议会任命还是普选?打破澳大利亚“威斯敏斯特共和国”模式的僵局

IF 0.6 Q2 LAW Public Law Review Pub Date : 2018-06-30 DOI:10.2139/SSRN.3292563
M. Duffy, S. Perryman, Anthony Cianflone
{"title":"议会任命还是普选?打破澳大利亚“威斯敏斯特共和国”模式的僵局","authors":"M. Duffy, S. Perryman, Anthony Cianflone","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3292563","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The question of creating an Australian head of state is a symbolic, constitutional and governance issue that remains unresolved. The lesson of the 1999 referendum is that for the current constitutional arrangements to be modified, there will need to be some consensus on a model. Yet at present the movement is deadlocked between a direct election model and a parliamentary appointment model with substantively different implications. There is therefore a great challenge to create a model that satisfies both the desire for popular electoral input and the desire to retain an essentially ceremonial and politically neutral non-executive head of state. After reviewing extant models (including relevant overseas models) and historical and conceptual issues, the problems of a full popular vote are discussed. The article then responds by introducing new concepts to the debate. These are: (1) “Tri-partisan Endorsement” (or “Three-way Support”) being a three party endorsement of a single candidate to face the voters along with any other nominees in an open popular election; (2) “Fifty-Fifty” being a method for appointment of an Australian head of state which involves aggregating the results of a parliamentary and a popular vote. The first seeks to achieve a politically neutral candidate while the second seeks to moderate the parliamentary vote for such head of state with a popular vote and vice-versa. The two concepts are separate but might also be utilised in combination in a single model. Finally, the article proposes a partial response to the unresolved “1975” dilemma through “Concurrent Expiration” where a head of state who removes a Prime Minister against the will of the House of Representatives will see the former’s own tenure expire 75 days after the holding of the ensuing election (subject to possible re-election). The article concludes that such concepts offer hope for the development of a judicious consensus model capable of achieving the support of the Australian people at a referendum.","PeriodicalId":43092,"journal":{"name":"Public Law Review","volume":"29 1","pages":"147-172"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2018-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Parliamentary Appointment or Popular Election? Breaking the Impasse on Models for an Australian 'Westminster Republic'\",\"authors\":\"M. Duffy, S. Perryman, Anthony Cianflone\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.3292563\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The question of creating an Australian head of state is a symbolic, constitutional and governance issue that remains unresolved. The lesson of the 1999 referendum is that for the current constitutional arrangements to be modified, there will need to be some consensus on a model. Yet at present the movement is deadlocked between a direct election model and a parliamentary appointment model with substantively different implications. There is therefore a great challenge to create a model that satisfies both the desire for popular electoral input and the desire to retain an essentially ceremonial and politically neutral non-executive head of state. After reviewing extant models (including relevant overseas models) and historical and conceptual issues, the problems of a full popular vote are discussed. The article then responds by introducing new concepts to the debate. These are: (1) “Tri-partisan Endorsement” (or “Three-way Support”) being a three party endorsement of a single candidate to face the voters along with any other nominees in an open popular election; (2) “Fifty-Fifty” being a method for appointment of an Australian head of state which involves aggregating the results of a parliamentary and a popular vote. The first seeks to achieve a politically neutral candidate while the second seeks to moderate the parliamentary vote for such head of state with a popular vote and vice-versa. The two concepts are separate but might also be utilised in combination in a single model. Finally, the article proposes a partial response to the unresolved “1975” dilemma through “Concurrent Expiration” where a head of state who removes a Prime Minister against the will of the House of Representatives will see the former’s own tenure expire 75 days after the holding of the ensuing election (subject to possible re-election). The article concludes that such concepts offer hope for the development of a judicious consensus model capable of achieving the support of the Australian people at a referendum.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43092,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Public Law Review\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"147-172\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-06-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Public Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3292563\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3292563","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

设立澳大利亚国家元首的问题是一个象征性的、宪法性的、治理性的问题,至今仍未解决。1999年公投的教训是,要修改现行的宪法安排,就需要就一个模式达成某种共识。然而,目前的运动在直接选举模式和具有实质不同含义的议会任命模式之间陷入僵局。因此,创造一种既能满足民众选举投入的愿望,又能满足保留一个本质上是礼仪性的、政治上中立的非行政国家元首的愿望的模式,是一项巨大的挑战。在回顾了现有的模型(包括国外的相关模型)以及历史和概念问题之后,讨论了全民投票的问题。然后文章通过引入新的概念来回应争论。这些是:(1)“三党支持”(或“三方支持”)是指三党支持一名候选人在公开普选中与任何其他候选人一起面对选民;(2)“五十对五十”是澳大利亚国家元首的任命方法,涉及将议会和普选的结果加起来。第一种是寻求一个政治中立的候选人,而第二种是寻求通过普选来缓和议会对国家元首的投票,反之亦然。这两个概念是独立的,但也可以在单个模型中组合使用。最后,文章提出了通过“同时到期”对“1975”困境的部分回应,即国家元首违背众议院的意愿罢免总理,其任期将在随后举行的选举(可能会再次当选)后75天届满。文章的结论是,这些概念为发展一种明智的协商一致模式提供了希望,这种模式能够在公民投票中获得澳大利亚人民的支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Parliamentary Appointment or Popular Election? Breaking the Impasse on Models for an Australian 'Westminster Republic'
The question of creating an Australian head of state is a symbolic, constitutional and governance issue that remains unresolved. The lesson of the 1999 referendum is that for the current constitutional arrangements to be modified, there will need to be some consensus on a model. Yet at present the movement is deadlocked between a direct election model and a parliamentary appointment model with substantively different implications. There is therefore a great challenge to create a model that satisfies both the desire for popular electoral input and the desire to retain an essentially ceremonial and politically neutral non-executive head of state. After reviewing extant models (including relevant overseas models) and historical and conceptual issues, the problems of a full popular vote are discussed. The article then responds by introducing new concepts to the debate. These are: (1) “Tri-partisan Endorsement” (or “Three-way Support”) being a three party endorsement of a single candidate to face the voters along with any other nominees in an open popular election; (2) “Fifty-Fifty” being a method for appointment of an Australian head of state which involves aggregating the results of a parliamentary and a popular vote. The first seeks to achieve a politically neutral candidate while the second seeks to moderate the parliamentary vote for such head of state with a popular vote and vice-versa. The two concepts are separate but might also be utilised in combination in a single model. Finally, the article proposes a partial response to the unresolved “1975” dilemma through “Concurrent Expiration” where a head of state who removes a Prime Minister against the will of the House of Representatives will see the former’s own tenure expire 75 days after the holding of the ensuing election (subject to possible re-election). The article concludes that such concepts offer hope for the development of a judicious consensus model capable of achieving the support of the Australian people at a referendum.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Impairment and Limited State Immunity Parliamentary Appointment or Popular Election? Breaking the Impasse on Models for an Australian 'Westminster Republic' The Constitution of the Environmental Emergency Limited Leverage: Federal Remedies and Policing Reform The Voting Rights Ratchet: Rowe v. Electoral Commissioner
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1