- Author:
Rafał Czachor
- E-mail:
rczachor@afm.edu.pl
- Institution:
Krakowska Akademia im. Andrzeja Frycza Modrzewskiego
- ORCID:
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5929-9719
- Year of publication:
2022
- Source:
Show
- Pages:
89-98
- DOI Address:
https://doi.org/10.15804/ppk.2022.04.07
- PDF:
ppk/68/ppk6807.pdf
Superpresidentialism as a System of Government
The classical typology distinguishes three models of sharing state power: parliamentarism, semi-presidentialism, and presidentialism. Distinctive features concern the position of main state organs and mutual relations between the legislature and executive bodies. The following paper argues in favor of enriching such classification by distinguishing superpresidentialism. It confirms that there is a group of political systems that do not fit traditional typology, combining some features of the semi-presidentialism and presidentialism. The core feature of the superpresidentialism is the domination of the President over the political system, its leading position in exercising power, control over the government, significant competences towards legislature and judiciary. The content of the superpresidentialism is discussed basing on the example of Central Asian republics.
- Author:
Rafał Czachor
- E-mail:
rczachor@afm.edu.pl
- Institution:
Krakowska Akademia im. Andrzeja Frycza Modrzewskiego
- ORCID:
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5929-9719
- Year of publication:
2023
- Source:
Show
- Pages:
77-88
- DOI Address:
https://doi.org/10.15804/ppk.2023.01.06
- PDF:
ppk/71/ppk7106.pdf
Constitutional Courts in the South Caucasus (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia)
The functioning of the constitutional courts is a European standard, widely accepted also in post-Soviet countries. The following paper looks at the basic legal provisions of the constitutional courts in Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia from a comparative perspective. While Armenia and Georgia undertake some democratic reforms, Azerbaijan remains a consolidated autocracy, what justifies such comparisons. It argues that despite being in line with European practice, there is no one model of a South Caucasus of the constitutional judiciary. The most important differences affect the nomination of judges, the scope of competencies, and the subjects eligible to submit the complaints. The study did not confirm the hypothesis that the model of the constitutional judiciary in Azerbaijan, as an authoritarian state, differs significantly from the more democratic models of Armenia and Georgia.