary republics and monarchies could be the right of parliament to express a vote of no confidence in it. However, the possibility of using such a tool is limited by the fact that the parliament is exposed to the risk of early dissolution, which may be resorted to by the government.
In republics with a mixed form of government, the prime minister and ministers are appointed by the president, but the composition of the government is usually determined by the balance of party power in parliament. However, this norm is not a mandatory condition for the functioning of the government, which depends more on the head of state than on the parliament. Parliament can express a vote of no confidence in the cabinet, but the procedure for such a vote of no confidence is very complicated. In addition, it can, as in parliamentary states, lead either to his resignation or to the dissolution of parliament itself.
In presidential republics, the parliament and the president who heads the government are formally independent of each other. Without the ability to directly influence the activities of the president and his administration, the formation of the latter, the parliament can to some extent use such a means of influencing them as its own financial and control powers. But in fact, public authorities do not act in isolation from each other, but represent a single mechanism of power, the main task of which is to develop a common strategy to ensure the interests of those social strata of society to which this power belongs.
Thus, it seems obvious to us that the legislature, as one of the highest organs of state power, has practically lost its original significance, and is now a rudimentary, anachronistic element of the state system of government, and needs a significant transformation.

References

1. Дюги Л. Конституционное право. М., 1908. 957 с.
2. Прело М. Конституционное право Франции. М. : Иностран. литерат., 1957. 671 с.
3. Конституция Французской Республики. Конституции государств Европейского Союза / Под общей редакцией Л. А. Окунькова. М. : ИНФРА-М-НОРМА, 1997. С. 665–682.
4. Государственное право Германии / Ахтенберг А., Бадура Н. и др. Т. 1. М. : ИГП РАН, 1994. С. 51.
5. Бромхед П. Эволюция британской конституции. М. : Юрид. литерат., 1978. С. 199.
6. Rosenthal A. Legislative Life: People, Process and Performance in the States. New York : Harper & Row Pub, 1981. P. 43.
7. Robert S. Lorch. State and Local Politics. Prentice-Hall, 1992. 415 p.
8. Алданов М. Ульмская ночь. М. : Новости, 1996. С. 582.
9. Lincoln Steffens. The Shame of the Cities. New York : McClure, Phillips, 1904; New York: Sagamore,1957. Р. 128.
10. Уэйд Е., Филлипс Г. Конституционное право. М. : Иностран. литерат., 1950. С. 70.
11. Constitution of the United States of America. United States Code. 1988 Edition. P. 45–50.
12. Oregon Law Review. Spring, 1973. № 3. P. 220.
13. Мищак І. М. Конституційно-правові аспекти реалізації народними депутатами України права законодавчої ініціативи. Наукові записки Інституту законодавства Верховної Ради України. 2011. № 3. С. 56–61.
14. Федеративная Республика Германия: Конституция и законодательные акты / Под ред. и со вступ. ст. Ю. П. Урьяса. М. : Прогресс, 1991. 468 с.
15. Мищак І. М. Деякі питання удосконалення контрольної функції парламенту. Наукові записки Інституту законодавства Верховної Ради України. 2010. № 3. С. 37–43.
16. Public Law 601—79 ru Congress [Chapter 753—2D Session] [S. 2177].
17. The Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 // P.L. 93-344; 88 Stat. 297-339.
18. Народовладдя в Україні: глобалізаційні виклики : монографія / Р.  О.  Стефанчук, С.  О.  Кузніченко, І.  М.  Мищак та ін. Одеса : Видавничий дім «Гельветика», 2020. 764 с.
19. Терлецька І. С. Законопроектна діяльність: вимоги забезпечення якості та ефективності законів. Наукові записки Інституту законодавства Верховної Ради України. 2011. № 3. С. 22–26.

References:
1. Dyugi, L. (1908). Konstitutsionnoye pravo. M. [in Russian].
2. Prelo, M. (1957). Konstitutsionnoye pravo Frantsii. M. : Inostran. literat. [in Russian].
3. Okun'kov, L. A. (1997). Konstitutsiya Frantsuzskoy Respubliki. Konstitutsii gosudarstv Yevropeyskogo Soyuza, s. 665–682. M. : INFRA-M-NORMA [in Russian].
4. Akhtenberg, A., Badura, N. i dr. (1994). Gosudarstvennoye pravo Germanii. T. 1. M. : IGP RAN, s. 51 [in Russian].
5. Bromkhed, P. (1978). Evolyutsiya britanskoy konstitutsii. M. : Yurid. literat., s. 199 [in Russian].
6. Rosenthal, A. (1981). Legislative Life: People, Process and Performance in the States. New York : Harper & Row Pub, P. 43.
7. Lorch, Robert S. (1992). State and Local Politics. Prentice-Hall.
8. Aldanov, M. (1996). Ul'mskaya noch'. M. : Novosti, s. 582 [in Russian].
9. Lincoln Steffens. (1904, 1957). The Shame of the Cities. New York : McClure, Phillips; New York: Sagamore, p. 128.
10. Ueyd, Ye., Fillips, G. (1950). Konstitutsionnoye pravo. M. : Inostran. literat., s. 70 [in Russian].
11. Constitution of the United States of America. United States Code. (1988). P. 45–50.
12. Oregon Law Review (1973). Spring, 3, 220.
13. Myshchak, I. M. (2011). Konstytutsiyno-pravovi aspekty realizatsiyi narodnymy deputatamy Ukrayiny prava zakonodavchoyi initsiatyvy. Naukovi zapysky Instytutu zakonodavstva Verkhovnoi Rady Ukrainy, 3, 56–61 [in Ukrainian].
14. Federativnaya Respublika Germaniya: Konstitutsiya i zakonodatel'nyye akty (1991) / Pod red. i so vstup. st. Yu. P. Ur'yasa. M. : Progress [in Russian].
15. Myshchak, I. M. (2010). Deyaki pytannya udoskonalennya kontrolʹnoyi funktsiyi parlamentu. Naukovi zapysky Instytutu zakonodavstva Verkhovnoi Rady Ukrainy, 3, 37–43 [in Ukrainian].
16. Public Law 601—79 ru Congress [Chapter 753—2D Session] [S. 2177].
17. The Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 // P.L. 93-344; 88 Stat. 297-339.
18. Stefanchuk, R. O., Kuznichenko, S. O., Myshchak, I. M. and others. (2020). Democracy in Ukraine: globalization challenges. Odessa: Helvetica Publishing House [in Ukrainian].
19. Terletsʹka, I. S. (2011). Zakonoproektna diyalʹnistʹ: vymohy zabezpechennya yakosti ta efektyvnosti zakoniv. Naukovi zapysky Instytutu zakonodavstva Verkhovnoi Rady Ukrainy, 3, 22–26 [in Ukrainian].

Abstract views: 57
PDF Downloads: 41
Published
2021-02-24
How to Cite
Barabash , B. (2021). Competence of legislative power at the present stage of society development . Scientific Papers of the Legislation Institute of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, (1), 13-26. https://doi.org/10.32886/instzak.2021.01.02