| Legislature |
|---|
| Chambers |
| Parliament |
| Parliamentary procedure |
| Types |
|
| Legislatures by country |
Tricameralism is the practice of having threelegislative orparliamentary chambers. It is contrasted withunicameralism andbicameralism, which are both far more common.
No national government is currently organized along tricameral lines. The word could describe theAncien Régime era FrenchEstates-General, though similar semantic arguments are applied since it sometimes met in joint session. TheSouth African Parliament established under theapartheid regime's1983 constitution was tricameral, as was theChinese1947 Constitution andSimón Bolívar's model state. A common feature in these bodies, which also casts some doubt on the appropriateness of the name, is that in several cases one of the three legislatures is not principally concerned with legislating.
There are different varieties of tricameralism. A disputed type of tricameralism is one where there are two legislative bodies, elected or appointed separately, and a third consisting of all members of the two, meeting together. In cases where this is considered tricameralism, such as theManxTynwald, theIndonesianPeople's Consultative Assembly, and theIcelandicAlthing (from 1874 to 1991), there is generally an explicit, routine role for the unified house, which distinguishes it from bicameral systems where a joint sitting of the two bodies is used to resolve deadlocks or for special sessions, which is true in several parliaments including Australia, Switzerland and India. Arguments over whether tricameralism should be construed to include this arrangement or not are primarily semantic.
Simón Bolívar, theSouth American revolutionary leader, included a tricameral legislature as part of his proposals for a model government. Bolívar described the three houses as follows:
Bolívar intended his model government to function as aparliamentary system, and so the tricameral parliament was expected to govern through the active administration of the cabinet ministers who would be accountable to it. Bolívar was explicit in many of his writings, particularly in his Message to theCongress of Angostura on how his proposed system was meant to reflect the way the British parliamentary system works. His proposal for Censors was not for them to act as legislators but rather to act as an office similar to anOmbudsman. As such, some opinions differ on whether his system could truly be classified as a tricameral parliament, considering that the Censors were not true legislators, but seemed to represent a separate branch of government altogether.
Despite Bolívar's huge influence in South America, no country in the region employs his tricameral parliament. Early attempts to implement the model, such as inBolivia, were not successful, although the chaos of the period was likely a factor in this outcome. As a result of not adopting Bolívar's British-inspired parliamentary system, numerous celebrated political scientists like the lateJuan Linz and many others have observed that the decision of many Latin American countries to model their systems of government on thepresidential system of the United States has led to numerous examples of political instability and subsequent descent into dictatorship or chaos.
The1947 Constitution of theRepublic of China has three chambers of parliament that are elected. Governmental organs of the constitution follow the outline proposed bySun Yat-sen and supported by theKuomintang (Chinese Nationalist Party), while incorporating opinions of thefederalism supportingCommunist Party in the 1940s. Theseparation of powers was designed byCarsun Chang, a founding member of theChina Democratic League.
As the mechanism is significantly different from the Westerntrias politica, the grand justices has an interpretation which ruled that these three organs all bear characteristics equivalent to a "parliament".[1]
However, thegovernment of the Republic of China lost theChinese Civil War in 1949 and retreated toTaiwan. A set oftemporary provisions were passed by theNational Assembly to gather more powers to thePresident and limit the functions of the tricameral parliament. Members of the tricameral parliament elected inmainland China in 1947 and 1948 continued serving in Taiwan without reelection until 1991.
After a series of constitutional amendments in the 1990s in Taiwan, a new set of temporary and separateAdditional Articles of the Constitution changed theLegislative Yuan to aunicameral parliament, although the tricameral parliament still nominally exists. TheControl Yuan was separated as a branch of government when theNational Assembly wasentirely shut down in June 2005.
TheEuropean Union is sometimes considered tricameral, comprising theEuropean Parliament, theCouncil of the European Union, and theEuropean Commission.[2] The European Parliament and Council of the European Union are the EU's twolegislative bodies and amend and approve, or veto, the proposals of theEuropean Commission, which holds theright of initiative.[3][4][5]
Some historians view theFrench States-General as an example of a tricameral legislature. Thethree estates gradually evolved as an advisory group for theKing (including giving advice on legislation). The three estates were simply labeled First (clergy), Second (nobility), and Third (commoners).
There are two distinct problems with regarding the States-General as a tricameral legislature. The States-General never had formal lawmaking powers, although it sometimes had a major role in the King's legislative activity. In addition, the tripartite arrangement was inconsistently applied, in that they would deliberate separately or jointly at various times.
TheFrench Consulate (and laterFirst French Empire, when the lower two chambers had no power) had a tricameral legislature, consisting of:
Whether theSénat was part of legislature, however, is open to doubt, forSieyès (the main instigator of the Consulate's Constitution and later president of this Senate) described it as belonging to an altogether different power beyond the executive, legislative and judiciary: theconservative power. In effect,Napoléon made theSénat a political élite to back his power as Consul and later Emperor, while the other two chambers were bent into submission. In 1807, theTribunat was definitively abolished.
After theIcelandic Parliament was restored by royal decree in 1844, it operated unicamerally from 1845 to 1874 when it became principally bicameral with an additional third chamber, known asUnified Parliament. The third chamber consisted of the union of the other two and deliberated as a single body, which makes some scholars classify it as only a bicameral system. However, the third chamber did have its ownspeaker distinct from the speakers for the other two chambers:
The Icelandic Parliament followed the legislatures of Denmark and Sweden and became unicameral once more in 1991.
Following amendments to theConstitution of Indonesia in the late 1990s and early 2000s, which became effective in 2004, the parliament ofIndonesia has three institutions (of which one consists of the members of the other two), similar to Icelandic and Isle of Man tricameralism:
Like the Icelandic Unified Parliament, the Indonesian People's Consultative Assembly has its ownspeaker and deputy speakers distinct from those of the DPR and DPD.
Tricameral meeting arrangements are a growing trend inlabor unions where some members will always beworking on one of three shifts. Under such arrangements, each shift will have its own meeting, but the action of one meeting will have to be adopted by the other two.[6]
TheRoman Republic had three legislative assemblies that worked with theRoman Senate of thepatrician class. These include:
The Senate and the assemblies worked together to appoint magistrates, enact laws, and territorial holdings issues.[7]
In 1983,South Africa'sapartheid government put forward a constitution providing for a tricameral legislature. On 2 November, around seventy percent of the country's White minority voted in favour of the changes – Black, Coloured and Indian South Africans were not consulted.
The South African tricameral parliament consisted of threerace-based chambers:
Black South Africans, who made up a majority of the population, were considered citizens of thebantustans and received no representation.
The creation of the tricameral parliament was controversial on two fronts. On the one hand, many White conservatives disliked the idea of non-Whites participating in Parliament at all. The dispute was a factor in the creation of theConservative Party, a breakaway from the dominantNational Party. On the other hand, many Coloured and Indian people rejected the system as a sham, saying that the chambers reserved for them were powerless.
The tricameral parliament was not particularly strong. The 1983 constitution significantly weakened the powers of parliament and abolished the position of Prime Minister. Most authorities were transferred to theState President, including the power to appoint the Cabinet. This was seen by many as an attempt to limit the power of Coloureds and Indians – not only were the non-White houses less powerful than the White one, but parliament itself was subordinate to a State President who was White.
TheTynwald, the parliament of theIsle of Man, is sometimes considered tricameral, although that description is not universally accepted. It has two branches, theHouse of Keys and theLegislative Council as well as a third body, theTynwald Court, made up of the members from both branches, much like in the Icelandic and Indonesian systems.
Also like in the Icelandic and Indonesian systems, the classification of theTynwald Court as a third chamber in its own right is controversial. Because the Court has no members who are not also members of theHouse of Keys or of theLegislative Council, the Court's status as an independent body rather than a combined body can be dubious. However, the island's government does claim that the Tynwald is in fact tri-cameral.[8] The building itself which houses the Tynwald is literally "tri-cameral," containing three separate chambers for its sessions.
TheGeneral Synod of theChurch of England is sometimes described as tricameral. It is divided into theHouse of Bishops, theHouse of Clergy and theHouse of Laity.
As the Church of England is thestate church ofEngland, theParliament of the United Kingdom has given the General Synod power (subject to veto) to make laws concerning the Church.
In the fifteenth century,secular clergy ofeach diocese sent two proctors to theParliament of Ireland, who met separately from theHouse of Commons and theHouse of Lords. In 1537, their right to membership was revoked after they opposed theReformation in Ireland.[9][10]
The governing authority ofQueen's University at Kingston principally follows a bicameral structure, split primarily between a Board of Trustees and a Senate, each of which has exclusive authority over non-academic and academic matters. Such arrangement is also common in several other Canadian universities, such as theUniversity of Waterloo.
Queen's University additionally has a University Council with advisory and ceremonial functions, including appointing of the universityChancellor (a purely ceremonial role). Although the Council has no real power to govern the university, it has exclusive rights to determine its own composition and select its members, meaning it is not subordinate to the Board and/or Senate. The Council was made by theParliament of Canada, which is thus the only body that can also dissolve it.
The “socio-political communities” of theSocialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia – being Yugoslavia itself, the constituent “Socialist Republics”, the two “Socialist Autonomous Provinces” (Kosovo andVojvodina) and the “Communes” – as per the1974 Yugoslav Constitution, had three “chambers” of their legislative “assemblies”: a chamber of associated labour; a chamber of local communities/Communes; and a socio-political chamber.[11]
Yugoslavia itself, despite being a “socio-political community”, was exempt from this and had a traditional bicameral system more like other federal states.[12]
These were replaced by the republics when they broke from Yugoslavia duringits collapse and transitioned to a capitalist system.
