Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'representatives'.
Real Representatives and False Representatives By Exegesisme The real representative is Germany, which I see from Germany Constitution. "Article 38 [Elections] (1) The deputies to the German House of Representatives [bundestag] are elected in general, direct, free, equal, and secret elections. They are representatives of the whole people, not bound by orders and instructions, and subject only to their conscience."(a) The false representative is in Canada, which I see from this website.(b ) "Whether MPs should act as delegates or trustees, both views of representation are constrained by another reality of Canada's parliamentary tradition: party politics and discipline. Most MPs are members of a political party and, as such, are required to follow the wishes of their party when deliberating and acting in the House. In Canada party discipline is much more acute than in other western democracies. In the United States and the United Kingdom, for example, representatives enjoy considerably more freedom from their parties. Canadian MPs, however, are expected to follow the direction set by their parties' leadership and caucus — even when that direction is in opposition to their views or the demands of their constituents." My comment: Canada representatives should be collectively shameful to work in such an upset system and without do any useful job to change this system, as comparing to the representatives in Germany. They even can not keep their conscience as they vote in this system. The behaviors of the representatives and their parties in the House of Commons are unconstitutional, their parties even force them lose their constitutional fundamental freedom of conscience, and they even do not dare to stand up to protect their own constitutional fundamental freedom of conscience in the House of Commons. "2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: (a) freedom of conscience and religion; (b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication; (c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and (d) freedom of association."(c ) And farther more, Our Canada Constitution should be shameful, for even nowadays there still is not clear written constitutional chapter for the executive branch to use the executive power. "Canada’s Constitution is also based upon numerous unwritten conventions. These are rules and norms that have never been formally written in a constitutional document, but are regularly observed nevertheless. Many of these unwritten rules have been inherited from Britain (with some modification), while others are unique to the Canadian constitutional context. Important examples include the predominant role and influence played by the Prime Minister of Canada (in Cabinet and in the executive branch in general)."(d ) Through these unwritten conventions, the executive branch has been stealing the power of the legislative branch and has been depriving the clear written constitutional fundamental freedom of conscience of those MPs. My conclusion: the executive branch has not enough obvious written constitutional resource to practice its leadership, through the unwritten conventions "secretly" steals the power of the legislative branch, and cause heavily potential conflicts with other obvious written constitutional contents. The constitutional inner conflicts should be fixed as soon as possible. Reference: (a) http://www.servat.unibe.ch/icl/gm00000_.html (b ) http://mapleleafweb.com/features/house-commons-introduction-canadas-premier-legislative-body (c ) http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/const/page-15.html#h-39 (d ) http://www.mapleleafweb.com/features/canadian-constitution-introduction-canada-s-constitutional-framework