Presidential Commission’s report recommends unicameral Parliament

0
 
The report of the Presidential Commission for Analysis of Political and Constitutional Regime considers the Romanian Parliament should be unicameral.
While backing this idea, the commission offered constitutional and political arguments.
 
"The unicameral solution is more suitable in the case of a unitary state, which has nothing to do with the federal ramification; in terms of costs, such a solution will allow us to reduce the number of MPs; the unicameral system would also hasten the process by which laws are passed, with such redundant procedures to be eliminated; the unicameral system is more suitable to the idea of a nation's unity.
 
A single nation leads to the idea of a single chamber of Parliament; in the context created by the generalization of the Constitutional Courts, with their control lately seeming more as a type of political censorship, which was initially set aside for the upper chambers," reads the aforementioned document.
 
Nevertheless, the authors of the report show that there are some arguments against the unicameral system too, such as the authoritarian tendencies of the political majority or the impossibility to avoid constitutional blockages.
 
"In the mirror one can imagine a few important arguments for rejecting the unicameral solution. Morphologically and intellectually, these are the motivations for maintaining a bicameral system; the unicameral system may be a point from where a political majority might try to assert itself as a tyrannical power; a single chamber can appear as inadequate when the intention is to represent in a more subtle manner political minorities or regional groups; the unicameral system does not guarantee the possibility to avoid constitutional blockages; a second reading in the upper chamber can be salutary, in the same manner in which the distribution of the responsibilities between the two chambers can be useful," the report of the commission reads.
 
The authors of the document concluded that, in case the unicameral solution is being considered for the future Constitution, cutting of the budget allocation should not be taken as the first argument, as the existence of a balanced constitutional construction should be considered as having much more importance.
 
"Besides all these shades of meaning, the one thing which should count most, in case the unicameral system is being considered as an option, is not the economic aspect (cut in the budget allocation), but the imperative of a more balanced and intelligent constitutional design," reads the document.
Citește și

Spune ce crezi

Adresa de email nu va fi publicata

Acest sit folosește Akismet pentru a reduce spamul. Află cum sunt procesate datele comentariilor tale.