Discuss How the Macau Sar Basic Law Shows “Executive-Led Government”.
Theoretically, checks and balance is essentially important between the Executive-Legislative branches in democratic regimes, it can prevent power dominate by either one branch which may result to “absolute power makes absolute corrupt and incompetent”-- Duke Clinton. However, the central government wants to assure the transition of Macau sovereignty from Portugal to China smooth and stable, and on the other hand, she also wants to develop a system that is convenient in monitoring Macau SAR government’s activities, and ensure Macau is running within the motherland’s state strategy. Therefore, the Basic Law of Macau has given more power to the Executive Branch than the Legislative Branch. This inclination of power provided by the Basic Law of Macau makes Macau SAR becoming an Executive-led government. In the following, we will discuss in detail about how the Basic Law shows Executive-led government.
The first point, which is also the most significant identification of Executive-led government of Macau, is the contrast between the influence, or say the interfering power of Executive to Legislative and vice versa. According to the Macau Basic Law Article 51 and 52. When the Chief Executive considered the bills or laws approved by Legislative Assembly do not fit the Macau SAR’s common interest, he can choose refusing to sign the bill. But on the other hand, when the legislature refuses to pass a budget introduced by the government or any other bill which is considered (by the Chief-Executive) not fitting the overall interests of the Region, after negotiation(the Basic Law doesn’t stated specifically to negotiate with which department, so I will assume this “negotiation” is negotiate with the Legislative Assembly) , if consensus still cannot be reached, the Chief Executive will then have the power to dissolve the Legislative Assembly one time in each term of his or her office after consulting the Executive Council and explain to the public, and re-elect a new
The first point, which is also the most significant identification of Executive-led government of Macau, is the contrast between the influence, or say the interfering power of Executive to Legislative and vice versa. According to the Macau Basic Law Article 51 and 52. When the Chief Executive considered the bills or laws approved by Legislative Assembly do not fit the Macau SAR’s common interest, he can choose refusing to sign the bill. But on the other hand, when the legislature refuses to pass a budget introduced by the government or any other bill which is considered (by the Chief-Executive) not fitting the overall interests of the Region, after negotiation(the Basic Law doesn’t stated specifically to negotiate with which department, so I will assume this “negotiation” is negotiate with the Legislative Assembly) , if consensus still cannot be reached, the Chief Executive will then have the power to dissolve the Legislative Assembly one time in each term of his or her office after consulting the Executive Council and explain to the public, and re-elect a new