A review on responsibilities and authorities of the world's monitoring institutions
There are legal institutions to monitor the elections worldwide. The Gaurdian Council in Iran, Constitutional Law Court in Turkey, Constitutional Law Council in France, the Senate in USA, House of Commons in United Kingdom, all are responsible for monitoring the election.
Irdc: There are legal institutions to monitor the elections worldwide. The Gaurdian Council in Iran, Constitutional Law Court in Turkey, Constitutional Law Council in France, the Senate in USA, House of Commons in United Kingdom, all are responsible for monitoring the election.
1. United States of America
The legal authorities control and monitor the election. It was first represented by a supreme court judge, Marshal Reyno. Due to an interpretation from paragraph 2 of Article 6 of the constitutional law, 9 supreme court judges are responsible for reconciling the enactments of the congress with constitutional law. The judges are chosen by the president and will be in charge permenantly, unless they do something wrong.
Monitoring the laws is a political, not judicial process in France. There is an organization called "the Constitutional Law Council" since 1955. Article 61 of the constitutional law says that the fundamental laws and internal lawbooks must be represented to the council, to be reconcilied with the constitutional law. Their decisions are imperative and not objectionable. The negotiations are not explained to public and only the verdict is announced. The council is made of two groups. The first group is chosen by the president, the president of the senate and the president of the national parliament for 9 years. The second group is formed by all of the former presidents permenantly.
Just like US, the monitoring is done by the judicial method. The Constitutional Law Court was established in 1947. According to the principles 134-137 of the constitutional law, the court is responsible for monitoring reconciling the laws with the constitutional law. The principle 136 says that if the court announced that a law or a document is against the constitution, then it will lose credit in a day.
According to the principle 135, the court is formed of 15 judges who will serve for nine years, and the duration is not extendable. Other responsibilities of the court are the interpretation of the constitution, monitoring the elections and take care of the charges of the president.
In Germany they also use a judicial method, represented by the Constitutional Law Court. It was established in 1951 based on the model of famous austrian jurist Hans Kelsen. It has 16 members, 8 chosen by Federal National Parliament and 8 chosen by the Parliament of States for 12 years, not extendable. The responsibilities of the court, according to the articles 92-94, are: reconciling the laws with constitution, despute resolution among the fundamental organizations, investigation of the election results, banning the political psrties against the constitution. The decisions are imperative and not objectionable.
The Constitutional Law Court is responsible for monitoring the laws and reconciling them with the constitution. The system is based on the Hans Kelsen model. 14 judges, chosen by federal government, national parliament or federal parliament, are in office for an unlimited time, and they only can be fired by the court itself. Protecting the constitution, reviewing the laws, monitoring the election processes and taking care of the government charges are among the responsibilities of the court.
The Constitutional Law Court are imperative and not objectionable in Turkey, based on the articles 146-157 of the constitutional law.
It has got 146 members, 14 chosen by the president and 3 chosen by the great parliament. Their time in office is 12 years, and expandability is not mentioned in the law. Monitoring the laws, interpretation of the constitution, banning the political parties and monitoring the decisions of the parliament is performed by this court.
Constitutional Law Court of Belguim, formed of 12 judges speaking French and Dutch, chosen by the king (out of a list suggested by the Senate and the Parliament), was established in 1980. The responsibilities of the court are monitoring the accordance of the laws with constitution, despute resolution and etc. Their time in office is unlimited but they can ask for retirement at the age of 70.
Constitutional Law Council, was established in 1989. 10 members of it, half chosen by the Parliament and half by the board of ministers, serve for 6 years, unexpandable. They monitor the laws, the process of elections, and the parliament. Their decisions are imperative and not objectionable according to the clause 51.
According to the principle 119 of the Russian onstitutional law, the Constitutional Law Court, since 1991, monitors the reconciling of the laws with constitution and also decides about the president in case of betrayal.
Suprem Federal Court, established in 2004, monitors reconciling the laws with constitution in Iraq. They use judicial method, just like many other countries. The president choses 9 judges permenantly and will only be fired in case of corruption. According to the principles 91-93 of constitution, they can also interpret the constitutional law and confirm the results of the decisions of the parliament. Their words are imperative and not objectionable.
11. Japon and South Korea
The Suprem Court, as the principle 81 says, is responsible for reconciling the laws with the constitution in Japon. Since 1947, 15 judges serve in the Supreme Court. The same process happens in South Korea since 1988, with 9 judges who have other authorities such as banning the political parties and interpellation of the administration.
There are two parliaments in Romania, as said in principle 25: Great National Assembly and People's Council. The first one decides on the choices of each member.
The Senate and the House of Commons are two branches of the Canadian parliament. The House of Commons has the authority to change or reform the constitution, and confirm or reject the members creditability.
Some members of the Supreme Court, chosen by luck, check out the credentials of the House of Commons and decides either accept or reject them. The Senate never objects their decisions.
The monitoring organization is not a rare thing in the body of an administration and it is common in many countries.