Class Notes (808,091)
Canada (493,058)
POLS 110 (385)

POLS 110B Lecture Notes.docx

28 Pages
Unlock Document

Queen's University
Political Studies
POLS 110
Kim Richard Nossal

POLSth10B January 10 , 2013 Thinking About Politics  The monadic definition o Focusing on one primary element as the most important to understanding a phenomena  Politics as a totalized activity o How do you think about a political realm that is separate from, and different from other realms o 2-3 million Cambodians were killed/died because of removal in order to establish a new regime  Politics is about… o Government o Law o Power and its exercise, control o The pursuit of good (or the good life) o The distribution of good things  Lasswell‟s “Who gets what, when, and how” (and why) o The maintenance of order o A social process o Ideas and issues o The resolution of conflict between people  Unmentioned possibilities o Practices that once invented, can never be un-invented  Ex. Slavery o Politics is about the willingness of some to dominate and enslave others o Politics is about why some people hate others enough to kill them o Politics is about why some people are at war with each other and why other people are at peace o Politics is about why some live in luxury and privilege while others must endure poverty and disparity  Attractions of a monadic definition: o The comfort of a pithy definition (one word) o Simplify complex phenomena  Problems of a monadic definition o Complexity o Interconnectedness  Beyond a monadic definition o What is politics about?  Political ideas  What drives individuals to engage in war? o Especially to enjoy it  The community and its affairs  Things that are the business of the community o How do we know when it‟s public over when it‟s private?  No impact on others – private  Impact on others – public  Doesn‟t always cut it POLS 110B January 14 , 2013 Thinking About the Political  Beyond a monadic definition o Multidimensional o Heuristic framework  What is Politics About o Political ideas o The community and its affairs o Interests and their intersection  Having the capacity to define one‟ own interests  Interests are multidimensional, incompatible and inconsistent  Harmony  Complementarity  Conflict  Simply no intersect at all (discrete interests) o Power to influence, authority o Capacity to ensure that one‟s own interests prevail over the interests of others – Luke‟s view on power o Influence effective in complimentary interests o Coercion is the conflict of interests  Politics is the exercise and possession of power, influence and authority over political communities o What is important is what it is exercised over  Rules o Way of organizing, regulating, or doing things o Rules of the game that allow us to see how things are done  Governance: Choosing the rules  Multidimensional definitions o This is useful because it focuses on key elements but it also allows us to analyze the interconnections between the various elements  How communities are shaped  By rules and ideas  Rules reflect interests o Specifically of some and not others POLS 110B January 17 , 2013 Beyond a Monadic Definition  Multidimensional definition encourages analysis of interconnections: o Community is shaped by ideas and rules o Rules reflect interests o Interests and power  What is Governance? o Making authoritative choices for and about the community o Regulating the public affairs of the community o Ensuring that decisions are implemented by exercising power, influence and authority  By legitimate authorities  First nations – gap between decisions made by the state and how they are actually implemented  Police have openly refused to implement judicial orders  Toronto judge criticized police and government for passing orders that are not enforced  Huge gap between all governmental levels and implementation of rules and sanctions o Generic process of regulation, decision-making, and enforcing the rules of “the game” o It is a process every human society, regardless of place or time, participates in  Governance and Government o Governance: the process of decision-making, regulation and enforcement o Government: the institutions o Does one need a government to engage in governance?  Societies Governed by a State? o Characteristics of governance in societies, having a state and governmental institutions  “Continuous organization of official functions bound by rules” –Weber  Organizations/institution last longer than the leaders who govern them for a period of time  State us highly institutionalized  Schools  Corporations  Hospitals  All of these institutions are highly rule bound  Rules codified  Designed to achieve certain goals  Monopoly on the use of force o Individuals are not allowed to legitimately use force for the pursuit of their own interests  Texas previously has laws that allowed for justifiable homicide  Ex. Adulterating wife  Still called into account for their actions to demonstrate that it is in fact justified by the law  Classes: division of labour o Whether based on race, wealth, caste, position  We cannot find a state without classes  Separation of governors from governed o Ruling class sustained by a surplus produced by the community  Sustained by the production of those they are governing  Ex. Modern Canadian State POLS 110B January 21 , 2013 Sovereignty and Political Authority  The state and its functions  Comparing societies: o Stateless society:  No continuous organization  No institutionalization  No codification of rules  No monopoly on use of force  No classes: classless society  No separation of governors from governed  No ruling class sustained by a surplus produced by the community o Societies governed by the state:  Highly organized  Highly institutionalized  Rules are codified  Monopoly on use of force  One must use state force to defend themself against others  Classes: division of labour  Separation of governors and governed  Ruling class sustained by a surplus produced by the community o Few humans are able to live out their lives without intrusion by the state o Homo sapiens have governed themselves, without a state, for 95% of their existence o The modern state is young – it bears no resemblance to the state in antiquity  The State o We want to look at:  The functions of the state  Importance of supreme political authority  Origins and nature of sovereignty  Importance of sovereignty of the state  Universal functions of the state o Define the community  Every state devotes attention to the drawing of boundaries  Both territorial and human o Defining “us” and “them”  Every state defines who its citizens are o Conduct relations with the other(s)  Normally political communities have many other countries on their borders  Do not think of the political world as or to Canadians  Not just the absence of state, but there was a fundamental inability to resist domination, subordination, and elimination by the Europeans o Maintaining internal order  Wanting to maintain over time a particular pattern of order o Engage in economic redistribution (product, labour, capital, goods, income, etc.)  Without it, ruling class would not exist unless they produced for everyone o Establish and maintain community infrastructure (“public works”)  Part of the public sphere  Ex. Pyramids of Egypt  Cathedrals of feudal Europe o Sometimes it really is for the community o It is often for the interest of the governing class th POLSst10B January 28 and 31 , 2013 Sovereignty and Political Authority  The nature of sovereignty  Dividing sovereignty: federalism o Not as understandable as when you think about the assumptions of sovereignty  What sustained the feudal order? o Religious o Economic o Military  Europeans had not discovered a way to destroy local castles that were so important in sustaining the feudal system. They provided lords to defy efforts others willed on them  Until a certain period, Europeans had not figured out how to combat the mounted knight in armour o Cosmological  The way in which Europeans conceived of the world  We must recognize that the fundamental ignorance they had, was reasoning for how they organized themselves politically  They lacked knowledge of the world around them, and how it worked o When compared to other cosmological existences (Muslim, China) we have to recognize that the Europeans were severely uninformed o Not created from humankind, but flowed downwards from God o The Church sought to maintain a monopoly on literacy  Only a minority could read, write, etc.  Collapse of feudalism o Changes  Religious changes  The growing power, wealth, and hegemony of the church o This breeds corruption and a fundamental discomfort with the idea that the church of Christ should look like the Vatican did  Economic changes  The growth of trade beyond Northern Europe led to the growth of cities, and urban populations. o This freed large numbers of people up from their feudal states  They are not longer relentlessly tied to the land  Military changes  The invention of the steel crossbow solved the problem of mounted, armoured knights  Importation of the Chinese invention – gunpowder  The perfection of artillery that was capable of piercing previously impregnable castles.  Cosmological/intellectual/ideational changes  Renaissance was a rediscovery of Greek and Roman mythology, a rediscovery of a much more correct way of looking at the world o Effect on how political authority was organized  A decreasing belief in the power of the pope  Which resulted in a loss of coercive power for the pope o Changes were interrelated, interacting with one another to produce, over time, a radical shift in beliefs and practices  Origins of the “modern” state o Changes in political authority  Those protesting the Catholic church and the church trying to re-impose its hegemony  Reformation/Counter-Reformation  Wars of Religion  Swept across Europe, featured huge number of deaths all in the name of Jesus Christ o The willingness of Europeans to slaughter one another over the “correct” path to the Devine  “Domestic” was in the 16 century o Protestants vs. Caththics  “International” wars in the 17 century o These wars of religion essentially revolved around one key question  Which brand of Christianity was to be dominant within a particular territory  How do you resolve the problem of having a Catholic king in a territory predominantly made up of Protestants  The idea of sovereignty o Jean Bodin (1530-1596) and the notion of sovereignty (1576):  He stumbled on what was, in essence, the solution to overlapping relations of authority in Europe  Maestas est summa in cives ac subditos legisbusque solute potestas  Majesty is supreme and legally unbound power over citizens and subject peoples  The struggle for sovereignty o Thirty Years War: (May 1618- October 1648)  Defenestration of Prague, Implementation of Catholic governors  Triggered a series of wars that spread throughout Europe and lasted 30 years  Ended in the Peace of Westphalia  Took place before Bodin‟s idea was able to be put in place  Sovereignty institutionalized o Peace of Westphalia  Recognized “sovereignty” of princes in Holy Roman Empire  Recognized “sovereignty” for Switzerland and United Province of the Netherland  Institutionalized the idea that rulers should be supreme in their own domain  Severed overlapping relationships of political authority o Especially those that emanated from the church in Rome  Sovereignty: a dominant idea o Sovereignty as the organizing principle of world politics  To see the dominance in action, you only have to reflect on how few people would want to politics recognized in a non-sovereign way o Sovereignty involves the right to exercise supreme political authority within one‟s territory  There is only one sovereign that is empowered to make decisions for that community  No other authority has any right to intrude o Sovereignty also involves the recognition of that right  It does not exist without recognition  It is truly inter-subjective  It only exists when other sovereigns agree  Ex. Taiwan lacks sovereignty  vast majority of others in the international system see Taiwan as part of China o The PRC may claim sovereignty, but do not have that power over Taiwan  One does not have sovereignty unless it is recognized by others  The theory of sovereignty o Supreme political authority in a given territory is indivisible o All people within that territory are obligated to obey that one supreme political authority o All other sovereigns will recognize the claim to sovereignty and respect it  They may not agree with it, or think that such obedience is in their interest, but if it is to work you cannot have individuals who are loyal to authorities outside of that territory  Ex. Catholics listening to the authority of the pope and disobey the sovereign rule of their territory  Other sovereigns will not interfere in your internal affairs  This does not mean that they will not try to get you to bend to their will  Sovereignty does not give you the right to autonomy; it does not give you the right to make decisions just as you please.  Other sovereigns will not try to appeal to some of the subjects who are under your sovereignty  The reality of sovereignty o Not all claims to sovereignty are respected  Contested territory  Quarrels over who owns what, lead to struggles over what is sovereign and what is not  Extraterritoriality  Desire of one sovereign to have its authority extend beyond its borders into the territory of other sovereigns  US government insists that its laws extend to American citizens outside of American borders  Imperial-era concessions in China o Instead created areas in china that were not subject to Chinese law and were instead subject to the laws of the country controlling the area.  US Trading with the Enemy Act  Canada‟s Bill C27, 1997 o Sex tourism, places like Thailand, children involved  If a Canadian does this outside of Canada, they are guilty of the same offenses as they would be if they did it in Canada  Supreme political authority in a given territory is divisible o The question is: How?  By governmental function?  War and defense  Foreign relations  Domestic security  Justice  Taxation  Finance  Industry  Agriculture  Education  Health  Immigration  Social welfare  Arts and culture o Why not?  Expensive  By territory?  Why not just divide a country up into smaller geographic units, and give each its own government  Levels of government o Canada o Province of Ontario o Frontenac County o City of Kingston o The segmentation of the state:  National  Provincial  Municipal  School board o To segment the state is not necessarily to divide supreme political authority o We want to look at those systems where the state is not only segmented but where supreme political authority is actually divided  In Canada there are numerous sovereigns that operate within the same state, but not in a messy way – like the Europeans in the feudal period o Systems where the state is segmented but supreme political authority is not divided:  Unitary system  Confederal systems  Various segments have authority, create central government, that operates at the will of the various segments  segments can dissolve the central government. They are not immune to dissolution o Dividing sovereignty: federalism  Federations: supreme political authority divided by area and “power” POLS 110B February 4 , 2013 Federalism  Dividing sovereignty: federalism o Unity and confederal systems: no division of supreme authority  Unitary  central government maintains supreme authority  Confederal  various units maintain supreme authority o Federations: supreme political authority divided by area and “power” o Understanding federalism via the assumptions and characteristics of the federal scheme  How to tae supreme authority and not have everything collapse  Assumptions of federalism o #1 Supreme political authority divided by both territory and function (“power”)  The name of the parts does not matter; the essence remains the same  The division of powers doesn‟t always have to be clean and unambiguous  Concurrent powers  powers given to both levels of government  You want to identify powers where there is no ambiguity o This is the ONLY way to define it  Combination of territory and power o #2 Each level must be autonomous: i.e., immune from elimination  Should not fear a loss of control o #3 Boundaries inviolable  They must be unchangeable unless there is consent o #4 Necessity of base line of equality  Always composed of units that are unequal – in size, population, and wealth  PEI 130,000 and Ontario 13,000,000  USA  California Vs. Rhode Island  You need some way to ensure that all of the parts of the federation are able, in an equal way, to participate in the governance of the political community as a whole  There needs to be collective sharing (usually created by institutions in the whole) in rule-making by unequal units o USA two senators per state, regardless of size/population/wealth o #5 Each level must be able to act directly on the citizen  If the central government cannot act on the citizen (tax, enforce regulation and laws), the federation will have serious problems o #6 Necessity of two sets of courts  Need federal courts to adjudicate federal law  Need provincial/state level to adjudicate non-federal law  You need an institution to adjudicate issues between levels of government. This usually falls to the highest court (In Canada this is the Supreme Court) o #7 Necessity of a procedure for amending the constitution  Time requires that the original set of understandings and rules will likely need to be altered  Constitutions of federations need to be extremely difficult to change  While you need to be able to make alterations, those alterations cannot be easily come by o #8 Citizens must be allowed to express loyalty (politically) to more than one level of government  Ex. Texas  they briefly existed as a sovereign state  This assumption of federalism is that it is quite appropriate to be both a loyal Texan and a loyal American  To allow that loyal is to exist in an essentially ambiguous state  Quebecois is the same way. You do not press if he/she is a loyal Canadian. It is okay for it to be ambiguous o #9 Secession to be made difficult in theory, impossible in practice  You do not want a federation where it is easy for one part of the federation to leave  You can create in the constitution the possibility for parts to leave o 1944 USSR constitution, any state could leave in theory but it was impossible in practice  Would have been killed during Stalinist period for trying to leave  Dissolution, Expulsion, Secession o Dissolution  Federation of the West Indies (1958-1962)  The idea was to create a federation of the British held islands in the Caribbean  United States (1777-1790)  When Americans realized that their new political experiment was not working, they dissolved entirely and started again  Czechoslovakia (1993)  A political community that had been created after WWI out of the ruins of Austria-Hungary. o Lasted from 1919-End of Soviet Era  Once Empire distinguished itself they decided they no longer wished to exist in a single political community o This lead to velvet dissolution o Czech Republic and Slovakia were created o Expulsion  Malaysia was born as a federation out of the existing colonies  Malaysia did not function well o Especially Singapore  In 1965 the rest of the federation voted to expel Singapore  It is not a separate, sovereign state o Secession  Peaceful secession?  Where one part of the federation wants to leave, and the rest of the federation approves o They divorce their assets and rights  Ex. Norway (from Sweden 1905) o Effectively, the process took place peacefully by separation of language, and peninsula  Ex. Montenegro (from State Union Serbia and Montenegro, 2006) o All that was left after the 1990s was Montenegro and Serbia (Yugoslavia was separated, declared independent or seized by NATO) o Kosovo was bombed, claimed, and eventually declared independent  Montenegro tired of being in the union and sought to secede  which they did in 2006  All non-peaceful secessions resulted in war:  Confederate States of America (from the US, 1861) o Southern states feared that their well-being, interests and rights were being suppressed by the CSA through the removal of the right to slavery o The number of deaths and the nature of the war (first industrialized war) foreshadowed what was to come.  Biafra (from Nigeria, 1967) o Finally tiring of what they argued what was exploitation and dominance by others in the federation  had caused them to attempt to withdraw o Government used force and imposed on Biafra a brutal campaign against them (imposed a famine). It was so grim that after three years of war, they surrendered and were absorbed into the Nigerian federation  Bangladesh (from Pakistan, 1971) o Before 1971 it was the western wing, and the eastern wing (called east Pakistan). The only thing they had in common was their religion (Muslim). o East Pakistanis were the minority and suffered maltreatment at the hands of the West Pakistan. o In 1971, East Pakistan sought to separate. The West Pakistan government reacted with supreme brutality – vast number of East Pakistanis fled into India  India declared war on Pakistan and essentially liberated East Pakistan turning them into Bangladesh  Slovenia, Croatia (from Yugoslavia, 1991) o The Yugoslavian government dominated by Serbians reacted forcefully o After 10 days of war, they decided to let the Slovenians go. This was the creation of Slovenia o Croatia was forced to fight a brutal war, including racial cleansing. Only after the Serbs were pushed out was Croatia able to become independent.  Bosnia  the Serb forces eager to demonstrate to the world the impotence of the United Nations, they took a city declared as safe, surrounded it, took all of the women and children and shipped them over to the Muslim side of Bosnia. o Everyone over 16 was put on a bus. Boys between 8-16 were divided between the bus with the women and the bus with the men.  The men and the boys on the bus were killed by the Serbs (approx. 8000)  Chechnya (from Russia, 1991) o Sought to secede from Russia. The Russian forces retaliated with huge amounts of force. The other side matched this brutality. Separatists brought violence into the heartland, and into Moscow in particular. Many children died as a result.  The dynamic is such that when secession is triggered, you don‟t know if it will be peaceful, or not.  Canadians need to look at this problem; once the process is triggered, there is much doubt about how the politics will actually emerge.  Secession and War o Why does war so frequently accompany secession?  Assumptions of federalism o #10 The most important assumption: All players in the system must be committed to power- sharing  Federalism cannot work unless there is a willingness to share power  The case of Vietnam o For much of the Cold War period, North and South were divided. o When the northern regime prevailed and eliminated the American military in Saigon, there were two governments  The problem was the Northern government could not tolerate the existence of another government  They believed the best way to deal with this, was to kill them. o They liquidated the government without execution, but instead forced them into exile, or concentration/re-education camps  Many ended up in France  The case of China o There are different dialects in different parts of China. You would think China would be a good candidate for a federal system. There could be semi-sovereign governments of the various Chinese provinces. o You would assume that it would have 4 or 5 time zones, but it only has one. The Beijing time zone. POLS 110B Thursday, February 7 , 2013  Clarification: o Amending the Canadian constitution  From 1867 to 1982: it could only be amended by an amendment passed by the British Parliament  To get an amendment the Canadian government had to ask the British Parliament  This continued to happen after the Statue of Westminster, in 1931  Amending formula after 1982:  Monarch, composition of Supreme Court, amending formula: unanimous consent (Sec. 41) o House of commons, provinces, Senate, etc.  National matter: “7/50 rule” – consent of Parliament and legislatures of 2/3 of the provinces, provided that those provinces have 50 percent of the population (Sec. 38.1 ad Sec. 42.1) o The small provinces could not push a change o Provinces with larger populations (ON and QC) could not push a change on smaller provinces by themselves.  Matters that affect only the federal government: consent of Parliament (Sec. 44)  Matters that affect only one province: consent of that province‟s legislature and Parliament (Sec. 45) o Amendments after 1982:  Using the 7/50 formula; strengthening Aboriginal rights (1983)  Two under exclusive federal jurisdiction:  Appointment formula (1985) o Number of seats per province  Nunavut representation (1999) o Giving Nunavut a place in parliament  Seven affecting only one province o Church schools (Newfoundland and Quebec) o Language (French) (New Brunswick) o Fixed link (confederation Bridge) (Prince Edward Island) o Name (addition of Labrador) (Newfoundland and Labrador)  The current Canadian government is the most monarchist government in our lifetime. o The government did not introduce a constitutional amendment that says the queen is going to be succeeded in a different way than in our constitution.  In the Canadian law, the only rightful heir in Canadian law after William‟s death is their first-born son. POLS 110B February 11 , 2013  The attractions of federation o Allows for the consensual merging of independent units (e.g., colonies in America, Canada, Australia, India, Malaya)  The first major decolonization (13 American colonies) to the experimentations of the 1950s and 1960s in the creations in the West Indies  Provides you with the opportunity to take independent o Allows for the protection of local traditions (southern states and slavery; Quebec and language, law, religion)  Southerners were worried about what the northerners would do regarding slavery and slave ownership laws  Quebec was allowed to keep their traditions, religion, etc. at a time when England and the English were deeply anti-Catholic  In the 19 century Quebec was allowed to keep their law. Very different from civil law  Allowed to maintain their language o Allows for the maintenance of separate local/regional/national identity after the creation of a new “national” identity o Allows for governance to be more local and thus more sensitive to local conditions  When government is local it tend to be more personal, corruption happens more easily at the local level.  Allows local conditions and differences to manifest themselves.  Dividing sovereignty o Can supreme political authority be divided into functions?  Politics and ”rule functions” o Three rule functions  If you think of how they come to be, and are applied you an see that there are rules associated with these functions  Making the rules  Implementing the rules  Adjudicating the rules  Who makes, implements, and adjudicates the rules for a polity?  A historical view: absolutism and autocracy o We need to recognize these rule functions tended to be merged into single individuals in the political community o Absolutism: an individual always supported by allies in the political community able to exercise these aspects of rule for the political community  absolutism  Evolution of separating the functions, institutionalizing them into “branches”  Rule functions and branches Rule Function Branch Making Legislative Legislature Implementation Executive Executive Adjudication Judicial Judiciary o Rule making is a legislative function that takes place in the legislature o The implementation of the rules emerges into an executive function and the executive branch of government o The judicial function turns into the judiciary  You can take supreme political authority and divide it into or by these three different branches.  Dividing sovereignty o Dividing supreme political authority and these institutions  Contrast between parliamentary and presidential systems o Parliamentary systems today are the result of historical evolution that stretches over a millennium  In order to understand where we come from, we have to look deeply back into the millennium o Shaped by:  Foreign conquest  1066 radically shifted the existing political community. The Anglo-Saxon community that was over thrown by the Northerners was a deeply democratic community o Anglo-Saxon roots of constraining the power of the king  Moots (meeting) of the Anglo-Saxons (shire moots and folkmoots)  Gave members of the community the opportunity to shape policy  The witenagemot (moot of the witan, or counsellors) – 100 nobles acting as advisers to the king o Introduction of Norman feudalism into what is today Britain  The king owned everything and was responsible for all aspects of the community. The king owned all real property and split it off to those that would declare their loyalty to him.  Struggles against absolutist power  British/English polity  Magna Carta, 1215: feudal assembly o The gathering was an elite gathering and it put in place a feudal struggle that we would see emerge over the next 500 years  First parliament summoned by Edward I, 1295 o Designed simply to talk  Limiting monarch‟s rights to tax, beginning in 1322  Narrowing the Royal Prerogative o Limit all sorts of powers of the crown – in English practice the powers of the crown were named “the Royal prerogative” o Much of the transformation of England came in one century. o Case of Prohibitions, 1607  The king could not only act as King and implement the rules, but he could judge the rules as well. The court system took an important decision here and refused that claim to the king.  Only the courts have the right to adjudicate. o Case of Proclamations, 1611  The king by practice/habit would frequently make law by claim it to be so  The courts said the king could not simply make any law he wants  Civil war  English civil war 1642-1651  Charles I and relations with Parliament o Essentially led to the emergence of civil war  Eleven years‟ tranny, 1629-1640  Only called parliament together if the was a need for funds  Only parliament could approve the raising of taxes  During this period Charles sought to govern and to expend money not through parliament but rather through a host of other mechanisms to raise funds o This left many people at odds with the crown  Charles dissolved parliament (short parliament, 13 April – 5May 140 o Later that year reconvened (long parliament (1640-1648)  Roundheads vs. Cavaliers o Roundheads supported the use of parliament o Cavaliers supported the king and the royal prerogative  Execution of Charles I in 1649 o This did not end the situation  Commonwealth, 1649-1660 o Cromwell governed as lord protector for much of the 1650‟s, when he died he passed the job to his son who had no desire to do so.  Restoration of Charles II, 1660 o It was between the quarrels between Charles II and parliament that we saw the true nature. o Quarrels over religion  Conflict between James II and Parliament, 1685 and 1688  Birth of James‟s Catholic son, June 1688 o Brought fear that when James died Catholicism would be brought back to England.  Invasion by William III of orange, November, abdication of James o This process marks the end of the domination of parliament by the monarch and is termed the glorious revolution of 1688 because it marks a particular moment when the new protestant king and his protestant wife agrees to a range of measures that still fundamentally are reflected in how we organize ourselves today o Bill of rights 1689  English/British Parliamentary System o Origins of the structure of contemporary parliamentary governance  Privy council (the Crown‟s private council)  Until 1688: not intimately linked to the legislature  After 1688: the advisers to the Crown had to have the confidence of the House of Commons  Emergence of the practice of choosing as advisers a group likely to secure that support  Emergence of cabinet government that fuses supreme political authority, linking the executive and the legislature  Crown-in-Parliament  Part of the enactment is to involve the crown  The executive o The Crown  Executive authority lies with the Crown  All acts of state taken in the Crown‟s name  Criminal prosecution taken in the Crown‟s name (R. Vs. Smith)  Crown owns land, corporations, intellectual property (an inheritance from feudal times)  Government employees serve the Crown  Crown exercise “Royal Prerogative” (historic powers not eliminated by statue or limited by constitutional provisions)  “Dividing” the Crown o The Crown as “corporation sole” – an office occupied by one individual, and his or her successors – with clear succession rules – permanent institution o Elizabeth II has numerous corporations sole o Each Commonwealth “realm” that vests supreme political authority in the Crown  Her Majesty the Queen in Right of the United Kingdom  Queen in Right
More Less

Related notes for POLS 110

Log In


Don't have an account?

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.