Self determination

What Is The Self-Determination Theory?

Self-Determination Theory (SDT) is a psychological framework that focuses on individuals’ intrinsic motivation and personal growth. Developed by psychologists Edward Deci and Richard Ryan, SDT suggests that people are inherently motivated to pursue activities fulfilling their basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness.

SDT suggests that when these basic psychological needs are met, individuals are more likely to experience a sense of well-being, intrinsic motivation, and personal growth. However, when these needs are unmet, individuals may experience anxiety, depression, and a lack of fulfilment.

SDT has been applied in a wide range of contexts, including education, healthcare, and workplace settings. It has been used to develop interventions to promote intrinsic motivation and personal growth and assess the effectiveness of various programs and policies. 

SDT provides a useful framework for understanding human motivation and behavior and has important implications for promoting well-being and personal development.

Components Of The Self-Determination Theory

Self-Determination Theory (SDT) proposes that individuals have three basic psychological needs for well-being and motivation. These needs are autonomy, competence, and relatedness.

Autonomy

This refers to an individual’s need to feel in control of their behavior and decisions. It involves having a sense of choice and volition and feeling that one’s actions align with one’s values and interests. In other words, autonomy means having the freedom to be oneself and to pursue one’s goals in a way that feels authentic and self-directed.

Competence

This refers to an individual’s need to feel effective and capable in their actions and behaviors. It involves having a sense of mastery and accomplishment in one’s endeavors and feeling challenged but not overwhelmed by tasks or activities. In other words, competence means feeling confident in one’s abilities and being able to make progress towards one’s goals.

Connection Or Relatedness  

This refers to an individual’s need to feel connected and involved with others. It involves feeling a sense of belonging and social support and having opportunities for meaningful interactions and relationships. In other words, relatedness means feeling cared for and supported by others and having a sense of shared goals and values.

Together, these three basic psychological needs form the foundation of SDT. When individuals feel that their autonomy, competence, and relatedness needs are being met, they are more likely to experience intrinsic motivation, well-being, and personal growth.

When these needs are not met, individuals may experience negative emotions, low motivation, and a sense of disconnection or disengagement. Therefore, SDT is a great way for promoting motivation, well-being, and personal development in individuals and in various settings such as education, healthcare, and the workplace.

How Self-Determination Theory Works

According to the Self-Determination Theory (SDT), individuals are likelier to feel intrinsic motivation, personal development, and well-being when their demands are addressed.

According to SDT, people can be driven in two different ways: extrinsically by rewards or penalties from the outside world or internally by the intrinsic satisfaction of the task itself. SDT stresses the relevance of intrinsic motivation since it is more likely to result in sustained engagement and well-being.

Applying Self-Determination Theory In Coaching

Self-Determination Theory (SDT) can be applied in coaching to help clients develop intrinsic motivation, personal growth, and well-being. Coaches can use SDT to support their clients’ autonomy, competence, and relatedness needs, increasing satisfaction and engagement in their personal and professional lives.

Coaches can help clients identify their values, interests, and goals and work with them to develop a sense of control over their actions and decisions. Coaches can also help clients build their skills and competencies and create opportunities for social support and connection. SDT provides a useful framework for coaches to help their clients cultivate intrinsic motivation, well-being, and personal growth.

Conclusion

Self-Determination Theory provides coaches with a powerful tool to help their individual clients as well as teams reach their goals. Coaches who understand the concept and its underlying principles can better motivate and support the development of autonomy, competence, and relatedness in the clients they interact with.

 

democratic trend, turn to decentralization in ethiopian federalism.

  HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION

  1 PRE _1991 ETHIOPIA

  Ethiopia is Africa's oldest independent country and it is the second largest in terms of population.  Other than a five year occupation by Mussolini's Italy, it was never colonised.

  It possesses a unique cultural heritage, being the home of the Ethiopian Orthodox and Muslim Church and the Judaism (three Ibrahim Religion) monarchy which only ended in the 1974 coup.

  It served as a symbol of African independence during the colonial period, and was a founding member of the United Nations Organization and the African base of numerous international organizations.

  In the first half of the 20th century, Ethiopia knotted close ties with Britain, whose troops helped drive out the Italians in 1941 and put Emperor Haile Selassie back on his throne.  Since the 1960s, British influence has given way to that of the United States, which in turn has been supplanted by the Soviet Union.

  During past regimes, Ethiopia has been the object of unpleasant experiences due to a lack of respect and tolerance for ethnic and cultural diversity, and a lack of good governance and accountability.  This lack of respect has caused the ancient civilization of Ethiopia to fall into the war and poverty of which we are currently convalescing and to experience a renaissance from the previous strength and beyond.

  The misperceptions of the past and abuses have been fully taken into account since the military dictatorship was overthrown in 1991. Since 1995, Ethiopia has been the supreme law of an individual federal and democratic constitution of sovereignty and group rights

  Until the system change in 1991, Ethiopia throughout its long history has not managed to develop a system of governance that embraces its diversity, one that helps transform its extraordinary diversity into an existential threat  for a deep well of strength and dynamism.  In fact, the management not of its diversity, for centuries has constituted a challenge-a main challenge which has massively contributed to its centuries long journey backwards from the front line of world civilization to one of the most countries  poor of the planet.

  2 POST 1991 ETHIOPIA AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE SYSTEM OF GOVERNANCE in our own context.

  In 1991, we launched on democratic federalism.  This should be considered as a new way of realizing unity in diversity.  All indications so far suggest that it is at last a successfully crowned enterprise.  Our federal system has allowed us to set up a democratic system of governance that is maturing and consolidating.

  It has allowed all the peoples of Ethiopia to maintain and celebrate their individual identities while at the same time constituting the great family of Ethiopians.  This allowed all Ethiopian people to manage and mobilize their local affairs autonomously and mobilize all their resources to improve their means of livelihood and development of their communities while at the same time becoming active participants »in  the common national affairs.  It has allowed us to design our system of governance based on the circumstances of each locality and thus serves the people better while consolidating our common democratic governance.

  Ethiopia has made a lot of progress since 1991, our renaissance, as well as economic development are evident.  Today, Ethiopia is characterized not only by freedom of religion and separation of religion and state, but also by tolerance, solidarity and equity.

Democratic federalism has allowed us to forge a common Ethiopian identity-one that is not separate from and above our diverse identities, but one that is constituted by the magnificence of that diversity.  It has become the foundation on which a stable and peaceful nation is constituted.  It has become the solid foundation on which we build a young and dynamic nation of one of the oldest states on the planet.

  The constitution, of our nations, nationalities and peoples have been given meets modern international standards.  For example, it is based on the principle of equality, be it ethnic, religious or gender equality.  This can also be seen through the strong concentration the Constitution puts on the protection of human rights and good governance.  Thanks to this process, Ethiopia has become the cradle of freedom.  The inclusive and participatory manner, we place to diversity and overcoming our problems of the past can be considered as a model for other countries.

  The year 1991 marked a fundamental transformation of the political structure of the country, from an otherwise heavily centralized and unitary oppressive state to an extremely decentralized federal system.  In accordance with the Ethiopian Constitution, the main objective of the new federal agreement is to build a political and economic community capable of ensuring sustainable peace, which guarantees democratic order and promotes equitable economic and social development.  The vision of establishing such a community was conceptualized through a decision taken by the collective nations, nationalities and peoples of Ethiopia in full and free exercise of their right to self-determination.  This capital decision aims to correct the historically unfair relationship established by previous regimes and the creation of a democratic political union and economic integration based on the principles of equality, mutual respect and common interests.

  Our constitution has a long-range objective to establish a political and economic community which is to ensure equality of rights for the peoples of Ethiopia.  The Constitution proclaims that this can only be achieved if the rights of individuals and groups are fully recognized and respected.  It is because of this principle that the constitution demands the free will and consent of the various nationalities to establish a strong democratic union.  If the union is to be further strengthened, it is essential to respect the human rights of citizens and democracy.

  The other fundamental cause of a political and economic community is the need to guarantee to each nationality equal chances of development and the right to equally enjoy the fruits of the country's development.  One way to guarantee this right is to provide the various peoples of the country with an equal right to self-government.  It is in consciousness of this fact that our Constitution grants to every nation the right of self-government.  The other key issue to ensure equality of rights of persons is to ensure that the development activities of the federal and regional governments are, as far as possible, for the benefit of the people in an equal manner.  In this regard, a number of provisions are envisaged in the Constitution.

  3 OWNERSHIP OF POLICIES AND STRATEGY

  From our experience, we can affirm that the most important prerequisite for any type of development is ownership.  For us, ownership is much broader than the narrow concept a number of international organizations use.  I am not talking about private ownership of resources.  For us, appropriation means that the country seeking development, be it economic, democratic or any other type of development must possess this desire.  The nation must identify its own problems and to find its own ways of solving these problems.  This does not mean that foreign aid would be rejected.  But, whatever strategy is decided to achieve development must be produced in this country and not outside.  Any type of strategy that is not held by the people is doomed to failure if the strategies are not internalized and belonging to succeed.  The extraordinary development of countries like South Korea, Germany or my own country Ethiopia are very good proof examples this point.

  Leading a country to more development is a learning process which equally means that human beings generally learn more from their own experiences done individually.  The same seems to apply to corporations.  These experiences create a historical and socio-economic context which we need to understand clearly when we want to bring about change.  The context equally determines the strategies that are likely to lead to success.

  Not every strategy works in all environments, or to employ a very simple expression: “no one size fits all”.  In order to succeed and gain ownership, policies must fit into the political, economic, educational and cultural context of our countries.

  In Ethiopia, we have studied the experiences of many other countries where we have developed our strategies and policies to overcome poverty.  We’ve always tried not to reinvent the wheel.  And we are also making sure that the strategies we have opted for the compatibility with our framework and our objectives.

  To succeed in the development of a country requires very strong political will, commitment and an extremely high level of discipline from the leadership and the people.  It is the duty of the leadership within parliament and government to develop

  The property leads us to the next necessary condition for development.  Sustainable development demands a strong and distinct political will for this kind of development.  Based on this political will and commitment, appropriate and clear policies and strategies in all sectors of the state must evolve.  It is not enough to concentrate on one sector.  If we are to achieve sustainable development, we need integrated policies.  All sectors to influence sustainable development.  Consequently, we must ensure the integration of our sectoral policies and design them in such a way that they all contribute to development.  Examples include infrastructure, education, health, environmental protection, investment conditions, political stability and peace as well as a clear understanding of the type of economic development is supposed to focus on  . . . .

  The different actors do not have the same obligations and different responsibilities, and they

  must work hand in hand to achieve sustainable development.  The sharing of responsibilities doesn't stop at the national level.

  At this stage, the development effort has reached the international level.  Developed economies have an obligation to support developing countries, for various historical and contemporary reasons.  Both, parliaments and governments of developed countries can contribute to the development of our countries, each through different means.  Long-term support is of utmost importance here, to return to the principle of ownership has already been mentioned, we ask our partners to support our policies rather than trying to implement new development policies  for us.

  4 Decentralization 

IN ETHIOPIAN CONTEXT

  People across the world demand greater self-determination and its influence in the decisions of their government.  

Some 95 percent of democracies now have elected under national governments and countries everywhere, big and small, rich and poor, are devolving political, fiscal and administrative powers to sub-national levels of government, but decentralization is often put in place  œuvre at random.  Decision makers do not always fully control the pace or genesis of the decentralization process.  Even when they do, decentralization models are often exported from one country to another without regard for local political traditions, regulatory frameworks, or property rights.

  Decentralization involves the transfer of political, fiscal and administrative powers to national sub-units of government.  A government is not decentralized unless the country contains “autonomous elected under national governments capable of making binding decisions, at least in certain areas.  Decentralization may involve bringing governments into existence such.  Or it could involve increasing the existing resources and responsibilities of infranational administrations.

  In Ethiopia, a large number of functions have been decentralized at the regional level State to the local level.  At this level, we also ensure a link between the people and the representatives by elected councils.  These councils to descend to the lowest level of local administrative units.  Thanks to these mechanisms nearly half of the adult population is represented in a council.  This means that literally everyone has a direct relationship with the elected officials.  This allows us to discuss any issue with the public.

  Decentralized powers are as follows:

  • Implementation of policies and laws adopted by the respective regional governments

  • Preparation and implementation of development plans, programs and budgets to various policies / sectors

  • Officials

  • Peace and security

  • education (primary schools)

  • Primary health care providers

  • Liquid feed

  • Management and maintenance of rural roads

  All layers of society are represented by these mechanisms.  This, so to speak in passing, of course includes women.  We encourage women to be part of policy and decision-making processes.  Currently, 29% of seats in the Federal Parliament are occupied by women.  Our current five-year development plan, the Plan foresees growth and transformation increase of this rate to 35% after the next elections.  The participation of women in municipal councils and regional parliaments is already close to 40% on average today.

  Ethiopia is on the verge of achieving the Millennium Development Goals and to bring the economy to the level of middle income countries.  What will happen because of the very close relationship the political representatives elected entertain with the people.  Not just our pro-poor and pro-people policies.  These policies have not only been developed for the people, but with the participation of the population.

  Of course, we haven't solved all our problems yet.  Eras of repression and underdevelopment cannot be erased in a single generation.  But we work hard, the people, the government together, in order to make progress.

  As far as good governance is concerned, great efforts have been undertaken to strengthen the legislatures and councils.  The members of these boards are trained to be in the best position to acquit themselves of their duties.  At the same time, the company is encouraged to demand good governance and good services.  This confirms parliaments in their oversight functions and ensures the  active involvement of society as a whole.

  I am not saying that we have achieved all our goals.  Much remains to be done, and this includes intensive and expanded training for representatives.

  Training tens of thousands of people and increasing the demand for governance, development and good service delivery within the population is neither done in a short span of time nor is it an easy task.

Regional and Local Government Ethiopia Table of ContentsRegional AdministrationWhen it assumed power in 1974, the Derg only slightly reordered the imperial regime's pattern of administrative organization at the national level. By contrast, the new regime saw existing local administration as anathema to the objectives of socialist construction, and its reform efforts were initially more evident on the local level than in the central bureaucracy.Immediately after assuming power, the Derg reorganized Ethiopia's fourteen provincial administrations and replaced all serving governors general. The fourteen provinces (teklay ghizats) were relabeled regions (kifle hagers) and were divided into 102 subregions (awrajas) and 556 districts (weredas). (By 1981 the number of administrative divisions had increased to sixteen with the addition of Addis Ababa and Aseb.) The restructuring was a major step toward dismantling feudal privilege. Moreover, all new appointees were either military men or university-educated individuals who were considered progressives.The main charge of these new administrators initially was to promote development, and the maintenance of law and order was considered only of secondary importance. Despite the commitment to rural development and to the staffing of regional administrative positions with young, dynamic, educated people, not much could be done to accelerate the process of change. Field bureaucrats had few resources to work with, their staffs were small, and their budgets were committed almost exclusively to salaries. By the mid-1980s, the relief and rehabilitation contributions of foreign private voluntary organizations in some cases made more resources available at the local level than did the regional administrations.After having concentrated on a gradual transformation of the state's administrative structure, with the promulgation of the 1987 constitution the Mengistu regime prepared for a further reorganization of regional administration. Hence, at its inaugural session, the National Shengo enacted a government plan for the administrative reorganization of regional government. As a result, twenty-five administrative regions and five autonomous regions were created. The autonomous regions consisted of Eritrea (broken further into three subregions in the north, west, and south), Aseb, Tigray, Dire Dawa, and Ogaden. The change promised to alter significantly Ethiopia's traditional pattern of administrative organization.If the plan were to be fully implemented, this reorganization would have required a dramatic expansion in the government and party bureaucracy. Relatively new institutions, like regional planning bodies, would have been eliminated and replaced with new planning agencies in the various regions. Some observers suggested that this plan was initially endorsed to pursue a Soviet-style approach to the nationalities problem. They argued that the regime was trying to organize regional administration along ethnic lines. Consequently, this reform had little positive effect on enhancing the regime's legitimacy and in fact limited its control over the general population.The primary organs of state power at the regional level were regional shengos. These bodies were responsible mainly for implementing the central government's laws and decisions. Regional shengos could draft their own budgets and development plans, but these had to be approved by the National Shengo. Regional shengos also possessed some latitude in devising and enforcing local laws and regulations and in electing local judges. By the summer of 1989, however, regional shengos had been elected in only eleven of the twenty-five newly designated administrative regions and in only three of the five regions designated as "autonomous." GoogleCustom SearchSource: U.S. Library of Congress

Federal Countries

There are roughly 25 federal countries in the world today, which together represent 40 per cent of the world’s population. They include some of the largest and most complex democracies – India, the US, Brazil, Germany and Mexico. Their system of government, while it can be complex, has made many federations amongst the most prosperous countries in the world with high standards of government services.

View Countries

Ethiopia 

History

Ethiopia is one of the oldest states in Africa. The most well-known of all Ethiopian emperors, Haile Selassie, ruled the country from 1930 until 1974, with the exception of the period during which Ethiopia was under military occupation by the armed forces of Benito Mussolini’s Italy, from 1936–1941. Selassie was overthrown in 1974 by the Provisional Military Council, known as the Derg, which proclaimed Ethiopia a socialist state. The Derg was in turn ousted by the Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF) in 1991.

In 1994, a Constituent Assembly adopted a new draft constitution approved in a referendum and the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia was proclaimed in 1995. Meles Zenawi became the first Prime Minister of the new Federal Democratic Republic in 1995, and after his death in August 2012, the current Prime Minister Hailemariam Desalegn took office.

Structure

With more than 80 ethnic communities, ethnicity is the underlying organizing principle of Ethiopia’s federal parliamentary democracy. Article one of the 1996 Ethiopian Constitution states that Ethiopia is a federal nation.

In 1996 the fourteen historical provinces of Ethiopia were dissolved and nine autonomous regions and two chartered cities (Addis Ababa and Dire Dawa) created to replace them. Six of these regions are inhabited almost entirely by a single ethnic group each, with the three remaining regions more ethnically diverse.

The Ethiopian Parliament consists of the House of Federation (the upper house), and the House of Peoples’ Representatives (the lower house), whose members in both cases are elected either by state councils or popular elections. The highest executive authority in Ethiopia resides with the Prime Minister.

The federal authorities deal with issues of national concern, including economic and social development, national standards and policy criteria for health and education, defense, federal police, foreign policy, foreign commerce, and immigration.

Malaysia. 

History

The Malaysian federal state evolved out of the colonial structure established under British rule that was based on the signing of treaties with Malay sultanate states. In 1948, the British territories on the Malay Peninsula formed the Federation of Malaya, which in turn gained independence from Britain in July 1957. Malaysia was formed in 1963 when the former colonies of Singapore and the East Malaysian states of Sabah and Sarawak joined the federation.

Disagreements between the federal authorities and the leaders of the State of Singapore led in 1965 to a Constitution Amendment bill that expelled Singapore from the federation. A constitutional crisis in 1969 resulted in the controversial proscriptive Sedition Act that overrides the balance of powers in the federal system. This legislation enabled the dominant ruling parties (primarily the United Malays National Organization and the Barisan Nasional coalition) to effectively increase the power of the central government.

Federal authorities consistently relied upon their power to amend the constitution to enforce their position on any matters of dispute within federal system. In 2008, however, the ruling government suffered a setback when it lost its two-thirds majority in parliament. After more than 50 years of one-party rule based on a multi-ethnic alliance, Malaysia’s governing Barisan Nasional finally faced its first serious challenge as the opposition won control of 5 of the 13 state legislatures. Pressure for greater federalism – starting with demands for the federal government to stop greater centralization – has begun to emerge from the state legislatures, especially those held by the opposition.

Structure

Malaysia, a nation with a population of 26 million, is the only federal country between India and Australia. The Federation of Malaysia is federal constitutional elective monarchy composed of 13 states and three Federal Territories. The King of Malaysia is the Head of State while the Prime Minister is Head of Government. Executive power is vested in the Cabinet, which is led by the Prime Minister and is chosen from among both houses of the Parliament.

Malaysia has a bicameral parliament consisting of the House of Representatives (lower house) and the Senate (upper house). The 222 members of the House of Representatives are elected from single member districts by universal adult suffrage. All of the members of the Senate (70 in total) sit for terms of three years, with 26 directly elected by the 13 State Assemblies, and the remaining 44 appointed by the King on the advice of the Prime Minister. A multi-party system is in place and the government is elected via a first past the post system.

Each of the thirteen states has its own unicameral State Legislative Assembly. Members of an Assembly are elected from single member constituencies during state elections which also use a first past the post system. The assemblies have the power to enact state laws, and the majority party in the Assembly forms the state government. State governments are led by a Chief Minister. Many states of Malaysia also have a traditional hereditary ruler (a Governor or Sultan), and in these states the Chief Minister advises the hereditary ruler.

Local governments, the lowest level of government in the Malaysian federal system, have the power to collect taxes and create laws in the form of by-laws. However, local government are not elected but appointed by the state government, and are headed by a civil servant.

Argentina

History

Following Argentina’s declaration of independence from Spain in 1816, nascent federalism began to emerge in the country when the provinces of Buenos Aires, Entre Ríos, and Santa Fe signed the Federal Pact in 1831, primarily as a means of military defense. The first Argentinean Constitution, which followed in 1853, established a republican division of powers, a high level of independence for the provinces, and a federal power controlled by a strong executive government limited by a bicameral national congress. The principle behind this was to ensure the equitable representation of the population and the provinces. This constitution remains in force today with several amendments. The next half century was turbulent, encompassed by a great deal of political instability, until the passing of Sáenz Peña Law made the political vote mandatory, secret, and universal among males aged eighteen or older.

In 1930, a military coup removed the democratically elected Hipólito Yrigoyen and the armed forces launched a period of authoritarian rule characterized by political instability, persecution of opposition political parties, and electoral fraud which would last for many decades. Between 1946 and 1955 President Juan Domingo Perón increased the political influence of unionized workers and implemented large numbers of public works, albeit under conditions of political repression and media censorship.

The cycle of authoritarian rule finally ended in 1983, following a period of military dictatorship that culminated in the Falklands/Malvinas War of 1982. The return of democracy also saw the return of federalism. Since this time, Argentina has been exposed only to the typical tensions between the central, provincial, and local governments that many federal countries experience. An economic crisis in 2001-02 sparked public protests and the successive resignations of several presidents. Néstor Carlos Kirchner from the Peronist party was elected president in 2003 and was succeeded in 2007 by his wife, Cristina Fernández de Kirchner. Fernández de Kirchner was re-elected for a second term in 2011. In October 2015, Mauricio Macri won the Argentinian presidential election and assumed office as the current president of the country

Structure

The federal structure of Argentina divides the country into 23 districts (known as provinces) and the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires. Argentina is a presidential representative democratic republic. The President is both Head of State and Head of the Government, and executive power is exercised by the President. Legislative power is invested both in the Executive and within the Argentinean National Congress, the bicameral legislative branch of the government of Argentina.

The National Congress consists of the upper house – the Senate – and the lower house – the Chamber of Deputies. Senators are elected to six year terms by direct election on a provincial basis, with the party that achieves the most votes awarded two of a province’s three seats in the senate, and the third going to the second-placed party. Members of the Chamber of Deputies are elected to serve four year terms. One half of the members are elected every two years by the people of each district using a proportional representation system.

Each of the Argentinean provinces has its own constitution, laws, authorities, and forms of government, but these institutions must first and foremost comply with the national constitution and federal law. The government of each province has three branches: executive, legislative, and judiciary. The executive branch is led by a governor, while the provincial legislative branch may be organized in a bicameral or unicameral format. Each province, with the exception of Buenos Aires Province, is divided into administrative divisions known as departments, which are in turn divided into municipalities.

Belgium 

Belgium

History

Belgium has been an independent state since its territories were detached from the Dutch kingdom in 1830, with the exception of the periods in which it was occupied by Germany during the First and Second World Wars. The nation was initially created as a strongly centralized unitary state that operated linguistically almost entirely in French. At this time, only 1% of the adult population could vote – the French speaking nobility, bourgeoisie, and high-ranking clerics. This was unacceptable to the Flemish population who viewed the country as bilingual and bi-cultural. Pressure from the Flemish Movement resulted in the passing of the 1898 De Vriendt-Coremans Law that enforced formal legal equality of the French and Flemish languages within Belgium.

Federalism was enshrined in law in the 1970 Belgian Constitution, and can be seen as form of ‘evolving federalism’ which aims to hold the country together despite its internal divisions.

Structure

Federalism is relatively new to Belgium but linguistic differences have long characterized this country nestled between France, Germany, and the Netherlands. Belgium’s defining political feature is its multilingual character, with the country divided into three linguistic communities: Flanders (in the north) is home to the majority of Belgian Dutch speakers, known as the Flemish; Wallonia (in the south) is predominantly populated by French-speakers; and a small German community inhabits a modest area at the eastern tip of the country. The capital, Brussels, is a separate, bilingual entity.

Belgium is a federal, parliamentary, representative, democratic, constitutional monarchy consisting of three communities (based on language) and three regions. These two types of constituent unit operate at the same level, meaning that one does not take precedence over the other. The Flemish and Walloon Regions are divided into 5 provinces each, which are further sub-divided into municipalities.

The King of the Belgians is the Head of State, and the Prime Minister of Belgium is the Head of Government. Executive federal government power is exercised by the Prime Ministers and ministers, who form a Council of Ministers. The number of French and Flemish speaking ministers must be equal (with the exception of the Prime Minister). The Belgian Federal Parliament is comprised of a Senate, and a Chamber of Representatives. The 150 members of the Chamber of Representatives are elected directly via a system of proportional representation, while 50 of the 60 total senators are elected by the parliaments of the communities or regions, with the remaining 10 co-opted by others.

Each of the components of the federal system (i.e. the Communities and Regions) has their own directly elected unicameral council or parliament that vote on decrees that have the same value and are on the same juridical level as federal laws. The regional and community parliaments and governments have jurisdiction over a number of policy areas, including transportation, public works, education, public health, and economic policy. However, these regional and community government entities have relatively limited powers over spending and revenue generation with the federal government largely maintaining control over this area.

🇨🇭 

History

Switzerland’s federal history can be traced back to August 1291, when three cantons created a defense union combined with a system of arbitration for conflict management. After the invasion of Switzerland by Napoleon in 1798 the French attempted to create a centralized Swiss state. This was unsuccessful, however, and the 1803 Act of Mediation partially restored the sovereignty of the cantons, created a number of new cantons, and effectively introduced a loose federal system. After the defeat of Napoleon in 1815, Switzerland determined that it would operate as a loose confederation. The Sonderbund War of 1847, a civil war in which seven primarily Catholic cantons created an alliance to protect their interests against a centralization of power, led in 1848 to the enacting of the (current) federal constitution. This constitution established Switzerland as a federal republic, delineated the responsibilities of the cantons and the Confederation, and established the federal authorities of government.

There have been a total of two revisions of the constitution, one in 1874 and one in 1999 (which came into force on 1 January 2000). The latter formulated the existing constitutional norms in modern language, and introduced additional content, particularly in relation to cooperative federalism. However, the overall design of the constitution remained unchanged throughout these revisions. The federal constitution of Switzerland has provided the basis for the peaceful cohabitation of different cultural, linguistic, and religious groups.

Structure

The Swiss federal system consists of three levels of governance. Authority is shared between the Confederation (central state), the 26 cantons (the federal states), and the 2,352 communes. Each of these three levels has legislative and executive powers. In addition, the Confederation and the cantons have judicial powers.

The Confederation’s authority is restricted to the powers expressly conferred to it by the Federal Constitution. All other areas, such as education and health care, are the responsibility of the cantons which enjoy considerable autonomy. Some of the responsibilities of the communes are expressly assigned to them by the Confederation, or by the canton of which they are a part. However, communes can also legislate when cantonal law does not specifically refer to issues that affect them directly.

Switzerland’s direct democracy means that all proposed amendments to the constitution are decided by referendum. Any federal law can be put to a referendum if a petition for reform receives the signatures of 50,000 citizens. This means that the Swiss people have the ability to make changes to the federal system. While the process of and implementing reform may be slow, changes do occur frequently. In recent years the provision, form, and length of compulsory education in Switzerland has been a topic which has challenged the federal system, as debate continues between the Confederation and the various cantonal governments on the extent to which education should be homogenized across the country in order to ensure that Swiss children are best prepared for adulthood. The question of language learning has been a particularly pertinent issue in this regard.

Nigeria 

faces the Boko Haram insurgency in the north of the country and attacks on the petroleum industry in the oil rich Niger Delta. One of the major challenges for federalism in Nigeria is the issue of how oil revenues are shared between the central government and the states.

Federal Countries

Australia

History

Australia was settled as a series of British colonies between 1788 and 1829; although by the time Europeans had discovered the island, aboriginal peoples had inhabited the area for at least 50,000 years. Between 1850 and 1891 six separate self-governing colonies emerged, each with a constitution and institutions of government of their own.

Throughout this period, there was some pressure for union between the colonies for economic, defense, and other purposes. The final and most serious phase of the federation movement took place during the 1890s. The terms of federation and of the constitution on which it was based were negotiated in two major constitutional conventions which occurred in 1891 and 1897-98 respectively. The conventions were attended by delegations of Members of Parliament from each of the colonies. The constitution that emerged was approved by referendum in each of the Australian colonies before it came into effect as an Act of the British Parliament. On 1st January 1901, the Australian self-governing colonies became the federated Commonwealth of Australia.

In designing the constitution the framers drew on the constitutional arrangements of both Britain and the United States. After some debate, the principles and institutions of responsible government already in operation in the six colonies were adopted for the new national government: the Commonwealth of Australia. Australian political leaders did not provide for constitutional protection of political rights, similar to the United Kingdom, even though the federal system and the constitutional framework were modelled on those of the United States.

Structure

The constituent parts of the Australian federation are the Commonwealth and the six Original States of New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, Western Australia, South Australia, and Tasmania. Australia also has two self-governing mainland territories, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. These territories are not full partners in the federation, but are treated as polities in their own right for many purposes. In addition, there are seven external territories.

In the more than 100 years since federation, Commonwealth (central government) powers have tended to expand through usage and judicial interpretation. The Australian federation relies in part on an extensive network of ministerial councils and a diversity of co-operative schemes designed to co-ordinate legislation and policy. The Commonwealth can intervene in areas solely of state concern, the most sensitive of which include the environment and human rights. Inevitably, these procedures diminish the authority of individual parliaments and enhance the role of executive government.

Over the past several decades, Australia’s main forum for federalism reform has been the Council of Australian Governments (COAG). Established in 1992, the members of COAG comprise the prime minister and all state premiers. The Council for the Australian Federation, established in 2006, acts as a spokesperson for the state and territorial governments.

 

Federal Countries

Austria

History

The dissolution of the Austro-Hungarian Empire at the end of the First World War led to the creation of the first Austrian Republic (1918–1933/34). In 1920 the first Austrian Republic adopted a federal constitution that remains in force today. The constitution itself has been revised several times and every revision has contributed to a strengthening of the federal level of the Austrian political system.

Incorporated into Nazi Germany in 1938, Austria once again became a federal state following the victory of the Allies over Germany in 1945. The 1920 Austrian federal constitution was subsequently reinstated with all its revisions and pre-1934 legislation. Austria regained its sovereignty in 1955 in exchange for a constitutional guarantee of its permanent neutrality, and became a member of the European Union in 1995.

Structure

Austria is a federal parliamentary representative democratic republic consisting of 9 states (known as Länder). The Federal Chancellor is the Head of Government, and the Federal President acts as Head of State. Executive power is exercised by both local and federal governments. Federal legislative power lies with both the government and the two chambers of parliament: the Federal Council (upper house); and the National Council (lower house). The judiciary is independent of both the executive and legislature and is exclusively federal in nature.

Each Austrian state has its own elected legislature, a state government, and a governor. However, Austria’s federalism is much weaker than many other federal nations and while the federal constitution initially granted all legislative powers to the states, many of these have been subsequently eroded. Criminal, civil, corporate law, defense policy, the majority of economic policy, and most educational and healthcare policy is federally regulated.

Consequently, Austria’s federalism is usually characterized as being highly centralized. Many Austrians have pushed to strengthen federalism in this central European nation. A constitutional convention established in 2003 made no major changes, although electoral reforms were enacted.

Austria remains a country of “unitary” federalism – i.e. one in which regional power is clearly subordinated to federal power.

 

Federal Countries

Bosnia and Herzegovina

History

Situated in the politically volatile Balkan Peninsula region, the territorial sovereignty of Bosnia has been historically contested for centuries. Bosnia and Herzegovina was one of six republics that initially comprised the Federal People’s Republic of Yugoslavia created in 1945 after the end of the Second World War. This collection of states came to be known as the Federal Socialist Republic of Yugoslavia after Josip Broz Tito was named President for life in 1963. As Yugoslavia began to break up in the early 1990s, the declaration of independence of Bosnia and Herzegovina sparked a brutal civil war between ethnic Bosnians, Serbs, and Croatians. Ongoing conflict and international intervention led to the Dayton Accords, the signing of which made Bosnia and Herzegovina an international protectorate and established a Muslim-Croat Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1994.

In 1995, Serb, Croat, and (ethnic) Bosnian leaders signed the General Framework Agreement for Peace (GFPAP), which became the basis for peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The agreement outlined a new national constitution for the nation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, establishing the county as a democracy consisting of two constituent entities: the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (also known as the Bosniak-Croat Federation) – a federation within a federation – and the highly centralized Republika Srpska (Serb Republic).

Structure

Bosnia and Herzegovina is small federal country consisting of two constituent units known as ‘entities’: the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, populated primarily by the Bosnian Muslim and Croatian ethnic groups; and the Republika Srpska, populated primarily by Serbian ethnic groups. Bosnia and Herzegovina faces the ongoing challenge of reconciling the demands of its Serbian entity and its Bosnian-Croatian counterpart. The complexity of the government structure established in the GFAP, as well as attempts by nationalist parties to entrench themselves at the entity level, have prompted repeated intervention of the supervisory bodies established by the international agreements.

The Dayton Accords established a complex government structure. Bosnia and Herzegovina is an international protectorate, with the highest political authority in the country the High Representative – the chief executive officer for the international civilian presence in the country. The authority of the High Representative is derived from international law, and he/she is able to bypass the elected Parliamentary Assembly when necessary.

The Chair of the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina rotates between three members (a Bosniak, a Croat, and a Serb) every 8 months within their four-year term. The representatives are elected directly by the people, with voters in the federation electing the Bosniak and Croat representative, and voters in the Republika Srpska the Serb. Additionally, the Council of Ministers, members of which are selected by the majority parties on the basis of strictly defined ethnic representation rules, has executive responsibility for foreign and economic policy amongst other areas. Each entity has its own government which deals with internal matters not overseen by the Council of Ministers, and their own Supreme Courts and lower courts. The supreme final court within the country, however, is the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, which has jurisdiction over decisions made in constitutional disputes between the entities.

The legislative branch of the Bosnian Parliamentary Assembly consists of two chambers: The House of Representatives (the upper house): and the House of Peoples (lower house). Equal representation between ethnic groups is a fundamental principle of the legislature. The 42 members of the House of Representatives are elected via a system of proportional representation to four year terms. Two thirds of the members are elected from the Federation (14 Bosniaks and 14 Croats respectively), and one third from the Republika Srpska (14 Serbs). The House of Peoples consists of 15 delegates who serve two year terms, with two thirds elected from the Federation (5 Bosniaks and 5 Croats) and one third from the Republika Srpska (5 Serbs).

Federal Countries

Brazil

History

Brazil won its independence from Portugal in 1822 and initially became a monarchy with a unitary form of government. Slavery was abolished in 1888, and a republican alliance deposed the king in 1889, proclaiming Brazil a federal country. The Brazilian Revolution of 1930 reduced the autonomy of Brazil’s states. When the ruling regime was overthrown by the military in 1945, the federal system was reinstalled along with an electoral system that included competitive nation-wide parties for the first time in the history of the republic. The military regime that took power in 1964 retained an emasculated form of the federal system, but when democracy returned in 1985 the new federal government allowed direct elections for the state governments.

The increased predominance of state interests in the federal regime culminated in the creation of the Constitutional Assembly (1987-88), in which the state and municipal governments consolidated the process of fiscal decentralization initiated in the late 1970s. In December of 1989 Brazil held its first direct presidential election since 1960.

From 1990, when Fernando Collor became the first directly elected President of the Republic in 30 years, to 1994 when Fernando Henrique Cardoso became President, the State Governors played a major role in national politics, influencing the behavior of federal deputies especially through the exercise of patronage or manipulating their chances of re-election.

Structure

The Brazilian federation has three levels of government: the central or Union government; 26 state governments and the Federal District government; and more than 5,500 municipal governments. States and municipalities have autonomous administrations which collect their own taxes and receive a share of the taxes collected by the Federal government. States are headed by a governor and municipalities by a mayor. Both entities have elected legislative bodies.

The 26 states of Brazil have significant powers under its Constitution, which was promulgated by the Constitutional Assembly in 1988. Three orders of government are recognized: central, state, and municipal. Additionally, a process of fiscal and political decentralization was ushered in with the new constitution.

Federal Countries

Canada

History

Canada is the product of the 1867 union of three colonies in British North America: Nova Scotia; New Brunswick; and Quebec and Ontario (which were united into a single colony and called Canada East and Canada West). Six other provinces subsequently joined Canada: Manitoba (1870); British Columbia (1871); Prince Edward Island (1873); Saskatchewan and Alberta (1905); and Newfoundland (1949). In addition, three northern territories are also constituent parts of the federation: Yukon; the Northwest Territories; and Nunavut, which was carved out of the Northwest Territories in 1999.

The nation of Canada, founded by the Constitution Act of 1867, initially adopted a fairly centralized federal structure. The 1982 Constitution Act affirmed aboriginal rights and introduced an entrenched Charter of Rights and Freedoms to which all governments and legislatures are subject.

The Council of the Federation, established in 2003, acts as a spokesman for the provincial governments of this large and diverse country.

Structure

Canada is a federal parliamentary democracy within a constitutional monarchy, consisting of ten provinces and three territories. The British monarch, also the monarch of Canada, is the official Head of State, although typically the monarch appoints a Governor General to perform the role on their behalf. The Prime Minister is the Head of Government and selects ministers to lead various departments, typically with regional representation.

The Parliament of Canada is bicameral, consisting of the Senate and the House of Commons, although the monarch also retains considerable power in this arena. The Senate (the upper house) is comprised of 105 members appointed by the Governor General on the advice of the Prime Minister, who serve until the age of 75. The Senate is supposed to provide regional equality, although the extent to which this is achieved is debatable. Members of the House of Commons (the lower house) are elected in single member districts via a first past the post voting system.

Each of Canada’s provinces and territories have their own Premiers, governments, and unicameral legislatures. Provincial governments have a significant amount of power and jurisdiction within their localities, including responsibility for areas such as health care, education, and welfare. They also have the ability to implement province-specific taxation.

Canada is a parliamentary democracy with a system that expresses a divided rather than a shared model of federalism. The country has established independent tax powers for both levels of government (provincial and federal), but there is weak provincial representation at the centre. Strong executive-led government in the federal and provincial capitals, combined with a weak Senate, has led to executive domination of relations between and among the federal partners.

Canadian federalism has been affected by the country’s linguistic diversity, centered on the French-English relationship, its regional diversity, and its ethno-cultural diversity. Reflecting the historical presence of two language communities, Canada has two official languages, French and English. Since Canada’s settlement and growth has depended heavily on immigration, approximately 14% of Canadians have other mother tongues. In 1991, almost 1 million people in Canada reported having aboriginal origins, in whole or in part.

Canada’s high degree of decentralization has been driven by factors such as: judicial interpretation of division of powers in favor the provinces; inadequate representation of regional diversity leading to popular support for provincial powers; the growing importance of provincial jurisdiction areas such as health, welfare and education; and Quebec nationalism.

Federal Countries

Germany

History

Germany has a strong tradition of regional government dating back to the founding of the German Empire in 1871, which itself was borne out of the many different independent German kingdoms that formerly comprised the Holy Roman Empire. In the immediate aftermath of the Second World War the United States, United Kingdom, Soviet Union, and France assumed all governance powers and responsibilities in the nation, dividing the country into four zones of occupation. In 1946 a number of regions known as Länder, based on the traditional delineations that existed within the independent German kingdoms, were established in all four zones under the supervision of the respective occupying power.

The three Western allies facilitated the formation of the Federal Republic of Germany in 1948 (commonly known as West Germany) and a new constitution, the Basic Law, came into force in 1949. The Soviet Zone became the German Democratic Republic (commonly known as East Germany) under a centralist communist regime. The fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and collapse of the Iron Curtain in Europe paved the way for the reunification of Germany and the adoption of a federal structure.

Structure

Since unification in 1990, the Federal Republic has consisted of 16 regions (Länder): the ten Länder of the former West Germany; five new Länder created out of the former East Germany; and Berlin. A characteristic which distinguishes the Länder from the constituent units of other federal nations is their right to recognition at the international level. Therefore, they have a status as subjects of international law independent of their position as members of a federation. Länder are represented in the upper house of the German parliament at federal level (Bundesrat).

Germany is a federal parliamentary republic. The Federal President is the Head of State, and the Federal Chancellor is the Head of the Government. The bicameral German Parliament consists of the Federal Legislature (the lower house – known as the Bundestag), and the Federal Council (the upper house – known as the Bundesrat). The Federal Legislature is directly elected by the German people, while the Federal Council represents the governments of the Länder. The Federal Legislature is more powerful than the Federal Council, although in practice the consent of both houses is generally sought in the passing of legislation. Each of the Länder has its own government, premier, and legislatures with significant powers and jurisdiction over many areas of governance.

Attempts have been made to reform the federal structure in Germany over the past decade, with reforms designed to create a better balance between the powers and responsibilities of the Federal Government and the Länder. Federal Reform I came into force in 2006 and Federal Reform II was concluded in 2009. Currently policy makers at all levels of government in Germany are working on Federal Reform III, which focuses on fiscal equalization, and is scheduled to come into force by the end of 2019.

Federal Countries

India

Credit: vectorstock.com/ingomenhard/Carl Stieren

History

India achieved independence from Britain in 1947 and a constitution emphasizing a strong central government came into effect in 1950. Beginning in the 1980s, a shift towards multi-level federalism resulted in local bodies playing an increasingly important role in governance.

Having led the independence movement, the Indian National Congress Party emerged as India’s dominant political force into the 1970s. In the 2009 general elections it once achieved the most seats in the House of the People, the lower house of the Parliament, and subsequently formed a coalition government. This kind of coalition, which represents various interests within the federal system, helps to increase the accountability of the central government. However, in the most recent general election held in 2014, the National Democratic Alliance – led by the Bharatiya Janata Party and its leader (and current Prime Minister) Narendra Modi – swept to victory winning the right to form a majority government for the first time in India in 30 years.

Several of India’s 94 constitutional amendments have been described as an attempt by the central government to shift the balance of power away from the states. In 1992, however, the 73rd amendment was passed, empowering and strengthening the role of the rural and village councils known as panchayats, providing them with new powers and funding and requiring that women must hold at least one-third of the seats on these bodies.

In general, the emergence of regional parties and the prevalence of coalition politics at the national level since the 1990s have shifted power away from the central government to the states. It remains to be seen whether this trend will continue under the current majority government.

Structure

India’s federation consists of 28 states and 7 union territories (including the National Capital Territory). Governors are appointed by the central government to oversee states. All states and two union territories have elected legislatures and governments. The remaining five union territories are directly ruled by the center through appointed administrators. Since 1956 the states have been divided along linguistic criteria. Every state and union territory is divided into smaller administrative districts – and these in turn are divided in tehsils and ultimately into villages.

India is a federal parliamentary democracy. The parliament is bicameral, with the House of the States acting as the upper house, and the House of the People as the lower house. Jurisdictional disputes between the central government and the states are handled by the Inter-State Council. This body, as stated by the Constitution of India, has a duty to inquire into and advise upon disputes between states, and investigate and discuss subjects in which some or all of the states, or the union, have a common interest.

 

Federal Countries

Mexico

History

Ever since 1810, when Mexico became an independent country, tensions between the states and the centre have dominated the political landscape. Indeed, the war of independence started in the states as a reaction to the excesses of a powerful central government. The precarious equilibrium between the centre and the periphery in Mexico has been crystallized in the different constitutions that have been drafted since independence.
The first constitution, the Constitución de Cà¡diz of 1812, was modelled after the Spanish system and defined two institutions at the regional level: municipal and state governments. Municipal governments were elected, but the state governments were appointed by the central government. This constitutional arrangement allowed the first independent government of Mexico, the short-lived monarchy of Agustà­n de Iturbide, to centralize power in the capital.

In 1824 an insurrection led by General Santa Anna forced Iturbide to resign, and he was later assassinated. With the downfall of the monarchy, the states reacted by establishing their own governments. In the new Constituent Assembly (1823-24), representatives of the state governments were able to exert a considerable influence in the drafting of the new constitution. It was in the 1824 constitution that federalism was first introduced. It was conceived by the Constituent Assembly as an institutional mechanism to preserve the union and prevent the secession of several states and, thus, what it reveals most is a fear of national disintegration. This is why its drafters sought to create a strong executive while at the same time recognizing some form of state autonomy and the separation of powers among the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government.

The tensions between the states and the centre made the 1824 constitution inoperable. The desire for independence on the part of some states could not be contained, and thus, in 1836 Texas declared its independence from Mexico. More importantly, the tensions between the Liberals (federalists) and the Conservatives (centralists) seriously divided the country. Political instability was so high that no government was able to rule effectively. By 1835, a new Constituent Assembly had amended the constitution and eliminated federalism as a form of government. The centralization of power became more explicit during the dictatorships that followed.

In 1857 a new constitution was drafted after dictator Antonio López Santa Anna was removed during an armed insurrection. In reaction to the strong powers granted to the executive in the 1824 constitution, the 1857 constitution sought to limit the power of the executive by strengthening Congress. As a mechanism to do this, the constitution eliminated the Senate. It was thought that a single legislative chamber would be more powerful and more effective in checking the power of the executive. Although this constitution recognized federalism as a system of government, it granted the central government great economic and political powers vis-à -vis the states. Moreover, by eliminating the Senate, the states lost their representation in the federal government.

In practice, this constitution also proved unmanageable, particularly given the political instability that was still prevalent in the country, and given that it did not create the institutional mechanisms to allow the executive to govern effectively. As Marvà¡n argues, this constitutional design granted Congress enormous power without accountability or appropriate checks and balances, and at the same time, granted the executive enormous responsibilities without sufficient autonomy.

The 1857 constitution was drafted by the Liberals, and the Conservatives’ opposition to it culminated in a civil war. The war between Conservatives and Liberals ended with the victory of the Liberals in 1867. In order to strengthen the executive, President Benito Juà¡rez sought to reform the constitution and, although he died in 1872, a constitutional amendment was passed which re-installed the Senate in 1875. Juà¡rez promoted the Senate as a means of strengthening the central government which he thought was necessary in order to reconstruct the country. The fact that the Senate was re-established did not mean that it was empowered, as many prerogatives remained with Congress’for example, the ratification of all Cabinet members and Supreme Court justices, the suppression of Presidential veto power, and the right to subject the President to a political trial with a simple majority. Also, the Senate was excluded from participating in the discussion and approval of the budget. With this limitation, federalism was impaired, for the states were excluded from taking part in the budgetary decision-making process. This limitation continues to the present.

Porfiro Dà­az took power in 1876. This began a period of prolonged and repressive dictatorship. Although during his time in power Juà¡rez used extraordinary provisions to govern and suspended individual rights, the regime of Porfiro Diaz took this to greater extremes. Dà­az gained control over the press, the Church, Congress, Governors and local elites. He also managed to amend the constitution to allow for his indefinite re-election.

A severe economic crisis, combined with popular disenchantment with a repressive regime that rested on a highly unequal distribution of wealth, and the emergence of a new generation of leaders who reacted against the entrenchment of a political elite who obstructed their political ambitions, made the conditions ripe for revolution and indeed that is what happened. In 1910, the start of the Mexican Revolution forced Porfirio Dà­az to leave the country. As in the past, the revolution originated in the periphery, but was won in the centre. It ended when two moderate northern generals (Venustiano Carranza and Alvaro Obregón) defeated the more radical faction. Carranza and Obregón consolidated their victory when they took control of the centre and were able to dominate the periphery.

After the civil war, a Constitutional Assembly was convened to draft a new constitution. The constitution of 1917 was modelled after the 1857 constitution and the 1875 amendments, but it granted the executive greater discretionary powers and it included a series of ‘social rights’ (education, labour, health) that institutionalized the ideals of the Revolution. This constitution, which is still valid today, became one of the most important institutional pillars of Mexico’s political regime.

The other major pillar of the regime was the official party, the Partido Revolucionario Institucional (PRI), which maintained virtually hegemonic control of power from its creation in 1929 to 2000. With the victory of an opposition candidate in the 2000 presidential elections, a significant number of politicians, academics and journalist have started to talk about the need to draft a new constitution.

Federal Countries

Nepal

History

The Kingdom of Nepal was created in 1768 when Prithvi Narayan Shah conquered the territory that comprises present day Nepal. In 1846, after many decades of monarchic rule, the royal family was subjugated by an aristocratic family, the Ranas, who created a system of hereditary Prime Ministers and reduced the power of the king. The Rana dynasty was subsequently overthrown by a coalition of democrats and the descendants of the original Nepali royal family in 1951. In 1959 the monarchy ended the democratic experiment by seizing power.

The development of a ‘People’s Movement’ (Jana Andolan) against the monarchy, which emerged in 1989, resulted in the establishment of a parliamentary constitutional monarchy under multi-party democracy. This stability was short-lived, however, as in 1996 the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) began an armed struggle demanding the establishment of a secular republican state. This led to the decade-long Nepal Civil War which claimed more than 13,000 lives. King Gyanendra used the government’s failure to control the revolt as a pretext to assume full executive power in 2005. In response, Nepal’s democratic parties allied with the Maoists to declare a pro-democratic movement (Jana Andolan-II), which led to the overthrow of the monarchy in April 2006.

A peace process brought about a political settlement in the form of a Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA). As part of the terms of the CPA, signed on 21 November 2006 by both the government and the Maoists, the rebels agreed to disarm and became a mainstream political party. The terms also affirmed Nepal to be a secular state. In 2008 a “secular, federal democratic republic” was declared following elections to a unicameral Constituent Assembly in which the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) won the largest number of seats. The Constituent Assembly was tasked with drafting a new constitution for federal Nepal. Nepal remained politically unstable, however, as a series of governments collapsed between 2008 and 2012. The failure of the first Constituent Assembly to draft a new constitution in the allotted time led to the formation of the Second Constituent Assembly after elections held in November 2013. Alongside serving as the Nepali legislature, the Second Constituent Assembly was responsible for drafting the new constitution of Nepal.

Structure

After a 10-year civil war, Nepal is undergoing a process of triple transition – towards democracy, towards federalism, and away from feudalism. All major parties have agreed to the creation of a new federal system.

Currently, the President is the Head of State of Nepal, although this role is largely ceremonial as the functioning of the government is managed entirely by the Prime Minister, the Head of Government. The Parliament (currently the unicameral Second Constituent Assembly) appoints the Prime Minister, and he in turn appoints the Attorney General. The heads of the Constitutional bodies (the Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority; the Public Service Commission; the Election Commission; and the National Human Rights Commission respectively) are appointed by the President on the recommendation of the Constitutional Council.

In September 2015 Nepal passed a new Constitution, creating a Federal country. This constitution replaces the interim constitution that has governed the country since 2007, and the new structure of government is now in the process of being implemented.

 

Federal Countries

Pakistan

Credit: vectorstock.com/Saruepee/Carl Stieren

History

Pakistan – an ethnically and linguistically diverse country – has ancient roots as a socio-political entity encompassing the Indus Valley. It was brought under centralized rule for three distinct eras, the third a period of rule by the British between 1857 and 1947. Pakistan became an independent nation in 1947 with the separation of British colonial India into the Muslim nation of Pakistan and the predominantly Hindu Republic of India. These two states fought wars in 1947-48 and 1965 over the Kashmir region, which both claimed as sovereign territory and continue to do so today.

The first Pakistani Constitution was adopted in 1956 and then abrogated by the military in 1958. The second Pakistani Constitution was adopted in 1962, but once again abrogated by the military in 1969. Pakistan’s third Constitution was adopted in 1973 by the first directly elected Parliament. This constitution enshrined a federal structure.

A major development in federalism in Pakistan was the 18th Amendment to the 1973 Constitution (the constitutional reform package), which was passed unanimously by the National Assembly on April 8, 2010. This amendment dramatically reduced the power of the president. It returned functions to Parliament and gave more autonomy to the provinces. The 18th Amendment was approved by the Senate on April 16, 2010 and became an act of parliament.

Structure

Pakistan’s federal parliamentary republic consists of: four provinces; one federal capital territory; two self-governing administrative territories; and a unit of semi-autonomous federally-administered tribal areas. The four provinces are Punjab, Sindh, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, and Balochistan. The Islamadad Capital Territory covers the capital city, while the Federally Administered Tribal Areas in the northwest includes the Frontier Regions with Afghanistan. The two self-governing administrative territories of Azad Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan form part of the disputed Kashmir region. The local governance system of Pakistan consists of three tiers: districts, tehsils (sub-districts), and union councils. Each tier has elected bodies. In total, there are approximately 149 districts, 588 tehsils, and several thousand union councils.

Pakistan has a hierarchically structured court system with two classes of court: the superior and the subordinate judiciary. The superior judiciary is entrusted with preserving, protecting, and defending the constitution and is comprised of the Supreme Court of Pakistan, the Federal Shariat Court, and five High Courts. The Supreme Court stands at the apex, and one high court serves each province, with the last serving the Islamabad Capital Territory. The disputed regions of Azad Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan have separate court systems. The subordinate judiciary consists of civil and criminal district courts.

The largest federal challenge for Pakistan, a geographically and demographically diverse nation, is to empower its provinces and tribal areas while maintaining a united federal republic.

Federal Countries

Russia

History

In the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, the territory that now encompasses European Russia came under the control of Moscow, and the ruling tsars (emperors) adopted an expansionist policy which led to the development of the Russian Empire in the eighteenth century. Modernization and industrialization led to ever growing resentment and rebellion against the autocratic feudal system of government, and was particularly compounded by the hardships caused by the First World War. In the early twentieth century the tsarist regime was overthrown in a popular revolution.

The October Revolution and the Bolshevik seizure of state power in 1917 led to a five year civil war which ended with a Communist victory and the creation of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (Soviet Union) in 1922. Federal status was enshrined in the new Soviet constitution unveiled by Josef Stalin in 1936, but the federal model adopted during the Soviet period was a façade that veiled the highly centralized Communist Party system.

Nationalist tensions, economic stagnation, and demands for democracy in various countries within the Eastern Bloc initiated the downfall of the Soviet Union, which disintegrated after an attempted coup against Mikhail Gorbachev in the Russian Federation failed in August 1991. Between August and December 1991, 13 of the republics seceded from the Soviet Union. By December 31 1991, the Soviet Union ceased to exist, and Russia had changed its legal name from the Russian Soviet Federative Republic, to the Russian Federation, which remains its name today.

The 1993 constitution, adopted after the fall of the Soviet Union, established a political system that is a unique hybrid of a presidential and parliamentary republic. However Russia has not developed the democratic system many hoped would follow in the post-Soviet era, as central government remains strong in the country and regional powers are strictly limited.

Structure

The Russian Federation is the world’s largest federal state with more than 100 distinct nationalities and ethnic groups. It consists of eighty-five federal subjects of six different types: 46 oblasts; 22 republics; 9 krais; 4 autonomous okrugs; 3 federal cities; and 1 autonomous oblast. One of Russia’s greatest federal challenges is balancing regional powers and identities within a unified federal country. Traditionally, authorities have maintained strong central state control over governance in the country.

The Head of State of the Russian Federation is the President, who is also the Supreme Commander in Chief, and holder of the highest office. The Russian system is characterized by the strength of its presidency, with the President determining the basic course of domestic and foreign policy. The Government of Russia is the highest organ of executive power, the members consisting of the Prime Minister (the Head Government), the deputy prime ministers, and the federal ministers and their ministries and departments. The Prime Minister is selected by the President, and then confirmed by the lower house of the Russian Parliament.

The legislature of Russia is the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation, a bicameral Parliament, consisting of the 450 member State Duma (the lower house), and the 166 member Federation Council (the upper house).

Federal Countries

South Africa

History

The indigenous black African tribes such as the Xhosa, Zulu, Sotho, and Tswana, who for thousands of years lived in the region known today as South Africa, were quickly displaced by European settlers during the colonial period. By the end of the nineteenth century the region was dominated by the Dutch and the British. The Second Boer War of 1899-1902, fought between the British military and Afrikaans-speaking Boers of Dutch descent, resulted in a British victory and the consolidation of British rule over South Africa. This was followed by more than 90 years of minority white rule and apartheid government.

Many groups resisted the policies of racial segregation that existed throughout the twentieth century in the country, both through peaceful protests and political violence. The pressure exerted over decades by the anti-apartheid movement, and the resistance of the African National Congress (ANC), finally brought down the system of racial segregation and minority rule. The release of Nelson Mandela in February 1990 and the holding of multi-racial elections in 1994 ended apartheid, and under an interim constitution South Africa was administered by the temporary Government of National Unity. The new Constitution of South Africa, drafted by the Constituent Assembly, was adopted by the National Assembly in May 1996. The Government of National Unity’s administration of the country ended at the end of the first parliament in 1999. In the 1999 elections the African National Congress Party (ANC) were once again the largest party, and formed a government under President Thabo Mbeki. The ANC has won every subsequent general election in South Africa. In the most recent elections, held in May 2014, the ANC once again emerged victorious and President Jacob Zuma assumed a second term in office.

Structure

South Africa is divided into nine provinces, which themselves are divided into metropolitan and district municipalities. District municipalities are further divided into local municipalities. Finally, metropolitan and local municipalities are divided into wards.

The Republic of South Africa is a parliamentary representative democratic republic. The President of South Africa acts as both Head of State and Head of the Government. Executive power is exercised by the government. Legislative power is exercised by the government and the legislature, the South African Parliament. The South African Parliament is bicameral and consists of the Council of Provinces (the upper house) and the National Assembly (the lower house). The President is elected by the National Assembly and must maintain the confidence of that body in order to remain in office. The judiciary is independent of the executive and the legislature.

Government representatives are elected at national, provincial, and local levels of government. Each province has its own governing unicameral legislature, with representatives elected via proportional representation. Each provincial legislature elects a Premier who acts as one of the special provincial representatives to the Council of Provinces. The Premier has the power to appoint a provincial cabinet and provincial ministers (known as the Executive Council and Members of the Executive Council respectively).

South Africa currently has a strong central government and robust local governments. Provinces are comparatively weaker and central government controls the finances of provincial governments through the use of appropriation bills which determine provincial budgets. The political culture of the country is one that promotes “co-operative government” and aims to avoid the conflicts that arise in some federations in which competitive federalism is practiced. The rationale behind this concept is the need for South Africa to move beyond the inequalities of the apartheid system, which 20 years later continue to have lingering effects on economic and social equality throughout the country.

Federal Countries

Spain

History

Historically, the territory which now comprises contemporary Spain was a network of different kingdoms ruled by a variety of monarchs. For several centuries the majority of the Iberian Peninsula was ruled by Islamic Caliphates, until the European Christian rulers ultimately came to dominate the territory once more at the end of the fifteenth century through the Reconquista. By 1492 Spain had unified multiple kingdoms into a single nation, albeit one in which regional identities remained strong.

Federalism, historically a democratizing force in Spain, has long been seen as one potential response to the challenge of maintaining a unified state and building the nation. The First Spanish Republic, a political regime which developed following the abdication of King Amadeo I, introduced federalism as an official principle of Spanish government. This new form of government was, however, unsuccessful and short lived. It did not give rise to autonomous states as intended, but political opposition led instead to the development of independent, rebellious cantons. The First Federal Spanish Republic came to an end in December 1874 with the restoration of the monarchy.

In the Spanish Civil War of 1936-1939, General Francisco Franco’s Nationalists fought against Republican forces in a conflict in which clashes over regional autonomy versus strong national unity played a key role. Franco’s victory and subsequent dictatorial regime led to the repression of regional culture and identity throughout the country, most prominently in the Basque Country, Catalonia, and Galicia. The death of Franco in 1975 enabled a transition to democracy, which included the enacting of the current Spanish constitution in 1978. The Constitution enshrined in law that Spain is a nation composed of 17 Autonomous Communities and two autonomous cities with vary degrees of autonomy and powers of self-government. Spain is not officially a federation, but shares many of the institutional features of federal countries.

Structure

Spain consists of 17 Autonomous Communities and two autonomous cities (situated on the coast of North Africa). Spain is not a federation as the central government retains full sovereignty. Spain is often referred to as having a form of asymmetrical federalism – comprised of regions with differing powers.

Spain is a democratic social representative constitutional monarchy in which the monarch acts as Head of State and the Prime Minister as Head of the Government. Executive power is exercised by the government – the Prime Minister and his ministers. Legislative power is vested in the Cortes Generales, the bicameral parliament of Spain which is composed of the Senate (the upper house), and the Congress of Deputies (the lower house). The Judiciary, integrated by judges and magistrates, operate the judicial system in the name of the King. The highest court in Spain for everything but constitutional matters is the Supreme Court, which has jurisdiction over the whole country. The Constitutional Court is the highest appellate court on constitutional matters and also has jurisdiction over the whole of Spain.

Since the Spanish Constitution of 1978 came into force, the central government has asymmetrically devolved and transferred powers to the governing authorities of the Autonomous Communities. Some Communities, particularly those that have strong regional identities based on historical precedent, have received more powers than others. Each Autonomous Community has a Statute of Autonomy, which effectively acts as that Community’s constitution (although it cannot override the Spanish Constitution of 1978). Each Community also has some form of government of its own, consisting of an executive and a legislature.

Tensions between the central government and the regions are a constant theme in Spanish political life. Several regions have expressed their desire for full independence from Spain in the past, but the central government has strongly opposed any such moves. Since the 1960s the paramilitary group Euskadi Ta Askatasuna (commonly known as ETA) has undertaken acts of terrorism against the Spanish central government authorities in order to achieve their political goal: independence for the Greater Basque Country. More recently, popular support for the secession of Catalonia from Spain has been growing, illustrated by the November 2014 Catalan Self Determination Referendum, in which more than 80% of the votes cast answered the questions ‘Do you want Catalonia to become a State?’ and ‘Do you want this State to be independent?’ affirmatively. The central government, however, has thus far remained resolute that there will be no secession from the Spanish stited Arab Emirates

History

The United Arab Emirates (UAE) is a relatively young nation state. From the sixteenth century portions of the modern-day state were controlled by a range of other colonial actors – first the Portuguese, then the Ottoman Empire, and finally the British, all of who aimed to control and benefit from trade in the region. In the nineteenth century the British signed a series of agreements with rulers (sheiks) in the region aimed at guaranteeing peace and ending piracy, beginning with the 1820 General Treaty of Peace. This lengthy process effectively resulted in the British controlling the territory which today makes up the United Arab Emirates. In 1952, seven sheikdoms formed the Trucial States Council, a discussion and coordination forum. In the late 1960s it became clear to the British government that it could no longer afford to maintain its defense commitments in the region and consequently announced the end of the treaty relationships with the sheikdoms which had formerly been under British protection.

In late 1971, two nations which today are regional neighbors of the UAE – Bahrain and Qatar – gained independence after their treaty agreements with the British came to an end. In this context, in December 1971 the rulers of Abu Dhabi and Dubai agreed to form a union between their two emirates, prepare a constitution, and subsequently invite the rulers of five other emirates to join the union. On 2 December 1971, Abu Dhabi, Dubai, and four other emirates agreed to form a union known as the United Arab Emirates. The seventh emirate, Ras al-Kaimah, joined the union in early 1972. In 1976 the President of the UAE Sheikh Zayid bin Sultan al Nahyan enacted reforms which led to further centralization as the federal government gained control over areas such as immigration, public security, and border control. The Constitution of the UAE, which came into effect on 2 December 1971, was permanently accepted in May 1996.

Structure

The United Arab Emirates is composed of 7 emirates (constituent monarchies). The UAE is a federal, presidential, absolute monarchy. According to tradition, the (hereditary) ruler of Abu Dhabi is the President and Head of State, while the (hereditary) ruler of Dubai is the Prime Minister and Head of Government. The Federal Supreme Council consists of the rulers of all seven emirates, and in theory this council elects the President and Prime Minister to serve five year terms. In practice, however, the president and prime minister are always the rulers of Abu Dhabi and Dubai respectively.

The federal legislature of the UAE is the unicameral Federal National Council, which is composed of 40 members. Half of these members are appointed by the rulers of their respective emirates and hold all of the Council’s political power. The other half are elected to two year terms by an electoral college whose members are appointed by the emirates, and have an advisory capacity only.

The Federal Judiciary of the UAE is a constitutionally independent body including the Federal Supreme Court. The Federal Supreme Council appoints the five judges headed by a president to the Supreme Court.

Each of the constituent emirates which make up the union has its own (hereditary) ruler, and it is they who are responsible for dictating governance reform within their territory. While the federal government maintains control over foreign affairs, security and defense, education, public health, and communications policy, each emirate maintains considerable powers, including the crucial authority over oil rights and revenues.

Although the UAE is a decentralized federation in practice, this decentralization has not negatively affected the country and it has enjoyed a significant degree of stability since independence. The UAE government has indicated support for stronger legal and legislative authority for the Federal National Council. The constitution, which mixes aspects of traditional and modern rule, represents a compromise between those emirates that favor centralization, and those which prefer individual autonomy. Despite an apparently broad array of federal powers, the constitution provides for a loosely bound federation in practice.

 

Federal Countries

United States of America

History

The United States of America (U.S.) came into existence after the 13 British North American colonies rebelled against British colonial rule in the eighteenth century. After forming a confederation and beginning an armed rebellion in 1775, the 13 colonies declared independence as the United States of America in 1776. Victory in the American War of Independence did not, however, resolve all grievances and shortly after achieving autonomy the lack of a strong central government exacerbated various tensions and differences that threatened to pull the states apart. In February 1787, a convention of state delegates met in Philadelphia to propose a plan of government. The product of this convention, the Constitution of the United States, enshrined the concepts of federalism and described the rights and responsibilities of state governments and the states in relation to the federal government.

The adoption of this form of federal government did not satisfy anti-federalists who opposed the strengthening of central government,  leading to conflict over the ratification of the Constitution. To assuage these concerns, in 1789 a number of amendments were proposed to the Constitution. The first ten amendments, known collectively as the Bill of Rights, guaranteed a number of personal freedoms, checked some of the central government’s power in judicial proceedings, and limited some powers to the states and public.

The 1803 Louisiana Purchase vastly increased the territory of the U.S., sparking westward expansion. The Civil War of 1861-65, primarily fought over the issue of slavery, had a critical impact on federalism as the federal government asserted its responsibility to uphold the Union against the secessionist wishes of the Confederate States.

Federalism was redefined by the two world wars and the emergence of the U.S. as the dominant world power in the second half of the twentieth century. These events had an impact on the ability of the federal government, and of the executive in particular, to exercise governmental authority. In this period the powers of the presidency grew substantially.

Structure

The United States is a federal constitutional republic which consists of 50 States, one federal district (Washington DC), one incorporated territory (Palmyra Atoll), and a number of inhabited and uninhabited territories. The President of the United States is both the Head of State and Head of the Government. The president is head of the executive branch, which is independent of the legislature. Legislative power is vested in the bicameral Congress, which is composed of the Senate (the upper house) and the House of Representatives (the lower house). The judiciary consists of the Supreme Court and the lower federal courts, with their role to interpret the U.S. Constitution, federal laws, and regulations, and to resolve disputes between the executive and legislative branches.

State governments also have significant authority in their respective states. Individual states have their own constitutions and the right to make laws in specific areas where legislative power is not the prerogative of the federal government, unless the power to do so is denied by the Constitution. This includes laws in areas such as education, contract law, and most criminal law. State governments, like the federal government, have executive, legislative, and judicial branches. Executive power is exercised by popularly elected governors who typically serve four-year terms (although in some states two years). Every state also possesses its own legislature, all of which are bicameral with the exception of Nebraska’s, which is unicameral.

The Constitution of the United States has been amended 27 times since 1789, and its federal system has been duplicated by other countries around the world. The Constitution, however, has remained a subject of contestation, particularly the distribution of powers between Washington and the states. A significant area of controversy is the growing role of the federal level of government in security since the September 11, 2001, attacks. Other pertinent issues which act as pressure points in the relationship between the federal and state governments in the United States include gun control measures, health care spending, education standards, and the debate surrounding the legalization of cannabis.

About Us

The Forum is an international organization that develops and shares comparative expertise on the practice of federal and decentralized governance through a global network.

Contact Us

Address:
75 Albert Street, Suite 411 Ottawa, ON K1P 5E7

Phone: +1 613-244-3360

Fax: +1 613-244-3372

Email: forum@forumfed.org

Website: forumfed.