Depuis la Révolution de 1789, la France a multiplié les expériences constitutionnelles et, après avoir refusé le bicamérisme, a connu depuis 1795 de nombreux régimes dotés d’une chambre haute. Les secondes assemblées républicaines, monarchistes ou impériales ont jalonné nos institutions publiques et politiques. Durant plus de deux siècles, la fonction présidentielle de la chambre haute s’est ainsi progressivement affirmée. L'éminence naturelle d'une telle charge, de même que l'autorité dont elle jouit au Palais du Luxembourg, permettent au président d'incarner la chambre haute. Cela n'empêche pas la fonction de demeurer en retrait sur le plan politique et cantonnée au périmètre caméral jusqu’en 1875. C’est alors qu’elle s’affirme, générant une influence au-delà de la haute assemblée. Son émancipation lui offre des attributions institutionnelles nouvelles. Ces missions sont efficacement remplies, attestant de la maturité de la fonction et permettant à de grands noms d’y être associés : la famille Pasquier, J. Ferry, J. Jeanneney, G. Monnerville, A. Poher… / Since the Revolution of 1789, France has multiplied the constitutional experiences. Most of political regimes have kept the bicameral system. The upper Houses, republican, monarchist or imperial, have thus marked out our institutions. For more than two centuries, the presidential function of the upper House has built its outlines.The natural eminence of such a workload, as well as the authority it enjoys in the Palais du Luxembourg, allows the President to personify the upper chamber. It doesn’t prevent the function from staying back from the political scene and confined to the cameral’perimeter until 1875. Then it asserts itself, creating an impact beyond the second chamber. Indeed, its emancipation giving new institutional attributions. These missions are successfully fulfilled, certifying the maturity of the function and allowing famous names to be related to them : the Pasquier’s family, J. Ferry, J. Jeanneney, G. Monnerville, A. Poher…

L'année 2009 marque le trentième anniversaire de l'accession au pouvoir de la première femme Premier ministre du Royaume-Uni, Margaret Thatcher, et ainsi le début d'une période dont la politique est marquée par son idéologie, celle du parti conservateur sous sa direction. Certains avancent même que la politique entreprise par le parti travailliste par la suite, et ce depuis son élection en 1997, est une poursuite du travail entrepris par les conservateurs sous la direction de Margaret Thatcher. Or, la période des trente années précédentes a aussi vu une évolution spectaculaire des statuts des composantes de l'Union britannique. En effet, 1979 est l'année du premier référendum sur la question constitutionnelle. Si ce référendum, par sa nature même, était voué à l'échec, il ne mit pas pour autant fin à un travail acharné des partisans de l'autonomie écossaise. Sous l'influence de courants nationalistes, les nations de l'Union britannique acquirent davantage d'indépendance dans le processus nommé dévolution. La fin des années soixante-dix est aussi une période de mobilisation quant à la question de la représentation des femmes dans la société écossaise, et plus particulièrement dans la sphère politique. Ainsi, ces deux problématiques (d'une part la question constitutionnelle et d'autre part la place des femmes en politique) semblent intimement liées dans la période 1979-2009, puisque la population écossaise ainsi que des groupes de réflexion constitués de femmes ont travaillé ardemment afin d'obtenir une meilleure représentation dans le monde politique, et de manière générale, dans la société. Ce travail de recherche s’interroge quant à l’incidence qu’a pu avoir cette période de changements sur le statut des femmes en Écosse – y a-t-il eu une amélioration de leur représentation ? Et si c'était le cas, ce changement serait-il imputable au nouveau système politique mis en place ? Les dix premières années de travail du nouveau Parlement écossais (1999-2009) sont analysées à travers du prisme de la question de la représentation des femmes et du particularisme (ou non) de la politique menée par une instance plus féminisée. / In 1979, Margaret Thatcher became the United Kingdom’s first female Prime Minister and 2009 was thus the 30th anniversary of that historical landmark. Those three decades are sometimes considered as having been largely influenced by her policy, even during the Labour rule (1997-2010) which followed her Premiership (1979-1990, followed by John Major’s). The same period became the scene of much debate on the constitutional question, as 1979 was the year of the failed referendum on devolution. However, it did not prevent those who believed in Scotland’s autonomy from further considering their options. At the same time, the Women’s Movement fought for gender equality, in the political area as well as other domains. Both causes collided in the call for better representation, which culminated in the 1990s. The research led on those particular times of change questions the links between both movements (the one in favour of autonomy and the one for gender equality) and whether they were able to work together towards a better representation of women in Scotland. The first ten years of the Scottish Parliament (1999-2009) are looked at through the scope of that notion of female representation: was a better one achieved? And if so, has it had a major impact on the way matters are handled in the newly established Scottish Parliament?

L'activité des parlementaires aixois a été guidée par la volonté de préserver l’ordre public -c’est-à-dire la structure de l’état et de la société ainsi que la tranquillité publique- ou d’en réparer les atteintes en Provence. Ce fil conducteur transparaît nettement lors des controverses religieuses qui ont émaillé le règne de Louis XV. En ce sens, les parlementaires aixois ont réaffirmé les mécanismes gallicans de la « réserve de réception » et de « l’appel comme d’abus », avant de recourir plus tardivement aux arrêts de règlement afin de lutter, à la fois contre les ecclésiastiques ultramontains et les jansénistes troublant simultanément la quiétude religieuse du pays provençal. Ce volet de l’activité parlementaire aixoise était une résurgence des conflits séculaires entre autorité séculière et autorité spirituelle. Ce souci de l’ordre public est également manifeste dans le désir que les officiers de la cour aixoise avaient d’asseoir leur institution comme la première de la province tout en se rattachant à la tradition monarchique. Pour cela, tant l’exclusivité de leurs compétences que leur emprise sur les autres institutions provençales étaient nécessaires. De même, des rapports sans animosité avec le souverain -ce qui laissait peu de place à la théorie de « l’union des classes » parlementaires- étaient indispensables. Ces impératifs préalables légitimaient leurs actions et les conduisaient à s’assurer de l’efficience de leurs arrêts de règlement -qui classiquement permettaient soit de conforter, soit d’adapter, soit de compléter la législation royale- en vue de maintenir la paix sociale, de préserver la sécurité et de conserver la prospérité en Provence / Officers of the Parliament of Provence's actions -under the reign of Louis XV- were governed by the desire to preserve public order – i.e. the structure of state and society as well as public tranquility– or redress abuses in Provence. This common thread is clearly visible throughout the religious controversies that occurred during the reign of Louis XV. In that respect, officers of the Parliament of Aix reaffirmed the gallican mechanisms of « réserve de réception » and of « l’appel comme d’abus » which they were able to make use of before later resorting to « arrêts de règlement » with a view to challenging ultramontane ecclesiastics and jansenists whose simultaneous actions disrupted religious peace in Provence. This aspect of parliamentary activity marked a resurgence of the age-old conflict between secular and spiritual authorities. This concern for public order is also patent in the Aixois officers’ desire to establish their institution as the highest in the province while still being bound to monarchical tradition. To that effect, both exclusive jurisdiction and ascendancy over Provençal institutions were necessary. In the same manner, a nonconfrontational relationship with the sovereign was essential, leaving very little room for the theory of « l’union des classes ». These prerequisite imperatives justified their actions and lead them to ensure the efficiency of their « arrêts de règlement » –traditionally providing the means of confirming, adapting or completing royal legislation– with a view to maintaining social peace, preserving public safety and upholding prosperity in Provence

No description available.

Over the last thirty years, research on the immigration policy-making of liberal democratic states has been preoccupied with the puzzle of why migrant inflows have reached unprecedented levels in Western countries, despite popular calls for restrictionism. A common response of scholars to this puzzle is that whilst governments endeavour to reflect public preferences for restrictive immigration policy, they are prevented from doing so by norms and institutions that are characteristic of liberal democracies. These ‘liberal constraints’ include the national judiciary; international human rights norms; and supranational institutions, such as the European Union. But what of the national legislature? What is the role of this key liberal institution in shaping immigration law within Western democracies? On this question, the literature says remarkably little. This thesis endeavours to redress this apparent neglect. Its case study is the United Kingdom, which is viewed, on the basis of existing research, as a ‘most-likely’ case for having a weak legislature; and in which the executive branch of government has been shown to be relatively unconstrained by the judiciary in comparison with other European states. Does anything, then, act to constrain the immigration restrictionism of the British government? Informed by a novel theoretical framework, ‘interpretive political opportunity structures’, the investigation focuses upon the Parliamentary passage of a single policy: the Immigration Bill 2013-14. Its analysis is based on a detailed examination of the Bill and its legislative process; and on thirty-three interviews that I conducted with key immigration policy stakeholders, including two Government ministers, one from each of the Coalition parties; Government and Opposition MPs; members of the House of Lords; civil servants; legal professionals; and lobbyists. The findings reveal that the UK Parliament had an important liberalising impact upon the Bill, acting to constrain the restrictionist bent of the executive. If the UK is accepted as a case in which we are most likely to find the opposite of this, i.e., a legislature impotent against a dominant executive, then the orthodox view that the legislature is in general a marginal actor in shaping immigration law may have to be revised. Notably, the unelected upper chamber, the House of Lords, appeared to constitute a stronger check on executive power than the elected lower chamber, the House of Commons. This is consonant with Peers’ understanding of their duty to legislate responsibly, rather than responsively (i.e., in line with popular opinion) like MPs in the Commons. Insulated from populist pressures, the Lords invites comparison with respect to its function and impact to the judiciaries of other Western nations, suggesting, perhaps, that in the British constitutional system, known for its pusillanimous judiciary, the Lords evidences an ‘adaptation’ to the marked power imbalance between the judicial and executive branches of the UK state.

A efetividade das oposições partidárias é um dos requisitos para o funcionamento adequado do regime democrático. A própria definição mais usual de democracia tem como um dos seus eixos centrais, ao lado da participação inclusiva, a contestação pública, pois é ela que garante o controle do governo e a rotatividade no poder. Não obstante, o estudo do comportamento das oposições parlamentares permanece relativamente negligenciado na literatura de política comparada e até nos estudos de caso. De fato, no contexto da emergência das novas democracias, as oposições partidárias parlamentares acabaram sendo percebidas, mesmo que tacitamente, como possíveis obstáculos àquela que foi e ainda é considerada a grande meta a ser conquista, a governabilidade. Assim, esse hiato se formou e persistiu porque os analistas acabaram privilegiando uma agenda de pesquisas focada na “engenharia constitucional” mais adequada à prevenção da manifestação de múltiplos atores com poder veto às políticas do Executivo. Por outro lado, poucos estudos foram realizados sobre os recursos institucionais à disposição das oposições parlamentares e sobre o uso que elas fazem desses recursos. O objetivo desta tese é analisar estes dois aspectos fundamentais do comportamento das oposições parlamentares no Brasil: (a) os recursos institucionais de que dispõem para fazer frente ao governo e (b) como elas utilizam tais recursos. Para a consecução desse objetivo, utilizo dados documentais e estatísticas descritivas sobre a ação das oposições. Em primeiro lugar, analiso a evolução dos dispositivos constitucionais e regimentais de 1832, 1854, 1928, 1934, 2936, 1947, 1952, 1955, 1972 e 2016, da Câmara e do Senado. Analiso, ainda, a proposição, a tramitação de projetos e as votações nominais, as prerrogativas das mecanismos de fiscalização e controle, tais como as CPIs, as audiências públicas, as convocações de ministros, os requerimentos de informação, o Conselho de Ética e Decoro Parlamentar, a Ouvidoria e a Corregedoria Parlamentar. Depois disso, analiso a utilização desses recursos pelas oposições por meio de dados referentes ao seu comportamento na Câmara dos Deputados no período de 1995 a 2014. A abordagem adotada é a do neoinstitucionalismo da vertente da teoria da escolha racional. Por esse prisma, o foco da análise é delimitado aos objetivos das oposições partidárias enquanto um ator político coletivo orientado por cálculos estratégicos e, simultaneamente, às restrições e incentivos institucionais que estruturam seus ambientes de atuação, ou seja, o eleitoral, o governamental e o judiciário. Os resultados da análise mostram que os blocos partidários de oposição usaram distintas estratégias, impactados pela sua trajetória e pelo cenário político. Os governos FHC propiciaram nas votações majoritárias possibilidades de movimentação de práticas propositivas e constrangedoras, que duplamente expõem as posições alternativas da oposição e as decisões polêmicas da situação. A oposição, liderada pelo Partido dos Trabalhadores, também recorre ao Supremo Tribunal Federal, esticando o jogo político, obtendo com o uso de ADIs vitórias parciais, simbólicas e publicizadoras de suas opiniões e das decisões controversas do governo e dos parlamentares da situação. Além disso, por não ter sido capaz de efetivar as tentativas de fiscalização, através de CPIs, mostra a dificuldade e os empecilhos do exercício da função de controle do governo. A partir de 2003, o bloco opositor, anteriormente governo, liderado pelo PSDD e PFL/DEM, investe na estratégia obstrutiva pura, reduzindo o uso dos recursos propositivos dentro de votações nominais. Além disso, foi mais efetivo na abertura de investigação, através de CPIs no Senado devido a sua bancada ampliada nesta Casa. Entretanto, essas polêmicas também os atingem e podem ter criado uma imagem de oposição disruptiva, não leal e não propositiva. No governo Dilma, na primeira gestão, encontra-se o aprofundamento da obstrução, com a obtenção das maiores vitórias dessa estratégia no período. Também, mobiliza importantes CPIs que abalaram o governo e conjugadas com a obstrução, promoveram frequentes paralisias decisórias. / The effectiveness of partisan opposition is one of the requirements for the proper functioning of the democratic regime. The most common definition of democracy has one of its central axes, alongside inclusive participation, public contestation, since it guarantees governance of the government and rotation in power. Nevertheless, the study of the behavior of parliamentary oppositions remains relatively neglected in the literature of comparative politics and even in case studies. In fact, in the context of the emergence of new democracies, parliamentary partisan oppositions were eventually perceived, even tacitly, as possible obstacles to what was and still is considered the great goal to be achieved - governability. Thus, this hiatus was formed and persisted because the analysts ended up favoring a research agenda focused on "constitutional engineering" more adequate to prevent the manifestation of multiple actors with veto power to the policies of the Executive. On the other hand, few studies have been done on the institutional resources available to parliamentary opposition and on their use of these resources. The purpose of this thesis is to analyze precisely these two fundamental aspects of the behavior of parliamentary oppositions in Brazil: (a) the institutional resources they have to face the government and (b) how they use such resources. In order to achieve this objective, I use documentary data and descriptive statistics on opposition actions. First, I analyze the evolution of the constitutional and regimental provisions of the House and the Senate of 1832, 1854, 1928, 1934, 2936, 1947, 1952, 1955, 1972 and 2016. I also analyze the proposal and process of projects, the prerogatives of the control and control mechanisms, such as the CPIs, the public hearings, the convocations of ministers, the information requirements, the Ethics and Parliamentary Decree Council, the Ombudsman the Parliamentary Corregedoria. After that, I analyze the use of these resources by the opposition through data on their behavior in the Chamber of Deputies from 1988 to 2010. The approach adopted is that of the neoinstitutionalism of the rational choice theory. From this perspective, the focus of the analysis is delimited to the objectives of the party oppositions as a collective political actor oriented by strategic calculations, and simultaneously to the institutional constraints and incentives that structure their working environments, that is, the electoral, the governmental and the the judiciary. The results of the analysis show that opposition party blocs have used different strategies, impacted by their trajectory and the political scenario. The FHC governments favored in the majority voting possibilities of moving propositional and constraining practices, which doubly expose the alternative positions of the opposition and the controversial decisions of the situation. The opposition, led by the Workers' Party, also appeals to the Federal Supreme Court, stretching the political game, obtaining with Adis partial victories, symbolic and publicizing their opinions and the controversial decisions of the government and parliamentarians of the situation. Moreover, because it has not been able to carry out the inspection attempts, through CPIs, it shows the difficulty and obstacles to the exercise of the government control function. Since 2003, the opposition bloc, formerly government, led by the PSDD and DEM, invests in the pure obstructive strategy, reducing the use of propositional resources within nominal votes. In addition, it was more effective in opening investigations, through Senate CPIs due to its expanded counterpart in this House. However, these polemics also hit them and may have created a disruptive, non-loyal and non-propositional image of opposition. In the Dilma government, in the first management, one finds the deepening of the obstruction, with obtaining the greater victories of this strategy in the period. Also, it mobilizes important CPIs that shook the government and combined with the obstruction, promoted frequent decision paralysis.

Esta dissertação examina as defesas do tráfico negreiro e da escravidão negra no Império do Brasil entre 1826 e 1865, isto é, desde o início regular do regime representativo no país até o desenlace da Guerra Civil nos Estados Unidos. O corpus documental compreende discursos políticos emitidos na forma de falas parlamentares, pareceres do Conselho de Estado, artigos de jornal, panfletos, memórias, livros e representações municipais e provinciais. Os textos foram interpretados por meio não apenas da análise do discurso, mas também da história social e política, de forma que se verificou seu impacto sobre a intensidade do contrabando negreiro, as articulações partidárias e as relações sociais. O primeiro capítulo aborda os efeitos do convênio antitráfico anglo-brasileiro sobre as relações entre Executivo e Legislativo, bem como as expectativas correntes sobre o fim definitivo do comércio. O segundo estuda sua reabertura sob a forma de contrabando, fundada no apoio sólido de determinados grupos sociais a políticos que o vindicavam (sobretudo, o grupo do Regresso e saquaremas). O seguinte narra as respostas pró-cativeiro dos estadistas imperiais à diplomacia mais agressiva da Grã-Bretanha na década de 1840, enquanto o último afere como os líderes parlamentares, mesmo depois da supressão do contrabando (1850), defenderam a sobrevida da escravidão no Brasil por tempo indeterminado como meio de desenvolvimento nacional. / This work studies the defense of slavery and slave trade in Imperial Brazil from 1826 to 1865, since the regular workings of Parliament until the outcome of the Civil War in the United States. It focuses on political discourses such as parliamentary speeches, State Council rulings, journal articles, pamphlets, books and political petitions. These evidences have been interpreted in the field not only of discourse analysis, but also of Social and Political History, in order to verify their impact upon slave trade dynamics, party building and social relations. The first chapter approaches the effects of the Anglo-Brazilian Slave Trade Treaty over Executive and Legislative relations, as well as the widespread conviction that the odious commerce was definitely finished. Chapter two handles its reopening as an illegal activity through articulated actions of particular social groups and members of Parliament (mainly the so-called grupo do Regresso and saquaremas). The following chapter relates the proslavery strategies of imperial politicians to cope with the increasingly more aggressive British diplomacy in the 1840s. The last one shows how parliamentary leaders, even after the slave trade suppression (1850), vindicated the political existence of slavery in Brazil as a means of national development for an indeterminate period of time

No description available.

Esta dissertação examina as defesas do tráfico negreiro e da escravidão negra no Império do Brasil entre 1826 e 1865, isto é, desde o início regular do regime representativo no país até o desenlace da Guerra Civil nos Estados Unidos. O corpus documental compreende discursos políticos emitidos na forma de falas parlamentares, pareceres do Conselho de Estado, artigos de jornal, panfletos, memórias, livros e representações municipais e provinciais. Os textos foram interpretados por meio não apenas da análise do discurso, mas também da história social e política, de forma que se verificou seu impacto sobre a intensidade do contrabando negreiro, as articulações partidárias e as relações sociais. O primeiro capítulo aborda os efeitos do convênio antitráfico anglo-brasileiro sobre as relações entre Executivo e Legislativo, bem como as expectativas correntes sobre o fim definitivo do comércio. O segundo estuda sua reabertura sob a forma de contrabando, fundada no apoio sólido de determinados grupos sociais a políticos que o vindicavam (sobretudo, o grupo do Regresso e saquaremas). O seguinte narra as respostas pró-cativeiro dos estadistas imperiais à diplomacia mais agressiva da Grã-Bretanha na década de 1840, enquanto o último afere como os líderes parlamentares, mesmo depois da supressão do contrabando (1850), defenderam a sobrevida da escravidão no Brasil por tempo indeterminado como meio de desenvolvimento nacional. / This work studies the defense of slavery and slave trade in Imperial Brazil from 1826 to 1865, since the regular workings of Parliament until the outcome of the Civil War in the United States. It focuses on political discourses such as parliamentary speeches, State Council rulings, journal articles, pamphlets, books and political petitions. These evidences have been interpreted in the field not only of discourse analysis, but also of Social and Political History, in order to verify their impact upon slave trade dynamics, party building and social relations. The first chapter approaches the effects of the Anglo-Brazilian Slave Trade Treaty over Executive and Legislative relations, as well as the widespread conviction that the odious commerce was definitely finished. Chapter two handles its reopening as an illegal activity through articulated actions of particular social groups and members of Parliament (mainly the so-called grupo do Regresso and saquaremas). The following chapter relates the proslavery strategies of imperial politicians to cope with the increasingly more aggressive British diplomacy in the 1840s. The last one shows how parliamentary leaders, even after the slave trade suppression (1850), vindicated the political existence of slavery in Brazil as a means of national development for an indeterminate period of time

This paper investigates the correlation between how Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) vote and their respective domestic democracy level. In doing so, it tests two hypotheses – first, that domestic democracy level affects MEP voting conduct. Second, that domestic democracy level affects the way MEPs tend to be disloyal to their European Party Groups (EPGs). The first hypothesis regarding the correlation between democracy level and MEP voting conduct is analysed statistically through logistic regression, the data for which has been collected from VoteWatch, whereas the second hypothesis is tested in a qualitative discussion based upon a smaller dataset.                       Both hypotheses are supported by the data, but because the study is based on a single issue, one can only feasibly generalise the findings to similar cases voted upon by the European Parliament. This paper uses a motion in the Parliament that directly concerns democratic values – as such, any conclusions drawn only apply to other cases similarly centred on democratic values. However, the findings of this study underline the importance of further studies on the topic of the influence of democracy levels on the political process of the European Union.