Principles of Political Science (405) PDF

Principles of Political Science (405) Page 1 of 53 INTRODUCTION DERIVATION OF THE TERM ‘POLITICS’: The term politics is derived from Greek word ‘Polis’ which means ‘city or state’. It was a form of State which the anci...

Principles of Political Science (405) Page 1 of 53 INTRODUCTION DERIVATION OF THE TERM ‘POLITICS’: The term politics is derived from Greek word ‘Polis’ which means ‘city or state’. It was a form of State which the ancient Greek had in their country. All the activities and affairs of the City-State were called by them as ‘politics’. This term was first coined by Greek political philosopher, the father of ancient politics, Aristotle. It was introduced almost 2500 years ago. WHAT IS POLITICAL SCIENCE? Political Science consists of two terms; politics and science. Politics means “the affairs of the cities”. It may be defined as “the process of making discussion that applies to members of a group. It refers to achieving and exercising positions of governance organized to control over a human community, particularly State”. Science means “systematic knowledge acquired by methodical observation and experiments, which provides us with uniform and valid laws and principles by means of which it is possible to control and to predict future movement and development of things or course of events”. So, political science is the branch of knowledge that deals with systematic study of the structure and behavior of the state and political institutions through scientific analysis. DEFINITIONS BY POLITICAL THINKERS: Following are the various definitions by political thinkers: Paul Janet: “Political science is that part of science which treats of the foundations of state and the principles of government”. H.J Laski: “The study of politics concerns itself with the life of man in relation to organized states”. Lasswell: “Political science is the study of shaping and sharing of power”. David Easton: “Political science is the study of the authoritative allocation of values for a society”. Aristotle: “Science of polis”. Concluding all the above definitions, it can be said that Political Science is the study about the state, its origin, its nature, its structure, and its functions and so on. DEFINITIONS OF POLITICAL SCIENCE: Political Science was defined in two different but interrelated ways namely: a. study of the political institutions, the State and Government; b. study of the phenomenon of power or force in human society. This kind of definition describes really two interrelated aspects of politics, viz., power and government. Power is the central organizing factor in politics, while government or State is the basic operational structure. In conclusion we may define that “Political Science is a systematic study of the State and Government, which is structured by power, making authoritative decisions and allocating resources and values for internal society, its development and external defense. Political science is the systematic study of government, politics and political behavior. It studies how a society governs itself at all levels and various ideas about how it should be AHSAN ALI (44/2k18) LLB (HONS) 2nd Year (3 r d semester ) GSLC, HYD. Principles of Political Science (405) Page 2 of 53 governed. It is a social science and studies about human but particularly in political behavior of human. It has very broad field which takes into account every state to individual matter. For instance, a crime takes place, police intervenes that is the part of government. Incase of blaze, fire brigades intervene. Similarly, incase of war military forces intervene. These all are the part of government, and everything which includes political concept falls into the domain of political science. HOW FAR POLITICAL SCIENCE IS A SCIENCE? We cannot deny the fact that political science is a science and gradually, with the development of science and technology it is become more systematic. Political thinkers have studied working of political institutions, collected a vast number of facts, and analyzed, coordinated and systemized their facts to arrive at certain conclusion and principles, which underlie political institution. To sum up, we can say that political science is a science but not an exact science like that of Physics, Mathematics or Chemistry, etc. Its approach to the subject, i.e., State, is scientific. The principle of political science may not be exact and universal but they are generally valid and useful in solving problems of the State and government. NATURE OF POLITICAL SCIENCE: Man, by nature, is a political animal. Human life is a choice between alternatives, and it depends upon what kind of choice is made. This is true both of the individual as well as of nation as a whole. For instance, a young boy leaves home, his past experience and guidance in his family, his school, his religion, and culture may be of help to him; but choice is his own, which will decide whether his life will be good and happy or not. The same is true of a nation as whole as they are guided by their past history, their religion and culture. This choice between two alternatives will determine their future development and progress. Wrong answer can lead to poverty, misery and even collapse of civilization, while right answer can lead to freedom, plenty and peace. Social choices of the people or nation are the essence of politics and political science is the study organizations or the fusion of individuals into social structure. It is the study of the process or the methods, by which choices are made. Finally, it is the study of the process or choices themselves (often called theories, philosophies or ideologies) and their consequences, whether they lead to golden ages or holocaust. In short, politics is the source of political science. Even political scientist observes politics closely and builds his science on the basis of observation, assimilation and conclusion. It is the intellectual leap from practical politics to theoretical, which gives rise to political science. SCOPE OF POLITICAL SCIENCE: The scope of political science extends to the study the past things that happened and to use it correctly in the present and to determine what will be its future. It has a wider scope which is classified into: Political theory, political institution, political dynamics and international relations. It studies of all those facts which are directly or indirectly connected with and revolve around the State. Thus it takes into account all the AHSAN ALI (44/2k18) LLB (HONS) 2nd Year (3 r d semester ) GSLC, HYD. Principles of Political Science (405) Page 3 of 53 matter relating to economics, religion, society, etc, if they in any way connected with the State. IMPORTANCE OF THE STUDY OF POLITICAL SCIENCE: Globalization has also increased the importance to study political science. The study of political science enables us to understand the nature of the crisis-ridden modern society and State and also the reason, so as to determine that how the political power can be exercised for human good, for maintenance of peace, harmony and progress. It imparts to us that government is not meant to be an agency of oppression or exploitation, but as a means for the improvement and betterment of social, economic, moral and physical conditions of everyone in the State and in the whole mankind. Moreover, political science imparts us knowledge and understanding democracy as the best form of State and to abhor dictatorship and other kinds of tyrannical States. Its knowledge will enable us a student to be a good citizen not merely in the sense of good voter, but also as a good man who knows his rights and fulfills his duties. We will get to know how government operates, what interests and forces are behind its policies and what results such policies are likely to produce. To sum up, ignorance of politics can be disastrous for the individual as also for the society and State of which he is a member. POWER OF THE STATE: Power is the tool and capacity, methods available to an individual or a group to control groups or individuals, to achieve desired goals or targets and is the ability to change the situations as per present requirement. STATE ORIGIN OF THE TERM STATE: The State, as a political organization, has existed in human history since very early times. The ancient Greeks called it “polls”, which means “city-State” or “politically organized community”. The Romans called city-State as “civitas” from which such English words as ‘city’, ‘citizen’, ‘civilization’, ‘civic’ are derived. The Romans also used another term, namely “Status re publican”. The Latin words ‘Status’ became “State” in Italian in the Middle Ages. In French it became “State”, in English “State”, in German “State”, and so on. MEANING OF THE TERM STATE: There is no universally accepted meaning of State. Idealist philosophers consider it as a moral personality and image of God on earth. Muslims regard that State is Kingship. Hindus mean it to be “Danda” means “Power”. To the Marxists, it is an instrument of class domination. Definitions of State: Definitions of the State are as many as the authors write about it. Some of the famous definitions are as under:- Aristotle is regarded as the father of ancient Political Science. He defined State as “a community of families and villages having for its end a perfect and self-sufficing life, by which we mean a happy and honourable life”. This definition imprints the time when State was no bigger than a small city-community. Holland, a modern jurist, defines the State as “a numerous assemblage of human beings, generally occupying a territory, amongst whom the will of the majority or of an ascertainable AHSAN ALI (44/2k18) LLB (HONS) 2nd Year (3 r d semester ) GSLC, HYD. Principles of Political Science (405) Page 4 of 53 class or persons is by the strength of such a majority or class made to prevail against any of their number who opposes it”. This definition proposed three characteristics of the State; a numerous assemblage of human beings, a definite territory and a dominant class or majority will. Woodrow Wilson defines it simply as “a people organized for law within a definite territory”. Garnar says, “The State as a concept of political science and public law, is a community of persons, more or less numerous, permanently occupying a definite portion of territory, independent of external control, and possessing an organized government to which the great body of inhabitants render habitual obedience”. Karl Marx, the founder of scientific socialism and communism, holds that “The State is the political organization of the ruling class which uses its power for the purpose of suppressing the resistance of its class enemies”. Modern Definition: Thus, we may say that “The State is a community of people, occupying a definite territory, organized under a government, which is supreme over all persons and associations within its territory and independent of all foreign control or power”. CONCEPT OF STATE TRADITIONAL CONCEPT OF STATE: The ancient Greeks were first people in world history who had systematically thought about the nature and the purpose of the State, which they called polis or City-State. Their concept of the State was ethical; they believed that it existed to realize good. According to Aristotle “the State came into being to make life possible; it continues to exist to make it good”. According to the Greeks, “the State was an ethical society; its aim was to make man’s life good and perfect. The good life could be attained by education equal and full participation in all activities of the State by its citizens. They considered the individual was an integral part of the State, which existed for the development of the self or personality of each citizen. Some of the moral principles or virtues which the Greeks upheld were justice, moderation (sophrosyne) pursuit of truth, honesty, duty to the State, patriotism, etc. Justice for the Greeks was not a legal dispensation but righteousness and it maintained the State. Moderation, which the Greeks called sophrosyne, meant not to go to extreme in all matters, personal or political. Pursuit of truth was sought on the basis of rational thinking or logic. Honesty was found in interpersonal behaviour. Duty towards one’s city-State was regarded by the ancient Greeks as a supreme virtue. It was the essence of patriotism. But it was also the source of the quarrels and wars among the various Greek city-States. MODERN CONCEPT OF STATE: Modern concept is State is absolutely different from that of the ancient times and of Medieval Europe. Briefly, it is secular, national and legal, as under:- 1. Secularism: Secular is a modern concept, which means that State has nothing to do with religion. A secular State is not necessarily an irreligious State, but it believes that religion is a private affair of the individual, in which State should not interfere. Secularist ideas were first expressed by the thinkers and philosophers of the Age of AHSAN ALI (44/2k18) LLB (HONS) 2nd Year (3 r d semester ) GSLC, HYD. Principles of Political Science (405) Page 5 of 53 Enlightenment in France during eighteen century. They asserted that Church and State should be separated from each other. However, the idea of secular State was first populated by Machiavelli early in twentieth century when politics was separated from religion in almost all the Western countries. 2. Nationalism: A modern State is a national State. A nation is aggregate of people untied by the bonds of common language, religion, culture, or race, and common historical experience, aspiring to establish or maintain their separate and independent State. As such, a nation-State has two elements: objective and subjective. Objective factors are common territory, common language, religion, culture and common historical experience of national liberation struggles, past and present; while the subjective elements are the psychological factors of national feelings and consciousness. Dankwart A. Rustow said, “the psychological elements of nationhood are more important that the objective ones. It is not mountains and valleys that make a nation; it is their consciousness of being a nation that makes them so”. In past ages, people of a State never felt to be a nation, for they were divided into various tribes, clans, races, local communities or cities. England and France were the first national States which came into being during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. Moreover, many States have also several ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities within their boundaries, such as Pakistan, India, etc, which sometimes lead to revolts and national liberation struggles. 3. Legalism: Modern State is based upon law. Laws are authoritative norms made and enforced by the State. Law is an instrument of social control to prevent conflict, violence, and crimes in society over such matters as property, life and limb, honour and individual or group interests. It has the authority of State and administered through judicial system. According to modern concept, law has two aspects: legislative enactment and universal enforcement. Firstly, State enacts law through its legislative body. This power to make laws was first vested in English Parliament during the eighteenth century. At present, every country enacts laws mostly through legislative bodies. Secondly, it is applied to all citizens regardless of differences of class, social status, wealth or rant. This feature in modern language is known as Rule of Law. EVOLUTION OF STATE Actual structures and forms of the State have always varied from time to time and from country to country and even the evolution of State in a country it did not remain same. Thus there is no uniformity and continuity in evolution of States. Briefly speaking, State has evolved through the following forms of stages: 1. The Stateless Societies of the Primitive Times: Maclver wrote that origins are always obscure. It is hard to trace back the origin and lifestyle of primitive people. Nevertheless, modern science and discoveries lead us to know that earliest human society was matriarchal in form, which was without any State or political authority. AHSAN ALI (44/2k18) LLB (HONS) 2nd Year (3 r d semester ) GSLC, HYD. Principles of Political Science (405) Page 6 of 53 Gradually, matriarchal society changed into patriarchal society when man began to produce things by labour and invented tools and techniques to produce them. The patriarchal society was still a Stateless society. It consisted of families, which were grouped into clans and several clans formed a tribe. A family was under authority of eldest male head of family or clan and gradually this authority assumed a strict political form when it was exercised by council of tribal elders with a chief head. Moreover, religion and common worship contributed in strengthening the unity of tribe, created by its kingship relations. Furthermore, unlike matriarchal society, the patriarchal society was torn by wars of the clans and tribes. Men began to kill man. Consequently, needs of defense and war necessitated military leadership and control. Thus a successful military leader became the political head of the tribe. He was the first king or ruler in the history of mankind. In this way patriarchal society have rise to the tribal State as the first State in human history. 2. The Tribal Kingdoms of Antiquity: In earliest times, the tribal kingdoms came into being in the river-valleys of Africa and Asia, such as those of the river Nile in Egypt, of the Euphrates and Tigris in ancient Sumeria (southern Iraq), of the river Indus in Indo- Pak subcontinent at Harappa and Moenjodaro, or of the Yellow River in ancient China. About 5000 B.C. back these kingdoms were confined to the cities in which they rose. The King’s authority was not absolute rather limited by the customs of the tribes and consent of the tribal chiefs, who constituted the consultative body of the kingdom. The king was chosen for the qualities of leadership on the battlefield and in the consultative councils. Thoough kinship was hereditary, but the successor of the king was not necessarily his son; he might be his brother, uncle or any other relative who possessed the qualities of courage and wisdom. Later on, from about 2000 B.C. these city-based kingdoms became city-States and other empires. So this evolution produced three types of States in antiquity; the ancient empires of the East (circa 200 B.C. to 500 A.D.), the city-States on ancient Greece (from about 800 to 336 B.C), and the Roman Empire (from about 300 B.C. to 500 A.D.). 3. The Oriental Empire: In certain suitable places in the East, e.g. Asia and North Africa, climate, geography and the inventive genius of man transformed tribal States into city-States. These oriental city-Stated quickly evolved empires. Such empires existed in Egypt, Iraq, Iran and China. They arose in the river valleys of Nile,the Tigro- Euphrates, the Ganges and the Yand-tze, which are therefore, called the ‘cradles of civilization’. There were many facilities like warm climate, fertile soil, abundance of water and unbroken plains around these valleys enabled aggressive tribe or city to conquer vast territories and enslave large populations and thus become an empire. The city is the first condition of empire, which became the center of wealth and power. The early empires of the world like Babylonian, Assyrian, Persian, Egyptian, Chinese, were established by peoples who had first leant the art of city-life. AHSAN ALI (44/2k18) LLB (HONS) 2nd Year (3 r d semester ) GSLC, HYD. Principles of Political Science (405) Page 7 of 53 The oriental empires were different from the earlier tribal States in many ways. They were based on conquest and force and organized on inequality basis. Rights and privileges depended upon the social status and class position of a person. The oriental king or emperor was the master of all, and was even worshiped as a god or a demigod. A stranger could become a member and enjoyed almost equal rights. The oriental empires were land empires. Their economy was based on agriculture and slavery. For a peasant, distance between God and the King was one degree that is why they tolerated despotism and tyranny of their emperors and kings. This was the secret of stability and permanence of ancient empires of the East. 4. The Greek City-State or Polis: The Greek City-State, known as polis in Greek, evolved on the shores and islands of ancient Greece. The land of Greece is divided by sea and mountains into innumerable islands and valleys, where people and communities lived a separate but not isolated life. Ancient Greeks were not dominated by any religion priesthood, their love of freedom was also expressed in a spirit of free enquiry in politics, philosophy and in all other fields of human interest. The Greek city-State gradually evolved and changed from monarchy to aristocracy and finally to democracy. They were the first democratic States in the history of mankind. They were based on the liberty of the individual and the free and equal participation of the citizens in the government. Euripides said: “He that has good advice to give to the city, let him come forward and speak”. Indeed, the political writings and philosophies of Socrates, Plato, Aristotle and other Greek thinkers of ancient times, which we can read today and think over patriotism, love of liberty and independence, self- government or democracy and freedom of thought and intellect were some of the sublime features of Greek life. 5. The Roman Empire: Ancient Italy including Rome was also dotted with number of city-States, like that of Greece. Like Greece, they also began as a monarchy, and then became an aristocracy, then a republic and finally an empire. By this transformation it repeated, to some extent, the history of despotism of the ancient oriental empires. The Roman ruling classes realized very clearly in their career of conquest and expansion that their vast empire could only be preserved by extending the rights privileges of citizenship to the conquered people also. So they were made citizens and not subjects, and were vested with civil rights only while political rights were reserved for the old citizens of Rome only. Moreover, Romans had a system of universal laws before which all citizens were equal. They also created strong and firm administrative machinery which preserved peace and order over Europe, Asia and North Africa, called Pax Romana. Trade and commerce, industry and agriculture flourished over vast territories of Europe, Asia and Africa under these conditions of universal peace. Roman empire type has also revealed certain weaknesses such as denial to political liberty, the destruction of local self-government, a soulless bureaucracy, heavy AHSAN ALI (44/2k18) LLB (HONS) 2nd Year (3 r d semester ) GSLC, HYD. Principles of Political Science (405) Page 8 of 53 taxation, depraved ruling classes, slavery, religious persecutions and irresponsible despotism. These weaknesses and deflects became the causes of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire. 6. The Feudal State: Feudal States of Medieval Europe rose from the ashes of Roman Empire. They did not know the meanings of Statehood. The idea of central authority and sovereignty vanished with the fall of Roman Empire. The nobles and princes of the Germanic tribes carved out kingdoms, small or large; but they did not possess absolute authority over their lesser vassals or nobles and princes. Instead, they created bonds of loyalty based on reciprocal rights and duties between the lord and his vassals. The feudal State was a class society, divided into two classes: the class of the ruling nobililty who possessed all lands, and the class of the dawn-trodden serfs and peasants who tilled them. Every nobles possessed at least a village as his fief; all the peasants who lived in the village were his serfs. Feudal relations existed between the noble and his serfs. He was to protect them while they were to cultivate his lands. Feudalism did not grant liberty to the individual nor created unity in the State. At the end of the Middle Ages in Europe, feudalism changed, when one of the feudal chiefs, dukes or kings, became strong and subdued other noble and lords. In this way he transformed the feudal estate into a State. This change destroyed the Medieval, feudal State, and created the modern national State. 7. The Nation State: A nation State is a new type of State. It is based on bond of nationality, such as common religion, language, customs, common aspirations, etc., and is strengthened by national boundaries. It led to the growth of international law, which recognizes the sovereignty and equality of all nation States, big or small, weak or strong. THEORIES ON ORIGIN OF THE STATE There are the theories on the origin of the state as have been formed and formed as a result of political thought and philosophy in the ancient time until the enlightenment period in Europe. 1. Natural or Divine Theory: This is the oldest theory about the origin of the state. In old ancient times politics and religion were not separate. It was then believed that God Created the State. This theory of divine origin can be summed up in three basic ideas: the State is created by God; the kings are divinely appointed and; they are answerable to God alone for their rule and to no human authority. The king who rules over the state is the agent of God on earth and he is above the law. As he was chosen and appointed by God, he possessed superior wisdom and his acts were beyond human criticism and accountability. Everyone is obliged to obey the King and the laws made by him. To disobey King is not merely considered crime but also a sin, because to disobey the laws of the King means to disobey the laws of God. Criticism: AHSAN ALI (44/2k18) LLB (HONS) 2nd Year (3 r d semester ) GSLC, HYD. Principles of Political Science (405) Page 9 of 53 a) This theory was undemocratic as the King was made absolute. b) It denied the historical evolution of the state, as it is generally held that factors like religion, family, force and political consciousness were behind the growth of the state. c) This theory was unrealistic because a bad ruler will continue to rule under the Divine shield. 2. Patriarchal Theory: This theory was put forward by Sir Henry Maine, who lived in India on official duties in the nineteenth century, where he studied the joint family system of Hindus as well as ancient Roman, Greek and Hebrew societies and institutions. On the basis of his studies he elaborated the patriarchal theory in his two books, Ancient Law and the Early History of Institutions. According to this theory, family was the basic unit of the primitive society, in which descent was traced through males. This theory argues that the state is the enlargement and aggregate of several families which developed under the control and authority of the eldest male member of the family, who enjoyed great power and influence upon the other family members. These families expanded through the process of marriage and split into as many families as the sons, each of which became the paternal head of his individual family. All the families remained united under the authority of their eldest living male; thus formed a group of families called clan. Later several clans, tracing their descent from a common ancestor, real or supposed, formed a tribe, headed by a Chief. The tribes expanded into confederation or State, headed by a King. The King exercised the same absolute authority over his subjects as did the patriarchal head over his wives, children and servants of slaves. So the family expanded into tribe and the father’s authority transformed into King’s authority. Criticism: a) This theory is simplified the origin of state by attribution it to the family alone, but the authority the father over the children is temporary which end as soon as the children grows up. b) Edward Jenks suggested that tribe rather than family was the beginning of the state. 3. Matriarchal Theory: According to this theory, the patriarchal family came into existence only when the institution of permanent marriage was in vogue. But among the primitive society there was a sort of sex anarchy instead of permanent marriage, under that condition, mother rather than the father was head of the family. Thus kinship, according to this theory, was established through mother rather father. The Queen ruling over Malabar and the princesses ruling over the Maratha countries are the examples of matriarchal systems of life. The chief exponents of this theory are Morgan, MacLennan and Edward Jenks. Criticism: AHSAN ALI (44/2k18) LLB (HONS) 2nd Year (3 r d semester ) GSLC, HYD. Principles of Political Science (405) Page 10 of 53 a) The state was created by several factors including force, religion, family, politics and contract etc. So, this theory was partial as it included family only. b) This theory analysis the origin of the family as the origin of state, but state is more than an expanded family. c) This theory is historically false, as it declares existence of matriarchal system at a particular time. As a matter of fact, both matriarchal and patriarchal system developed side-by-side. 4. Force Theory: According to this theory, wars and aggressions by a powerful tribe were the principle factor in the creation of the state. A man physically strong established his authority over the less strong people of a tribe and thus become chief or leader of the tribe. Thus, the chief used his authority in maintaining the law and order and defending the state from the aggression of outside. For instance, the English Kingdom enslaved other kingdoms of world and became the British Empire of 19th century. Thus this theory concludes that, the State is the outcome of human aggression in the past and is subsequently maintained, defended or destroyed by force, coercion and compulsion. Criticism: a) The force is not only the factor in the origin of the state; religion, politics, family and politics are behind the foundation of the state. A state may be created temporarily by force, but not perpetuate. b) This theory is against the universally accepted maxim of Thomas Hill Green that “will, not force, is the basis of the state”. c) This theory is against the individual liberty. d) A man is political animal, thus without political consciousness of the people the state cannot be created. 5. Social Contract Theory: The most famous theory with regard to the state is the social contract theory. According to this theory, the state came into existence out of a contract between the people and the sovereign. This theory divided human history into two divisions – one period prior to the establishment of the state is called “state of nature” and the other period is subsequent to the establishment of the state is called “civil state”. The state of nature was bereft of government and political authority to make and enforce laws. There was natural law governing the conduct of the people, resultantly man made war on each other and life was solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short. To overcome from these hardships the entered into two agreements: 1) pactum unionis and 2) pactum subjectionis. By the first pact of unionis, people sought protection of their lives and property, resultantly a society was formed where the people undertook to respect each other AHSAN ALI (44/2k18) LLB (HONS) 2nd Year (3 r d semester ) GSLC, HYD. Principles of Political Science (405) Page 11 of 53 and live in peace and harmony. By the second pact of subjectionis, people united together and pledged to obey an authority and surrendered the whole or part of their freedom and rights to an authority. Thus, in this way, an authority or government or state came into existence as a result of these two agreements. The chief exponents of this theory were, Thomas Hobbes, John Locke and Jean- Jacques Rousseau. Criticism: a) This theory is not borne out by any historical record. b) It does not follow the logic that the people had a bundle of rights even before the creation of state. c) This theory carries portent of revolution by giving too much importance to men as the creators of the state. The truth is that the government, not the state, is the creation of man. 6. Marxician Theory: This theory of Karl Marx is the most protruding theory. According to this theory, state came into being out of conflict between two kinds of classes: 1) Bourgeoisie (capitalists) and Proletariat (wage-worker). Bourgeoisie were those who employed for work and Proletariat were those who were employed to do work. Thus conflict arose between these two classes, in order to control wage-workers, capitalists formed state to work under capitalists and to rule over wage-workers. The capitalists used to collect taxes from wage-workers for the regulation of sate just to benefit the capitalist class. Marx stated that every state is a tyranny (dictatorship). It is said that every state is forced by extra-moral, extra-legal force. Criticism: a) It is nowhere stated in the history that state in its origin is linked with the struggle classes. b) This theory provides that state is the creation of the class and it will die with the death of classes is false and misleading. The states are permanent and perpetual instead of temporary. c) This theory is not primary but secondary because force has been discarded as unsatisfactory theory in the creation of the state. There might be different classes, but it is difficult to say that they were at arms, as the classes cooperated and contributed the development of the state. 7. The Evolutionary or Sociological Theory: No single theory offers an adequate explanation. The Evolutionary or Sociological theory is widely accepted as a convincing origin of the state. According to this theory, the state is the product of growth, a slow and steady evolution extending over a long period of time and ultimately shaping itself into the complex structure of a modern state. This theory is more scientific. Dr. Garner argues that, “the state is neither the handiwork of God, nor the result of superior physical force, nor the creation of evolution or convention, nor a mere expansion of the AHSAN ALI (44/2k18) LLB (HONS) 2nd Year (3 r d semester ) GSLC, HYD. Principles of Political Science (405) Page 12 of 53 family. The state is not a mere artificial mechanical creation but an institution of natural growth or historical evolution”. There were a number of factors which helped the evolution of the state. Briefly, the social forces and influences in the evolution of the State are as under: i. Kinship: The state is based on the principle of command and obedience. The earliest stages such a relationship in family was based on blood and birth. In this respect matriarchal and patriarchal families became the basis of origin of State. There were families, clans and tribes, whose membership was based on blodd relationship which was the first element of unity and the first basis of organization and discipline. There used to be council of elders with a chief as political authority whose command was obeyed by all members of the tribe. In this was the path was paved for the development of State. ii. Magic and Religion: In primitive tribes people were not civilized and advanced, so they did not understand the forces of nature. At that stage man was at the mercy of natures so he tried to control them by different practices which later on got the name of magic. Some people had the knowledge of these forces, so they acquired superiority over others and became their leaders. With the passage of time such men became the priest-kings. Slowly and gradually religion became a powerful instrument for keeping control over the people. Even today religion plays an important role in the state activities. For instance, Pakistan and India were established on the basis of two religions, Islam and Hinduism, respectively. iii. War and Force: War and Force also played an important part in the evolution of the state. In the beginning force was used to capture animals, wealth and land of the neighboring tribes. Thus war changed the tribes into political entity which resulted in the establishment of a permanent leadership. Eventually a powerful tribal leader after many successful wars became the king. In this way tribal State was changed into kingdom and modern State came into being. iv. Property and Defense: In the beginning people roomed from place to place in search of pasture and water. They did not know what agriculture was and how crops were cultivated. As a result of this they did not occupy a particular territory and lead a settled life. With the passage of time population increased and man was compelled to lead a settled life. This compelled them to occupy land, with this there arose the need to have an authority to define and enforce the rights of the families or individuals within the territory of the settled community. This authority was also supposed to defend the wealth, which consisted mainly of land and domestic animals. In other words a common authority was needed to define property rights and property relations and to decide issues like inheritance, theft, exchange of goods etc. It is said where there is no property there can be no government. This means that the government and the state AHSAN ALI (44/2k18) LLB (HONS) 2nd Year (3 r d semester ) GSLC, HYD. Principles of Political Science (405) Page 13 of 53 came into existence with the beginning of the private property and the division of the society with classes. v. Political Consciousness: In the beginning there was the need for defense and protection of life, liberty and property, regulation of social relations etc, which necessitated Political consciousness. When the people settled down on a definite territory in pursuit of their subsistence and a desire to secure it from encroachment by others, the need for regulating things and persons felt imminently and this is the essence of political consciousness. Conclusion: It follows that no single factor was responsible for the growth of State rather many factors helped the growth of the state and transformed uncivilized society into a state. The evolutionary theory is the most satisfactory of all the theories which seek to explain the origin of the states. It should be noted that no theory pin-points the time at which the state originated as a consequence of many factors working in union at different times. NATURE OF THE STATE Nature of State has always been a difficult question. In this respect, there are three kinds of views as under:- 1. Monist: Monism attributes oneness or singleness. The monistic view of the State is that it is a single, unified whole, while the individuals who compose it have no separate and independent existence of their own, but are part and parcel of the State in which they live. They have no individuality of their own, while the State has a personality of its own: “the individual is fleeting, the State is everlasting, the leaves wither, the tree stands”. The monistic view of the State is expressed in several theories as under:- a. The Organic or Organismic Theory: It is one of the oldest and most important theories of the State. The Organic theory views the State as an organism. The Organistic theorists assert that State has the same characteristics as a living being. The individual exist only in the State. His existence dependence upon the State. Like an organism, the State also grows from simple to complex. An English Professor, Herbert Spencer is the Chief exponent of this theory. He described it in his book, Principles of Sociology (1880). Brief exposition of his theory is as under:- i. Individual is the cell of the State: According to him, as the body is composed of the cells, so the State consists of the individuals. ii. Parallelism in Growth and Development: Both, the organism and the State begin as germs, and as they grow they become more complex. The society develops by differentiation of functions and division of labour, just as the animal body has also evolved in the past. AHSAN ALI (44/2k18) LLB (HONS) 2nd Year (3 r d semester ) GSLC, HYD. Principles of Political Science (405) Page 14 of 53 iii. Functional inter-dependence of the Parts: The functions of both, the organism and State, are interrelated. The health of the body depends upon proper functioning of the parts. If a part becomes diseased, it affects the health, vigour and proper functioning of the other parts. Likewise, in State, various groups and organs of society depend upon each other’s functioning. For instance, if the farmers stop producing crops, State as whole shall suffer. iv. Structural Parallelism: Herbert Spencer elaborates comparison between society and organism in regard to their structure. An animal organism has three parts, viz., the sustaining system, the distributor system and the regulatory system. The sustaining system consists of mouth, stomach, intestines, etc and enabled the living organism to digest food. The distributor system consists of the heart, the blood vessels, arteries and veins, and circulates or supplies blood to all parts of the body. The regulating system is the nervous system and consists of nerved and brain, by means of which the activities of the different parts of the body are regulated and conducted. The State has also three corresponding systems. It has sustaining system in the industrial or productive system. Its distributor system is the means of communication and transport in the State. Its regulatory system is the governmental system. v. Renewal Mechanism: The animal is constantly renewed by decay and wear and tear of its old cells and tissues and by the formation of the new ones. Similarly, the old and diseased individuals die and younger generations take their place. Thus, like the animal body, State also maintains itself permanently. It is, therefore, everlasting. Criticism: This theory has been criticized as under:- i. Individuals are not like cells in the organism: Every individual has a will and consciousness of his own, but the cells do not possess them. Spencer has himself pointed out that the former is concrete, while the latter is a discrete. ii. Individual can exist without State: An individual has a life and can exist without State, but the cell or any other part of an animal body or plant cannot exist if it is cut off from the body. If it is argued that some plants whose small parts, if cut off and planted once again, can grow and become full plants; even then the analogy breaks down because if the individuals are separated from the State, they may not develop into a new State. AHSAN ALI (44/2k18) LLB (HONS) 2nd Year (3 r d semester ) GSLC, HYD. Principles of Political Science (405) Page 15 of 53 iii. State is not an organism in the physical sense: State itself consists of individuals and each of individual is himself an organism. In this case State is a strange monster; it is an organism consisting of innumerable organisms. iv. State is a social organization and not a physical organization: State is abstract in sense while organism is concrete body. We can observe the animal body and study its parts or cells under a microscope, but we cannot see the State or put its parts under a microscope. v. State has no process of birth, growth, decay and death: An organism comes into being by the union of two organisms, male and female, but a State is not born in this manner. Unlike living organism, the State does not grow; it changes. An organism cannot stop its growth but the State will not change or develop its people do not want. The State does not originate or renew itself as a plant or an animal does. Lastly, organisms die but State is permanent. b. The Idealist Theory: Plato and Aristotle originated idealist theory. They regarded State as self-sufficing and held that in State alone the individual reaches his highest development. However, this theory was best expounded by Immanuel Kant and Hegel during 18th and early 19th century and other German philosophers. The idealists regard the State as an end in itself and individual as a mean to the end. According to Hegel, the individual can perfect himself only in the stale. The supporters of this theory also believe that the state is a person and has a will of his own. This will is the real one and represents the will of all. So the individual must always obey the law of the state because they represent the will of the state. The actions of the state are always right. Infact when an individual obeys the state he obeys his own-self. The supporters also say that the state is a reality and the individual something temporary. Hegel says that the state is the march of God on earth and that the people should worship it. This is the reason that the state must always be obeyed. Criticism: This theory is criticized as under:- i. An Abstract Theory: It is an abstract theory because the state, which describes does not existence in reality. It is also pointed out that the idealists merely idealize the actual State attribute to it a degree of perfection which it does not possess. ii. Danger to the Rights & Freedom: The argument of its supporters that the state is everything and individual is nothing is false and presents a great danger to the individual's rights and freedom. There are many other relations among human beings, which are as important as the relationship between the individuals and the state. AHSAN ALI (44/2k18) LLB (HONS) 2nd Year (3 r d semester ) GSLC, HYD. Principles of Political Science (405) Page 16 of 53 iii. State is not Absolute: In modern times, it has to depend on other states in order to fulfill its needs and to export surplus goods. Thus neither it is self-sufficient nor is it absolute. iv. It is based on Wrong Conception: The Idealist also considers the state to be sovereign that is there is no check and limitation on the authority of the state. This is wrong. In modem world such ideas have led to the 1st and 2nd World Wars. Now the people of the world cannot afford 3rd World War. This means that today all the states consider imposing certain restrictions of their freedom, so that the peace of world and people can make progress. v. The State cannot represent will of people: The Idealist is also wrong in the assumption that the state embodies real will of the people. In today's world the will of the state is the will of the ruling class and not of the people. vi. No Right to Individual: This theory does not grant any right to the individual except only one right and that is to obey the state. For this reason this theory is dangerous because there is no value of the people and can be considered as anti-humanitarian. This theory also says that individual to be a part, which can be utilized by the ruler as they please. In other words people are sacrificed for interest of the ruling class. c. Judicial or Personality Theory: This theory was expounded by the jurists and in its extreme form by the German jurists, at the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th century. They were Gierke, Treitschke, Bluntschli, Jellinek and the English jurist, Maitland. According to this theory, State is a ‘legal person’ possessing certain rights, will and powers of its own. The State has rights, powers, interests and will, which are not the rights, interests, or wills of the individuals who compose it. According to them, State has a will of its own and can act in the same way as does a human being. The State owns property, enters into contracts, collects taxes and undertakes economic enterprises, takes loans and does many other things in its corporate capacity. Moreover, these powers are not fictitious but real. These are not merely created by law, but exist because State is a sovereign association. Criticism: This theory is criticized as under:- i. The corporate nature of a State is a fact, but this fact does not make it a real personality, acting and willing like a natural personality, as that of human individual. ii. The will of the State is infact the will of those who govern it and the rights of the State are, in fact, right of those who govern it. AHSAN ALI (44/2k18) LLB (HONS) 2nd Year (3 r d semester ) GSLC, HYD. Principles of Political Science (405) Page 17 of 53 2. Pluralist: The pluralistic or monadistic view of the State is just the opposite of the monistic view. It views that the State as a composite body in which the individuals have distinct and independent existence of their own while the State exists merely as a convenient or mechanism to protect the weak against the strong. Every individual is thus a self-contained unit or monad which, does not depend on other for his existence and survival. This view is upheld in such theories as pure individualism, anarchism, and in some socialistic theories like Guild Socialism. It is also upheld by the pluralistic theories of sovereignty. 3. Dualist: This view regarding nature of the State exists between monism and pluralism. It is a compromise between them. It regards both the State and the individual as distinct but interdependent. According to it, each individual has a life and needs of his own; but he also depends on others for his welfare. Neither he is completely merged into the State, nor is he entirely isolated from or independent of it. This view is upheld by several theories of the State and politics such as Locke’s theory of Social Contract, the Laissez Faire Individualism, the English Utilitarianism, the Mechanistic Theory of the State etc. ELEMENTS OF STATE In order to constitute state, following four are the essential elements:- 1. Population: A state is aggregation of people which constitute a primary element of state. Although, there is no particular limit of population is specified in order to establish state, but some philosophers has argued regarding limit of population. Plato said that, an ideal state should have 5,000 citizens. Aristotle avoided any mathematical perception and argued that the population of state should be neither too small nor too large. Today there are many states with heavy population like China, India etc, which shows that it is impossible have a fixed quantum of state. 2. Territory: A state has occupies definite and fixed area where in its inhabitants reside, that is called its territory. Like population, there is no hard and fast rule regarding size of territory. The territory of state not merely mean land area, but it also includes air, sea, water, forests, mountain, etc. 3. Government: A government is a political organization through which the general will of people is formulated, expressed and executed. Thus, government is necessary to constitute a state. It is called the brain of the state. The functions through its organs, i.e. legislature, judiciary and executive, etc. In the absence of government, there would be anarchy. No particular form of government is specified to constitute a state. It may be unitary, parliamentary or presidential etc. 4. Sovereignty: Sovereignty refers to the supreme power of the state, which one of the essential element of the state. It is regarded as the life and soul of the state. Sovereignty has two aspects, internal sovereignty and external sovereignty. Internal sovereignty refers that the state has supreme power over all the things within its AHSAN ALI (44/2k18) LLB (HONS) 2nd Year (3 r d semester ) GSLC, HYD. Principles of Political Science (405) Page 18 of 53 territory. It can compel obedience of its people to its laws and commands. External territory refers that the state is free from the control of any other state, as before independence India was not state because it was ruled by British. OTHER FEATURES OF STATE: Although the State is composed of four essential elements, it is also characterized by certain other features. These are as under:- 1. Unity: Unity simply means that, the population and territory and population of the State are organized under a single supreme power. However, it is an attribute, not an element. It arises from the elements of territorial integrity and sovereignty of the State. 2. Continuity or Permanence: It means that State continues to exist for all times. Theoretically, State is immoral. Its laws and sovereignty are for all times. Governments may change, but State continues to exist; the King dies, but kingdom lives on. However, in actual practice, it not the State but the idea of State that is immoral. The actual States have frequently changed in history, at times by slow evolution, and at times by forcible evolution. For instance, once England was an absolute Monarchy, then she became an oligarchy, now she is a crowned democracy, in which King or Queen is a mere figurehead. In France, these changes have taken place in a violent, revolutionary way. Similarly, Russia before 1917 was an absolute monarchy, but she is today a communist. Moreover, one State can be conquered and annexed by another State, just as England subjugated many States in the post-Mughal India. So, in practice, States are not continuous and immoral, as they are claimed in theory. 3. Equality: It means that all States, whether big or small, are equal in the eyes of International law. It is an attribute of external sovereignty. FORMS OF STATE Following are the main form of the state: 1. UNITARY STATE: Unitary state is a political organization where all the most of the governing powers are vested in centralized government instead of province. It is opposite of the federal state. Although the state is divided in provinces but these divisions are administrative in their nature, which completely work under the supervision and control of the central government. For example, United Kingdom, France etc. Merits: There are following advantages of unitary State: i. Strong Government: The great merit of unitary form of government is its strength and vigour. It is a source of strong, stable and powerful government. ii. Simple and Less expensive System: Unitary State is simple in organization, as there is a single administrative system to execute laws and policy. This saves money. It is, therefore, less expensive form of government than the federal one. AHSAN ALI (44/2k18) LLB (HONS) 2nd Year (3 r d semester ) GSLC, HYD. Principles of Political Science (405) Page 19 of 53 iii. Uniformity of laws and policies: There is uniformity of laws, policy and administration throughout the country, because there are no autonomous units in it. iv. Useful in meeting emergencies: It is very suitable for meeting emergencies because being an all-powerful government, the central government can take all necessary decisions quickly and implements these with full force. Demerits: Unitary State carries following demerits: i. Excessively Strong Center Government: The unitary system provides for the creation of an all-powerful central government, which involves a possibility for central dictatorship or despotism over local areas. ii. Danger of Inefficiency: The central government often behaves inefficiently because of being overburdened with all the work. It often finds itself not fully capable of meeting the pressure of work resulting from the socio-economic- cultural functions that it has to perform as an agent of the modern welfare state. iii. Unsuitable for Big States: The unitary system is suitable only for small and homogeneous states. For big states or states with racial, linguistic, cultural, religious and regional diversities, federal system alone can be suitable. iv. Absence of Provincial Autonomy: It grants no autonomy to the local provinces or units because of being a system based on centralization of powers. Thus is regarded as less democratic. It further discourages popular interest in public affairs. 2. FEDERATION STATE: A federal state is a political organization characterized by the union of partially self-governing province, or states or regions, under the central or federal government. In this form of state, power is constitutionally distributed between federation and provinces. For example, India, Pakistan, USA, Canada, Mexico UAE, Australia, etc. Salient Features: A federation has following characteristics: i. Supremacy of the Constitution: There is supremacy of constitution in a federal State. In federation, Constitution serves as the agreement between two or more sovereign States to form a new State in which they exercise certain specific powers. It embodies powers and functions of both, central and provincial government, so as to avoid encroachment upon rights and powers of each other. Thus the supremacy of the Constitution is ensured. Its supremacy implies three things as under:- a. Written Constitution: The Constitution must be written and definite so as to make it inviolable document leaving no dispute or doubt its provisions. b. Rigid Constitution: The Constitution must be rigid proposing a definite and difficult process for its amendment, which the central government AHSAN ALI (44/2k18) LLB (HONS) 2nd Year (3 r d semester ) GSLC, HYD. Principles of Political Science (405) Page 20 of 53 or the unit government cannot set into motion by itself. Thus the Constitution will remain supreme and binding on both. c. Sovereignty of Amending Authority: Sovereignty in a federation lies neither with the federal government nor with the provincial governments. It lies only with the constitution-amending body or bodies taken together, as provided by the Constitution. ii. Distribution of Powers: The essential characteristic of the federation is the distribution of powers between the central and federating governments. This is the essence of federalism. There is no uniform method for the distribution of powers. The general and the basic principle is that matters of local importance are given to the provinces and that of national importance to the federal government. Besides this there are the following three methods of distribution of powers commonly used in the world today: a. American Method: Under this method powers of the central government are written down and the remaining powers known as the residuary powers are given to the provinces. The aim behind this method is to keep the center weak and the provinces strong. This method is used in the USA. b. Canadian Method: This is just opposite of the American method. Under this system the powers of the provinces are written down in the constitution and the residuary powers are given to the federal government. The idea is to make the center strong. This method is used in Canada. c. Indian Method: This method was introduced in India under the Act of 1935. Under this method three lists are drawn. One contains the powers of the federal government, called the Federal List. Similarly there is the Provincial List and then there is the third list, which is, called Concurrent List containing the powers, which can be exercised by both the governments. In case of conflict between the federal and provincial law regarding the concurrent subject, the central law will prevail. iii. Supremacy of the Judiciary: In a federation, the federal judiciary is supreme entrusted with the duty of protecting and interpreting the constitution, in order to preserve the supremacy and inviolability of the constitution and prevent the interference and encroachment by the federal or provincial governments on the sphere of the powers of other. In this respect, the federal court performs two kinds of functions: Firstly, it interprets the constitution whenever there is a dispute regarding any provision of the constitution between the federal government or one or more of the provincial governments. Secondly, it preserves AHSAN ALI (44/2k18) LLB (HONS) 2nd Year (3 r d semester ) GSLC, HYD. Principles of Political Science (405) Page 21 of 53 the supremacy and inviolability of the constitution by declaring any law of the central or provincial legislature as ultra vires and therefore null and void. iv. Bicameral Legislature: A federal State is a complex organization. It requires double mode of representation; one for the country as a whole and another for the competent units. Moreover, the competent units may differ in size, population and resource. Yet the principle of equality or parity requires that they should have the same voice and equal representation in the federal government. In view of these requirements, a federal legislature consists of two Houses; one of which represent the nation as a whole, while the other represents the competent units on an equal basis. Merits: The following are the advantages of federalism:- i. It Combines the Merits of Unity with Diversity: A federation is a unity of several States, wherein States do not lose their individuality and their diversity and autonomy. Thus they combine the advantages of strength that result from unity with the diversity and autonomy. A federation maintains a balance between centripetal and centrifugal forces. ii. Experiment is Possible: Diversity and variety of administration, legislation and policy in various units make it possible to experiment in new ways and methods of law and administration without affecting other units. If the experiment is successful, it is adopted by other units and even by national government for whole country. If the experiment is unsuccessful, only one part will suffer and rest of the country will be saved. iii. Federation creates new States by peaceful incorporation and voluntary union: Federation usually creates States by peaceful integration and voluntary union. For instance, U.S.A. came into being by the voluntary union of the thirteen revolted colonies of North America in 1787. iv. Federal unification brings strength, progress and prosperity to small States: Federalism is a form of government which gives strength, progress and prosperity to the small states. Since there are big and small states, it is easy for the small states to take advantage from the bigger and the richer federating units. The Small unit can be helped in the fields of science, technology, education, agriculture, health etc. by bigger units. In this way smaller units will become strong progressive and prosperous. This has been proved by USA and also by the Ex-USSR. v. Suitable for Heterogeneous States: This system is suitable for a large state with huge territory or small state with big diversity. If a country has a vast area, the pace of progress can be increased if the whole area is divided into smaller units with local autonomy. This experiment was carried out by Ex-USSR, which had the biggest area in the world. Similarly if a state is small and it has different AHSAN ALI (44/2k18) LLB (HONS) 2nd Year (3 r d semester ) GSLC, HYD. Principles of Political Science (405) Page 22 of 53 nationalities, this system can solve many of its problems. Each nationality can be given a particular area with autonomy. In this way each nationality will be happy and will make quick progress. Malaysia is the best example of this. vi. It Prevents Despotic Tendencies: Federation form of government prevents the provincial or the central government front becoming despotic because under this system they become check on one another. In this way each government remains within its defined field and cannot over step the limit set for it by the constitution. vii. Local Self-Government on a large scale: A federation is local self-government on a large scale. Under this system, each federating unit has autonomy and internal independence. In this way each province or federating unit gets a chance to get more and more political experience and awareness. In this way people are trained locally and this experience can be utilized at the national level. viii. It is the Best System for Modern Complex Society: It is the best system for modern society as the modern society is very complex and is composed of different kinds of associations each essential for the people. Unless the system is federal, neither the society nor the world can make progress. ix. Federation brings Peace: A federal system brings peace because it is based on consent and agreement. There shall be no international disputes and wars and mankind would enjoy the blessings of eternal peace and happiness in conditions of national liberty and progress. Demerits: The following are the disadvantages of federalism:- i. Source of Weakness: Federalism makes the state weak because there is always a conflict going on between the center and the federating units; and as a result of this both the federal government and the federating units suffer. This also results in delay and inefficiency and thus leads to the weakness of the state. ii. No Uniformity of Laws: Federal system prevents uniformity of laws and policies for the State. It is because every federal unit is independent and has the right to adopt any policy or law. The federal government does not have the authority to interfere in the affairs of the federating unit. Consequently, there are as many laws and policies as the number of federating units. This also creates problems for the people who have to go to other provinces from time to time. For instance, minimum age of marriage is 16 years in Punjab while 18 years in Sindh Province. iii. Method of Distribution of Powers is not perfect: Federalism is essentially based on the distribution of powers between Centre and Units. But it cannot be a perfect distribution which may be valid for all times. It is because, what is of local importance today may become a matter of national importance tomorrow. But the national government cannot acquire the new power without a constitutional amendment or judicial interpretation. Thus due to limited powers, nevertheless AHSAN ALI (44/2k18) LLB (HONS) 2nd Year (3 r d semester ) GSLC, HYD. Principles of Political Science (405) Page 23 of 53 the federal government can do many things, but it is handicapped because these fields belong to the federating units. iv. Rigidity of Constitution is an obstacle to the harmony and progress: The double government and the distribution of powers in a federation divide the governmental operations into watertight compartments. The rigidity of the constitution is an obstacle in the way of the progress of the federal State, because the constitution cannot keep pace with the changes in the society. Due to rigid and difficult method of amendment, so many things, which require prompt and quick action, cannot be done and this, in turn, affects the progress of the whole country. v. Expensive and Un-economical: Federalism is an expensive and uneconomical system because of the duplication of governmental machinery of the Centre and the Units, and the central and provincial public services. Moreover, federal State is uneconomic in the sense that agriculture, industry and certain other natural resources are allocated by constitution to the provincial sphere. vi. Danger of Secession: Federalism is exposed to the danger of secession of the federating units. The federal units may be inclined to secede from the federal union due to their differences or grievances over language, culture, religion, race, economic inequality and many more. As such each unit has its own government and constitution, the tendency towards secession is very strong in federation than in a unitary State. This is what happened in the USA in 1860's when the southern states started civil war to break away from the federation. Similarly in the very recent past East Pakistan broke away from federation and became Bangladesh. 3. CONFEDERATION STATE: A confederation state may be defined as the union or association of two or more sovereign States which have permanently given up part of their liberty for some specific aims and objects, such as defense. The membership of states is voluntary. It is usually made by way of treaty whereby states agree to follow a powerful central government. The purpose to confederate is common action in relation to other states such as defense, foreign relation, trade, etc. For example, confederation of USA, Crown of Aragon, New England confederation, etc. FORMS OF GOVERNMENT There are following three forms of government: 1. PARLIAMENTARY: Parliamentary form of government is a democratic form of government wherein legislative and the executive organs of the State are closely connected and interdependent. This form of government comprises of four organs: the King or President, the Prime Minister, the Cabinet or Council of Ministers and the Parliament. The King or President is titular head of the State having many powers in theory but in actual he cannot exercise them without the consent and advice of the AHSAN ALI (44/2k18) LLB (HONS) 2nd Year (3 r d semester ) GSLC, HYD. Principles of Political Science (405) Page 24 of 53 Prime Minister or Cabinet. The real executive is the Cabinet headed by the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister after being elected by the majority of votes in the Parliament, forms his Cabinet among the members of Parliament in order to aid the King or President in discharge of his executive powers. The Cabinet including Prime Minister is to the Parliament for their conduct and policies and retains power until they command the confidence of majority of the Parliament. The Parliament is the most important organ of the parliamentary form of government. It possesses supremacy in the Constitution. The Cabinet is responsible to Parliament and hold office until they command confidence of majority in the Parliament. If the Parliament passes a vote of no confidence against cabinet, the Cabinet either resigns and gives place to new one who commands majority, or dissolves the Parliament and calls for new elections. By this Parliamentary mechanism, the sovereignty of the people is manifested for which it is called a responsible system of representative government. Dicey has emphasized that the parliamentary system is founded on a fusion of the executive and the legislative organs and at the same time upon the maintenance of harmonious relations between them. FEATURES OF PARLIAMENTARY FORM OF GOVERNMENT: Following are the features and characteristics of parliamentary form of government: 1. Two Executives: In Parliamentary form of government, there are two executives: Titular Executive and Real Executive. Titular executive is head of the state for example the President of Pakistan. This type executive is mere a symbolic or constitutional head of state. Second is Real Executive who is to exercise real powers of the state and is head of government for example, the Prime Minister of Pakistan. 2. Supremacy of Premier: The Prime Minister is head of government and enjoys too many powers. He is the leader of the lower house of the Parliament and leader of the council of ministers. He is to appoint, remove, allot portfolios and supervises the activities of his ministers. He acts as a bridge between cabinet and president. On his resignation, the council of ministers must resign. Prime Minister is like a shining moon in the galaxy of stars. 3. Collective and Individual Responsibility: The Cabinet is collectively responsible to the lower house of the Parliament and retain government as long as they it commands the confidence of majority in Parliament. In case of no-confidence in a single minister, the whole Cabinet must resign. The activities of Cabinet may be questioned and checked by various constitutional means. A minister is also individually responsible to the Parliament for the acts of omission and commission of his department. AHSAN ALI (44/2k18) LLB (HONS) 2nd Year (3 r d semester ) GSLC, HYD. Principles of Political Science (405) Page 25 of 53 4. Team Work Spirit: All ministers work in a team spirit. They must agree on an issue in cabinet meeting and because of different opinion, the minister concerned must resign or he is expelled from the cabinet. All differences must be kept secret. The cabinet members are in the one boat and they either swim together or sink together. 5. Coordination of Powers: In Parliamentary form of government, both organs, i.e., executive and legislature are closely related and interdependent. The members of Cabinet are also the members of Parliament. Maximum bills in the Parliament are initiated by ministers, they take part in legislation and address legislature. The executive also calls meetings of Parliament and is empowered to dissolve it. on contrary, the Parliament can question the activities of the Cabinet and remove the Cabinet through vote of no-confidence. Both government organs have strong check upon each other. 6. Term: Term of cabinet is fixed by the constitution but not in rigid sense. A minister may be removed or changed any time. Parliament can be dissolved during the national emergencies. If parliament is dissolved, government no longer remains in office. Parliament, through no-confidence movement against any particular minister, Prime Minister or against the whole cabinet, can remove government. Therefore life of parliamentary government is uncertain. Merits: The Parliamentary form of government has the following advantages and merits:- i. Harmony between the Executive and the Legislature: All the members of Cabinet are also the members of Parliament, which leads to close collaboration and intimate interdependence between the both organs. There is a unity of purpose and harmony between them. Consequently, there is no apprehension of deadlock between the executive and the legislative because the laws legislated by the Parliament are executed with confidence and promptitude and thus results in efficient governance. ii. It ensures responsibility and checks autocracy: The Chief merit of parliamentary government is a responsible form of government. The Cabinet is responsible to the Parliament and ultimately to the people. The ministers are constantly criticized by the members of Parliament, especially by those of the opposition. It resigns as soon as it loses the confidence of the majority in the Parliament. It also prevents the rule by an autocratic government, as such a government will be opposed by the Parliament and will not be elected again to the office by the people. iii. Flexibility in times of crisis: This form of government has flexibility and elasticity in times of emergency, because the change in ministry can be brought about peacefully and constitutionally to meet the crisis. AHSAN ALI (44/2k18) LLB (HONS) 2nd Year (3 r d semester ) GSLC, HYD. Principles of Political Science (405) Page 26 of 53 iv. People’s Government: The Parliamentary executive has been acclaimed as the real government of people, because the members of the Parliament, as representatives of people, draw the attention of the House to the problems of people. Further, during elections, political parties raise various issues of people. Thus the government is significantly influenced by public opinion. v. Able Governance: In parliamentary government, the ministers are selected from the legislature on the basis of their experience, talent, skills and expertise, which enables the able persons to execute administer work. Demerits: The Parliamentary government carries following demerits and disadvantages: i. Weak Separation of Powers: In this system, the principle of separation of powers is violated. As the cabinet members are also the members of Parliament, thus there is apprehension that the concerned may enact tyrannical laws and execute them in a tyrannical manner. ii. Unstable Government: The parliamentary government is unstable and impermanent as the Cabinet has not fixed minimum tenure and holds office only during the confidence of the majority in the Parliament. This system is especially unstable in the countries having multiple parties as in France, Pakistan, etc. hence Cabinet system is not conducive to continuity in policy and stability of government. iii. A large system of Party Government: The cabinet government usually carries multiple parties, where majority wining party forms government while rest of the parties form opposition. The system divides parties into groups of people and parties, one of which tries hard to get things done and the other equally hard to obstruct them. Theoretically, the opposition parties are to obstruct bad adoption of laws or policies. But in actual practice, they are opposed for the sake of overthrowing existing government. Consequently, party interests are placed above the national interests and the progress of the country is retarded. These defects are not so great under two-party system as in England, but become acute under the multiple party system. iv. Governance by Amateurs: The Parliamentary government lacks competence and effectiveness, because the ministers are mostly amateurs. As the Prime Minister has to appoint ministers from among the members of the Parliament, which are not selected on the basis of their talent or knowledge or experience for administration and government but caste, religion and influence in the party. v. Growing Cabinet: The Cabinet is the committee of Parliament to discuss, decide and propose legislative measures and other governmental actions before the Parliament and secure approval of its policy. Thus it works efficient if it is small in size and free from unnecessary burden of work. But the increasing size of AHSAN ALI (44/2k18) LLB (HONS) 2nd Year (3 r d semester ) GSLC, HYD. Principles of Political Science (405) Page 27 of 53 government and multiplication of duties upon ministers, which makes it harassed by overwork. vi. Cabinet Dictatorship: The Cabinet having support of the majority in the lower house of the Parliament tends to be authoritarian and irresponsible. As being assured of the support of the majority, it does not care for the feelings and views of opposition. It has also little respect for the legislature as the majority is bound to support the government. Thus, the Cabinet Government is reduced to party government, and parliamentary democracy is turned into Cabinet Dictatorship. 2. PRESIDENTIAL: A presidential government is a form of government wherein the executive and legislative departments are entrusted to distinctly separate and different persons or body of persons, namely the President and the Congress respectively, without the one being responsible to the other for its functions. The executive organ is headed by a President and the legislature is known as Congress. It is also called an irresponsible system of government as the President or his ministers are not responsible to the Congress for their duties and policies. The President: The President is the head of State as well as the Chief Executive of the government. He is invested with immense and absolute powers as conferred by the Constitution. Although he is not responsible to the Congress, however, he is checked upon by the Congress. For instance, if he commits a crime, he can be impeached by the Congress. His treaties and appointments of the high administrative officials are approved by the Senate. He selects his ‘ministers’ or ‘secretaries’ to run the various departments. These ministers are, neither members of Congress not responsible to it for their acts and policies. The President picks them up from anywhere in the country, whether they belong or do not belong to any party. He consults them but he is not bound by their advice. He can dismiss them at any time without explanation. The Congress: The legislature of the Presidential system, called the Congress, is vested with all legislative and money-granting powers, but, unlike the Parliament, it is not supreme or sovereign organ of the State. It consists of two houses, the Senate which is more powerful and the powerful assembly called, House of Representatives. It is independent of the executive organ, however, the Senate is given powers to check the authority of the President. Similarly, the President has also some powers to check the legislative powers of the Congress. He can veto a bill passed by it, which can, however, be overridden by two-third votes of the Congress. He sends legislative proposals to the Congress and calls its extraordinary sessions. Merits: The Presidential system is credited with the following merits: i. Stable Government: The Executive is elected for a definite period of years, he cannot be removed from office during this period, which guarantees stability of AHSAN ALI (44/2k18) LLB (HONS) 2nd Year (3 r d semester ) GSLC, HYD. Principles of Political Science (405) Page 28 of 53 government. This system of government is energetic and powerful, as it is free from the fear of adverse votes in the legislature. ii. Continuity of Policy: The President vigorously pursues its policies continuously without fear of losing the majority in the legislature. Thus there is no shifting in the political balance by votes of censure or no-confidence and new elections as it the Cabinet system. iii. Certainty of Policy: The advantage of continuity of policy also guarantees certainty. The President is solely vested with executive powers. He chooses his own ministers. He determines his own policy. Although he consults with ministers, but he is not bound by their advice. Thus the government policy is certain and sure. iv. Competent Government: The Presidential government is competent in the sense that the President selects his ministers on the basis of their personal merits and qualifications instead of party considerations. Demerits: The defects and weaknesses of Presidential form of government are as under:- i. Based on wrong principles: The Presidential system is based on the principles of separation of powers and the system of checks and balances. The framers had concentrated all executive powers in the hands of the President and all the legislative powers in the hands of legislature respectively. They sought to limit and control the separation of powers by a system of checks and balances. This aggravated the evils they had sought to prevent. The separation of powers is itself a wrong and defective principle for organizing a government as it divided which is naturally indivisible. By instituting the system of checks and balances, they confounded matters still further because it is contrary to the principle of separation and also highly injurious to administrative efficiency. This can result in conflict on deadlock between the two organs which cannot be resolved till term of either office. ii. Presidential Autocracy: The President is solely vested with executive powers, who can exercise them as he likes, as he is not answerable to the legislature for his acts and policies. This is the reason why presidential system has become breeding ground of dictatorship and Presidential autocracy. iii. Conflict between executive and legislature: Due to separation of powers and non-accountability of the executive to the legislature, the Presidential system leads to various conflicts and deadlock between both. It is especially when both President belongs to one party and the legislature is filled with the representatives of other party. 3. AUTHORITARIAN: An authoritarian government is a form of government which rules with absolute authority and the people are to act with blind submission, and freedom AHSAN ALI (44/2k18) LLB (HONS) 2nd Year (3 r d semester ) GSLC, HYD. Principles of Political Science (405) Page 29 of 53 of action and thought brings about harsh punishment. It is totally in contrast with democratic government. Following are the types of authoritarian government: a. Absolute Monarchy: It is the type of authoritarian government where the King has the power to rule freely with no laws. He becomes the King succeeding his elder of dynasty. All the major powers are vested in him alone, i.e. control of the military, police, etc and other important positions are occupied by his family members. Upon his death, the power is transferred to his heir. Examples include Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Brunei, Swaziland, etc. b. Constitutional Monarchy: It is the type of authoritarian government where the head of state shares the power the legislative branch and must act within the parameters of a constitution. The king or queen (head of state) share power with the legislative branch such as in UK. c. Oligarchy: It is the type of authoritarian government where most political power rests with a few people of dominant class of group of the society. These groups of people maybe distinguishable by royalty, wealth, education, or military control. Sometimes oligarchy governments are controlled by a few families who pass their power from one generation to another. This form of government is different monarchy because here power is transferred irrespective of blood relationship. These include Russia, China, Saudi Arabia, South Africa etc. d. Totalitarian Dictatorship (autocracy): It is the type of authoritarian government where a government is by a single person with unlimited power and that does not tolerate activities by individuals or groups and regulates nearly every aspect of public and private behavior. He is not restricted by opposition, or laws, or constitution, etc. There is very little or no freedom. SEPARATION OF POWERS The theory of separation of powers refers to the threefold distribution of governmental functions o powers. They are (a) Legislative power, (b) Executive power and (c) Judicial power. Since the ancient time of Aristotle, political writers have recognized this kind of distribution of functions and powers of government. Later on, French thinker of 18th century, observed the system of government in England and formulated his thoughts in the form of doctrine of separation of powers, expounded in his famous book “The Spirit of Laws” written in 1748. He explained his theory in these words, “In every State, there are three kinds of powers; the Legislative power responsible to make laws for the time being or for all time and amending and repealing those prevailing made. The second power is executing the matters including war and peace, sending and receiving ambassadors, preventing invasions, etc. The third power executing the matters through punishment of crimes and judging the disputes of private individuals”. According to him, each of these powers should be vested in a separate and distinct organ, in order to secure liberty of individuals and avoid converge of powers. For AHSAN ALI (44/2k18) LLB (HONS) 2nd Year (3 r d semester ) GSLC, HYD. Principles of Political Science (405) Page 30 of 53 instance, if legislative and executive powers unite, there is apprehension that the concerned may enact tyrannical laws and execute them in a tyrannical manner. Moreover, there can be no liberty if the judicial power is not separated from the executive and legislative power. For instance, if judiciary joined with executive power, the judge might behave with violence and oppression. If it joined the legislative power, the life and liberty of the subject would be exposed to arbitrary control. Blackstone expressed the same idea in these words: “whenever the right of making and enforcing the law is vested in the same man or one and the same body of men, there can be no public liberty”. Montesquieu never contemplated a rigid separation of water tight compartments while demarcating the spheres of these branches of government. He proposed that the power of government should be so separated that one power should be a check to another and thus balance each other. Thus, the theory of Separation of powers proposes separation of functions and powers of government into following three organs: 1. LEGISLATURE: The functions of legislature are different from State to State. In a autocratic government, the legislature is either non-existent or just a consultative body, without any power to make laws. Such as in Afghanistan, Iran, Jordan, Russia, etc. Whereas, in a parliamentary form of government, the Legislature perform several functions. Such as in England, Pakistan, America, etc. Organization: Legislature is of two types, unicameral or bicameral. Unicameral legislature consists of one house, where as bicameral legislature consists of two houses, the upper house giving representation to the states on equality basis and the lower house giving representation to the provinces on population basis. Functions: The main functions of legislature are as follows: a. Legislation: Legislature is primarily responsible to make for the state. It can also alter the existing laws and repeal the old or outdated laws. Nowadays, this function of the legislature is the most important source of laws for the State b. Financial Functions: The functions of legislature are not only confined to make laws bu