Constitutional Monarchy

[dimpy.handa]

Constitutional monarchy is a very effective political system. A hereditary Head of State acts as an important element of continuity within a democratic system.Are these Heads of State anachronisms who should be swept away in the spirit of true democracy, or do they have much to commend them at a time when the leaders of many new republics still struggle to find popular legitimacy?

 

[swatiraohnlu]

As originally conceived, a constitutional monarch was quite a powerful figure, head of the executive branch even though his or her power was limited by the constitution and the elected parliament. Some of the framers of the US Constitution may have conceived of the president as being an elected constitutional monarch, as the term was understood in their time, following Montesquieu's account of the separation of powers.

 

[dimpy.handa]

The levels and types of power and authority held by the Monarch vary from case to case, as does the nature and guarantees of the constitution, of course.

Most constitutional monarchies have a parliamentary system (such as Australia, Belgium, Cambodia, Canada, Denmark, Japan, Malaysia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Thailand, United Kingdom) in which the monarch is the head of state, but a directly or indirectly elected prime minister is head of government.

Although most contemporary constitutional monarchies are representative, constitutional democratic monarchies, they have co-existed with fascist and quasi-fascist constitutions (Italy, Spain) and with military dictatorships.