Политическая система государства (На англ. языке)
2. The main part:
a) a system of power — what is
b) the political system of Great
c) the comparison of British and
Ukrainian political systems.
The State System of any nation is not an
artificial creation of some genius or simply the embodiment of different
rational schemes. It is nothing else but a work of many centuries, a product of
a national spirit, a political mentality and the consciousness of people.
I have chosen the topic because of its
obvious importance. Ukraine is building a sovereign state and it is encounteing
a lot of problems. Ukraine is suffering an overall deep crisis, trying to set
herself free from the persistent inheritance of totalitarianism preying upon
economic, politic, national self-consciousness. There is no universally
efficient remedy to help the Ukrainian society out of this grave condition. The
process of recovery will be long and arduous. Moreover, the country’s eventual
deliverance from totalitarian inheritance and its harmonious entry into
civilized world community remain for that matter, hardly practicable at all,
unless political culture is humanized, and political education of such a kind
propagated that would help society overcome the backwardness, the pre-modernity
of prevailing visions of justice, democracy, law and order, and the
relationship of the individual and the state.
It is quite clear that in the process of
democracy formation a lot of problems connected with it will inevitably appear.
Many of them already exist. In this solution, a considered usage of foreign
experience can help the Ukrainian community to optimize the processes essential
for the transitional period from one political system to another, and not to
allow the social prevailing tensions to develop into a national civil crisis.
And it will also help to save time and resources.
The Main Part.
A system of power is a complex of
organically connected and bonded together governmental bodies, establishments
and persons given the highest authority, and also political parties and
organizations, directly having the power and putting it into life. The sources
of power in a democratically organized community are its people, and its
system. First of all, key figures within this structure should be under control
of the people. This system is the core of legal functioning and serves as the
foundation of state and public life. Its main parts are legislative and
If we want finally to live as normal people,
we should seriously think which system of power we subject to and how is it
possible to improve it, how to make it suitable for the interests of our people
and what can be taken from foreign, world experience. But one of the main
problems is that we are not the only ones, who don’t have a good system of
modern power. Humanity hasn’t yet worked out a suitable and ideal system. That
is why we should build our own power by considering all positive and negative
aspects of the world’s system and our one. But we should not forget that a
power works well only when its authority is clearly and definitely determined.
Let’s compare our system of
power with the British one to see whether it is competent enough and how well
organized it is.
The Political System Of England
The organs of goverment in the United
Kingdom of Great Britian are:
1) the legislature, which consists of the Queen in Parliament, and is the
supreme authority of the realm;
2) the executive, wich consist of:
a) the Cabinet and other ministers of the Crown, who are responsible for
initiating and directing national policy;
c) local authorities, who administer and manage many services at the local
d) statutory boards, which are responsible for the operation of particular
nationalized industries or public services;
e) “shadow cabinet” which is the directing and leading body of the
The most interesting and important aspect of
the British political system, its pecularity, lies in its division of powers.
It is common knowledge that Great Britain,
having the oldest Parliament in the world, has one of the most stable and
effective political regimes of our time. Its stability is mostly the result of
the division of powers, which, by the the way, is not the exeption from the
The main idea of this variant lies in the
following: the principle of the demarcation (division) is combined with a
principle of interaction. And its principle is fixed in the British system of
power not as something abstract, but institutionally. I mean a special center,
a linking section, which brings together the legislating and executing powers,
and at the same time is the center of making important political decisions.
Surely, it is the Cabinet and its leader which are at the head of the whole
executive system of the state.
The main 4 principles of division of powers
1) sovereignty of the Parliament, as the highest body of political
2) the leading role of the Cabinet and the government in the legislative
3) a strict Parliamentary and commitee control of the legislative branch;
4) a special role given to the State Machinery, which not only executes
the instructions, but also influences a political process.
So, as we see, the legislators provide the
execution of the laws and resolutions of the Parliament by controlling the
State machinery, and in its turn, the state machinery participates in the
legislative process, providing its preparatory stage (by doing a spade-work).
The Comparison Of Two Political Systems:
Ukrainian And British Ones.
1. The first distinction may seem to be
the form of rule:
Ukraine is a respublic. And Britain, as you
probably know, is considered to be a parliamentary monarchy.
The Queen is the personification of the U.K.
By law, she is the head of the executive branch, an integral part of the
legislature, the head of the judiciary, the commander-in-chief of all armed
forces of the Crown and the temporal head of the established Church of England.
But in practice, as a result of a long evolutionary process, these powers have
changed. Today, the queen acts only on the advice of her Ministers which she
cannot constitutionally ignore. In fact she reigns but she doesn’t rule.
However, the monarchy has a good deal more
power than is commonly supposed. There remain certain discretionary powers in
the hands of the monarch, known as the Royal Prerogative.
Ukrainian and the British Parliaments have at least four similar functions:
a) to work out legislation, including the creation of a budget;
b) to control the government;
d) to influence actively the people by acquainting them openly with the
facts, concerning the accepted desisions.
The difference lies in the electoral systems
and the rules for recalling the government.
But there is also one more remarkable
peculiarity of the Ukrainian Parliament: the political history of Ukraine does
not know any potent legislative bodies (we can hardly take into account the
experience of the Soviet Congress ).
3. Both Ukraine and Britain are
countries with the representative democracy (which means that the people
delegate power to the bodies, which act on their behalf).
is, that Britain has a parliamentary form of government, and Ukraine, in its
turn, has a so-called “semi-presidential” form. The main distinctions of this
forms are shown in the table, given below.
The British parliamentary form
The Ukrainian “semi-pesidential” form
1. The election solves two
On one hand, the forming of the Parliament. And on the other hand, the
creation of the Government and different coalitions.
1. The election solves just one
Either the problem of forming the Parliament or the creation of the
2. The Government is formed only
by the Parliament.
2. The Government is formed by
both the President and the Parliament.
3. The executive Power is separated.
3. The executive Power is not
4. Unlike Britain, Ukraine has different
bodies of legislative and executive power, and one body doesn’t interfere with
the activity of the other.
5. The negative features of the British
system may seem to be too much power in the hands of Prime Minister and rather
uncontrolled local government.
Having compared two political systems, I
have come to the conclusion that the form and the level of development of the
systems are influenced greatly by the history of the State. The second factor
is that of evaluationary progress, which usually improves the existing order
and makes it more democratic.
Having analysed two state systems, I have
noticed the tendency towards the reinforcement of the executive power and a
lessening of the legislative power. But still, parliament remains an integral
institution in a democratic society.
I have studied the British political
experience concerning the division of powers and I can say that with all its
originality, the British System is not something unique or exceptional. This
system should be taken as the foundation stone of the cooperation of two powers
in countries with a representative democracy.
The reason for the lasting discussion of
this problem in the Ukrainian Parliament lies not only in involving the
interests of powerful persons. Actually, it is the result of the “amateur”
level to understand this problem.
1. Основи держави і права України, 1993
2. M.Y.Mezey Comparative Legislatures, Durham, 1979
3. Политические исследования, Полис, 1992
4. П.О.Бех Англійська мова, Либідь, 1992
5. A book of Britain, Просвещение, 1977
6. Деловая жизнь // Правда, 1991
7. Entony Sempson Anatomy of Britain, 1992
8. Мировая экономика и международные отношения, Наука, 1993