Politics in Comparative Perspective Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 5000 words

Politics in Comparative Perspective - Essay Example Through the internet, talk shows and television, the media has taken a central role in contemporary politics. Politicians are now able to voice their agendas through new forms of social media. In the liberal democracies, the legislature has vital roles in which the primary role is in the formulation of laws. This paper will discuss the role of parliaments in modern democracies with reference to various countries. The concept of multi-level governance and its significance in understanding policy-making will be discussed. The paper will discuss the functions of constitution and critically appraise the role of media in modern politics as well as make comparisons of parliaments in two liberal democracies. Moreover, the paper will discuss media in contemporary politics and legislature in liberal democracies. The role of parliament in modern democracies The parliament has several duties in modern societies. The parliament plays a fundamental role as a state organ. The parliament appraises the legislative proposals during the process of their passage. It also supervises the responsibilities of the executive and acts as a watchdog on activities of the government. The parliamentary committee framework allows the legislators to devolve their labor and focus on specific area of expertise. The parliamentary committee systems are crucial structures for legislative mechanisms often referred to as miniature legislatures or microcosms of their progenitor parliamentary bodies. Most countries tend to depend on such committees to perform legislative duties. Bangladesh for instance, adopts the parliamentary system of government. The parliament wields all legislative authority. Bangladesh’s parliamentary system had been replaced with single party presidential system due to political differences between parties and government party, which exercised immense power and failed to recognize the formal opposition party in parliament. However, the military took over and abolished th e one-party presidential system in 1975. Bangladesh had been under civil-military regime dominated by the military for 17 years. Parliament policies adopted during this period served the interest of the regime. However, the parliamentary system of governance was revived in 1991 after civil unrest erupted (Mahiuddin 2009). Mahiuddin (2009) observed that the Bangladesh parliamentary committees tended to participate more in supervising activities of government rather than appraising policy matters. Political parties tend to influence the functioning of the parliamentary committees within the context of conflicting politics. This implies that the parliamentary committees tend to be dysfunctional when there is lack of collaboration between various parties involved. Notwithstanding such limitations, the parliamentary committees tend to nurture training environment for legislators to enhance their parliamentary norms and knowledge of regulations. Bangladesh’s parliament had been uni cameral since the promulgation of constitution in 1972, which entrusted all legislative power to Jatiya Sansad or one-chambered parliament. The president was the chief of nominal executive while the prime minister wielded real executive power. This system is similar to the cabinet government of UK. The discretion of prime minister and cabinet towards the legislature was mutual. Parliamentary committees were adopted from the British. The standing and select committees