| Abstract [eng] |
The object of this research is topical and important, because there are not a lot of similar researches. This study works on bicameral and unicameral parliaments – they are analysed and compared. The very concentration of the work is not to scrutinize the parliaments of different countries, but, to find differences in the way of comparison and analyse between unicameralism and bicameralism. For the purpose to reach the goal and to implement tasks of this research, we use methods of systematic analyse, comparison of law, concluding, analyse of documents, historical comparison, intentions of the legislator, logical, linguistic, etc. We can hardly imagine democracy and its implementation without the institution of parliament nowadays. Parliament is institution of public authority. And the parliament expresses the will of the sovereign of the state – the People – in the most proper way. The parliament has the power of legislation, but each country decides which model suits better – unicameralism or bicameralism. Firstly is analysed the history of parliamentarism. Later is presentation of short view of genesis of the theory of separation of powers and what place parliament takes in it. Also is looking for and analysing the reasons, why countries choose one or other model of parliament. In the second part of this research we have chosen for analyse examples of different countries (Lithuania and Sweden), which have unicameral parliament. Is scrutinized the model of composition, internal structure and the process of legislature. In the third part is analogical analysing of bicameral parliaments in France, Check Republic, Germany and the United States of America. The mane advantage of bicameralism is that the bill, before becoming law, passed double control. But the process of legislation in the unicameral parliament is much faster. |
