The powers of the head of state: in relation to parliament, this convening its sessions, publication of laws, the right of dissolution, sometimes - the right of veto. The head of state forms the government (sometimes only formally approves), it has the right to dismiss the ministers and the government to resign, to appoint judges, to provide citizenship and the right of asylum, to conclude and ratify a certain kind of international agreements, to prescribe diplomatic representatives, to reward, pardon convicts, etc., But the implementation of these powers in practice depends on the form of government, from the real position of the head of state. In addition, with any form of government, the authority of the state may realize independently, and for the implementation of others, the consent or approval of the parliament or even the government is required. The state of the state performs the functions of the Supreme State of the State Out and within the country (signs international treaties, has the right to directly appeal to The heads of foreign countries and governments, appoints diplomatic representatives, carries out the accreditation of representatives in foreign countries, acts with official appeals to parliament and messages to the nation). Functions of the head of state, for example, in the inheritance of the throne or temporary incapacity of the monarch can be transferred to his representative or regent Council. In addition, the prerogatives of the head of state can be carried out by an official acting on behalf of the monarch in one of the states in the Ulya. The state of the state can be headed by the executive power (presidential republic, absolute and dualistic monarchy), and be part of the national public authority (India), as well as not to relate to any branch of power, performing a coordinating function (mixed republic). In the parliamentary republic and monarchies, in many in the semi-presidential republics, in order for some (not all) the acts of the president or the monarch acting, premier The minister must bore them with his signature (the so-called contrason). The monarch is the head of state and at the same time the head of the executive. All full of power belongs to him only in the absolute monarchy. The actual powers of the head of state and the head of the executive authority, he enjoys in a dualistic monarchy, in the parliamentary monarchy the acts of the head of state and the head of the executive authority, it is usually at the direction of the government. The president may occupy a different position in the system of state power: to be only the head of state, at the same time the head of the state and the executive authority, the head of state and the actual head of the government in the presence of a special position of the administrative prime minister. The President is elected for a certain period. Promotions of the President's election: - Voting in Parliament; - Voting of electors. Voters vote for the electors, and the last, without gathering together, elect the president from among the candidates nominated by the parties; - election of the president of the Special Electoral Collegium (Federal Assembly in Germany); - election directly by voters. The legal responsibility of the president in many countries is also limited. So, in Finland, in France, in the cat d "Ivoire, the president can be brought to justice only for the actions performed by him in the performance of his functions, if they constitute the state treason. According to the US Constitution, the President's liability comes for treason, bribing n other grave crimes and violations. The German president is responsible for intentional violations of the law, which, obviously, frees him from liability for careless offenses. It remains to add that the procedure for attracting the president to the responsibility is special. It involves several instances, each of which is assigned their own role. For example, The Lower Chamber of Parliament puts forward a charge, and the question of the guilt of the head of state solves the Upper Chamber. It is possible that the accusation nominates both chambers at the same time (France) or any of them (Germany), after which the question of the president's guilt solves the Supreme or Constitutional Court.

If the guilt will be installed, the president is removed from office, and this process can be completed. If it is continued, then from parliament the case is transferred to the court (usually by the Supreme), which makes the decision to describe. Such a procedure was developed in England, applied to high ranks and got the name of impeachment. The president is enshrined by the rights to special content - a high complaint, which is usually not changed during its term of office; the right to use the residence and means of transport; to pay for executive expenses; The right to protect his personality, the safety of family members and others. With a presidential position, not only privileges are connected, but also their legal representation. For example, the Constitution of some Latin American states prohibit the President to leave the country without the consent of Parliament. Even at the beginning of the 20th century, the United States was considered invalid by the President abroad, even to participate in the establishment of the League of Nations. The state right regulates relations related to the retirement of the president before the expiration of its powers. Such can take place in the case of his death, deregistration (impeachment), the impossibility of fulfilling the responsibilities of the head of state. The possibility of fulfilling the obligations is established either at the request of the president himself or without his participation. In the first case, he can declare the resumption of his activities. In the second - the impossibility of execution by the president of obligations establishes the court, parliament or a collegium from among ministers, parliamentary managers and others. At the same time, the president remains the right to challenge their decision and resume the implementation of the authority. It must be said that in practice cases of termination of presidential powers due to illness, old age and similar circumstances is not observed. Elderly and already low-speed Hindenburg was presidential in Germany to death. Due to severe disease (hemorrhage into the brain, paralysis of the left part of the body, a temporary violation of speech), President Woodrow Wilson did not participate in the Cabinet meetings, and 28 laws adopted by the US Congress remained unsigned and did not entered into force. Even such obvious disorders did not lead to the suspension or termination of presidential powers. There are two consequences from the fact of the early disposal of the president. First, he may be appointed successor, who fulfills the position of head of state. The successors are temporary or valid until the expiration of the term of office of the president they replaced. So, the Italian president may temporarily replace the Chairman of the Senate, and in the United States the law defines the range of officials (Vice-President, members of the Cabinet - only fourteen), replacing the retired president, and also establishes a sequence between them. Persons constantly replacing the president of the United States have the right to fulfill his duties without any seizures before the expiration of the term of office of the replaceable. The second, after the disposal of the president, extraordinary elections can be carried out. However, they are appointed when the president retired finally. The final disposal takes place in the event of his death, deregulation or refusal, as well as, provided that the impossibility of executing the presidential authority will be recognized as permanent. The right to regard this inability as final usually belongs to the same bodies that decide the question of the responsibility of the head of state. For example, in France, the Constitutional Council is entitled to make a final decision that the president does not have the ability to continue the execution of the functions of the head of state. The powers of the president stopped:

As a normal order, with the expiration of the term of office at the time of joining the post of the newly elected president.

Their early termination: in cases of death, resignation, displacement, as a result of the application of the impeachment procedure or the procedure of parliamentary responsibility, inability for health reasons to implement presidential powers. The presidential rejection from office is carried out by parliament or with the participation of Parliament. The legal consequence of the application of the impeachment procedure or the procedure similar to it is the presidential rejection of the President - as a rule, without the right to occupy it in the future. At the same time, in some countries, at the same time with impeachment, the president can be brought to criminal liability (France), in other criminal liability it is possible only after the deregistration (Germany), and in some states a person cannot be brought to criminal responsibility for acts committed during the period execution of presidential powers (Czech Republic).

In the case of temporary or early termination by the President of his authority, they are carried out by the vice-president (if this post is available) or the head of the upper chamber or the entire parliament (if the parliament is unique). More often such a substitution is short, since with the early termination of presidential powers in most countries, the elections of the new president are appointed within the prescribed period. However, in the United States, the vice-president becomes president for all the remaining time before the expiration of the term of office of the elect, but who stopped his office ahead of schedule. In some countries, the powers of the person who performs the function of the president is limited. For example, in France, the function of the president who ceased his authority early, temporarily (before the elections of the new head of state, which should take place no earlier than 20 and no later than 30 days after the opening of the vacancy) are assigned to the Chairman of the Senate, and if he has In turn, there will be obstacles to their execution - to the government. However, they are not entitled to appoint a referendum and dissolve the National Assembly; At this time, the issues of confidence in the government and the change of the Constitution (Article 7 of the Constitution of France) cannot be resolved.

B Difference from the Ventrenos Chapter gives liabilities due to its own impact. Someone corresponds due to national treason, the implementation of other gravity offenses.

An analysis of the prescriptions of the constitutionalities of European republics affecting the reasons to attract the president's responsibility leads to the conclusion that the data of the constitution is allowed to be divided into 2 categories.

The first team is the Constitution, which take into account the premature elimination of the President with the exclusive posts, if someone does not carry out its own constitutional direct duties. Other texts, reasons for premature removal of the president, about the completed position, in coordination with the constitutional data, are the material certifying this, which head does not function in agreement with its own constitutional purpose, does not cope with these problems, which in accordance From the Constitution, someone is obliged to resolve, will not sell the powers entering his responsibility zone or in a unreasonable way to use them, and in addition, it does not carry out direct duties entering its ability.

The Constitution relating to the 2nd GPUPU takes into account absolutely other reasons for premature removal of the president with a domal care position, not at all universal with presidential work. In the property of the reason, with the aim of attracting the president to justice, the data of the Constitution takes into account the implementation of an illegal action - I change the depreciation or otherwise an offense. A similar offense has the opportunity to make not only the chapter, however, however, as director, and Kara due to its implementation is quite equal to both for the purpose of the president, in such a way and for the purpose of a native. The difference is only in the exercise of the president's attraction and a native to criminal responsibility. Thus, in accordance with this GPUP of the constitutions, directly because of his own work, the chapter does not give up bad responsibility.

There are special prescriptions in individual constitutions, in the final figure, we are paid to attract the president to liability due to non-fulfillment of their own constitutional direct duties. For example, in the Constitution of the Republic of Iceland, it was suggested: "The chapter does not give up responsibility due to their own official impacts" (Part 1 of Art. 11). The figure of Finland decides: "The action opposite the president due to their own official opportunities does not have the ability to worry" (§ 113). In coordination with Art. 68 The Constitution of the West Republic "The Head of the Republic gives liabilities due to the impact made by him near the implementation of their own direct responsibilities, only in the case of national treason." In accordance with the Constitution of the Bohemian Republic, "The Head of the Republic does not give anything obligation due to the implementation of its own function" (paragraph 3 of Art. 54).

The liberation of the president with responsibility due to the failure to fulfill its own constitutional direct duties, with the lawyer's opinion, denotes what is always in this case, which is expressed in the Constitution on the function of the president, its tasks, zones of responsibility and legal capacity, always in this case Reliable is told in the president's oath, - deafening, however, to repentance, non-degree phrases.

In this way, the conclusion of JAVEN: If the figure does not record in the property of the reasons for premature removal of the president, with the president of its own constitutional direct duties, in this case, the beloved, undoubtedly exists, existence due to the work of the president.

Premature breaking the possibilities of the President of the Republic in European countries.

The separation of the president with office has the opportunity to be kindly. In this case, the beloved is as an act of good-natured power of the Supreme Official Person of the country, the country has no need to adopt one or another, in such a case. If the problem appears, in this case, someone belongs to this, to whom is obliged to appear prayer for resignation. Opening, according to the recognizable, it is necessary to search in the method of legitimizing the presidential mandate. Over time, in what place someone acquired from voters - the statement is obliged to be directed by the people, if this convention is, in this case, to parliamentary, in this case, to eat the election method determines the addressee.

Consider the more detailed causes of premature unscrupulous stopping capabilities. Between them there are:

b Violation of the Constitution (Austria, Albania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Germany, Greece, Georgia, Iceland, Lithuania, Macedonia, Moldova, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Croatia);

b State treason, treason of homeland (Armenia, Bulgaria, Greece, Georgia, Italy, Kazakhstan, Cyprus, Russia, Romania, Slovakia, Turkey Ukraine, Finland, France, Czech Republic);

b heavy crime (Azerbaijan, Armenia, Belarus, Russia, Romania, Slovenia, Finland);

b Crime (Austria, Georgia, Ukraine);

b Violation of the Law (Hungary), an established offense (Ireland);

b a crime against humanity (Finland);

b other grounds: entry into force of the conviction (Estonia), low or morally disgraced misconduct (Cyprus), the inability of the performance of functions, unworthy behavior (Malta).

Thus, these foundations can be reduced to three groups:

• 1) violation of the Constitution;
• 2) criminal or administratively pursued offenses
• 3) Amoral, immoral misconduct.

The constitution of individual states (let the conversation be so in the main thing about the countries appearing in the post-Soviet location) take into account the premature gap of the presidential opportunities due to the inability according to the pecariz of well-being to fulfill the presidential functions. As for operations, in this case, the Constitution is only a unit provide detailed conclusions to the problems that appear in relationships. The main order is worth the problem of this, who exactly has the ability to testify to this sustainable powerlessness. Only a unit in the property of specialists in this polite process is obliged to be denoted only by parliamentarians. And if a medical decision is required, in this case, who is obliged to provide it and to what extent is it unites folketing? Discussions in this calculation bored in the Russian law press. However, they possess exceptionally abstract significance, because they did not acquire any lawful conclusion.

The peculiar structure of the Commission, established according to this pretext, makes an excellent offer of the figure of Kazakhstan, in accordance with what admissions and parliamentarians are introduced into this commission. It is difficult to notice to what extent "constructive" enough of this kind of structure, because, in the difference from doctors, the deputies in the main mass of their own in any way are not burdened with special medical comprehensions. And the granuals of Luda and the ward regulations in the framework of the Deputy Commission, it is not very superimposed into the classic figures of deputy work.

The explanation of the "pathology of the Constitution" seems the most difficult on the number of reasons. In fact, the polishemia of the main important document of the country brings a significant number of uncertainty in the content of responsibility due to non-compliance with the Constitution in this case by the president. The solution to this problem, according to the recognizable, enters the responsibility zone of constitutional control.

We add to this that the president's entry in place fit with the circumstance of the adoption of the oath, in which the correctness and implementation of the Constitution will be equal as one with the main direct responsibilities of the head of the country. In this context, meaningless non-compliance with the president of the General Law of the state has the opportunity to be regarded as "oath incontinence", in which case it is equal to the crime, including in the event that someone and do not oppress in criminal mode, which is properly demolished in the singular moral and moral sins. And if this vow is applied to the Bible, which is absolutely certain with the goal of Christian Europe, in this case, this already and the offense is before the Almighty.

With a curious constitutional initiative, the Venusic Head of the Chirac Navig, Personality, passed in the pool in the summer of 2003, passed, according to the expansion of the reasons for the poverty of the presidential mandate in the expansion of the reasons. Suriname Figure takes into account only one reason for the criminal responsibility of the president - the national change. However, the view of the constitutional recommendation and the abolishing date of the relatively borders of the presidential immunity did not fit. And this, according to the recognizable, the only one with the main topics of constitutional correction, from which chapter.

According to the conclusion of a constitutional recommendation from January 22, 1999, immunity expands into all sorts of exposure to the president in the implementation of eigenfunctions, in addition to the action of nationwide treason. As for the operations, led up to the implementation of presidential functions, or operations, which are conjugate with their embodiment, the criminal obligation has the ability to come only in accordance with the exercise pre-installed by the Constitution, and in fact, in the journey of the highest SIRTILITY Justice (Art. 68 of the Constitution ).

A slightly different situation in the abolishing date, which in the complete meeting on October 10, 2001, it was the right of the highest Palace of Justice, only a single unified branching formula was cut off - nationwide treason. As for other crimes, the head of the republic protects the gravestone to the republic by protecting the gravestone to either during the implementation of presidential functions. And the period of limitations simply temporarily stops during the presidential mandate.

Constitutional improvement will not fall into the invisibility of the president, which, however, does not carry an unconditional in any way. In fact, the chapter does not have the ability to be subject to criminal or managerial pursuit during its own functions. However, on the monthly period, according to the expiration of the mandate, opposite it, it has the ability to be resumed either precipitated a huge chase due to the sins, produced up to or during the execution of presidential opportunities.

Expands and reasons for deregistration. The probability of deregistration is allowed due to an offense, falling before the lawsunction of the international criminal date, and due to ignoring their own direct responsibilities, undoubtedly unsubscribed with the presidential mandate. Relief is conducted by parliament, which is reorganized in a great judgment. The order of the meeting of the Highest Swell has the opportunity to go with one with the Chambers of Parliament and is recorded in another chamber, which is obliged to confess according to this pretext in the 15-day period. The permission to convene a date temporarily stops the execution of presidential direct duties, which up to the adoption of the conclusion is pre-assigned to the Chairman of the Senate. A great judgment before the chairmanship of the Chairman of the State Assembly with a casual voting should approve the permit for renunciation in a two-month period. His permission enters into force instantly.

In this way, the advisable plan significantly expands the causes (compositions of offenses) of the president's rejection, which are actually due to the jurisdiction of the international criminal date. The chapter has the opportunity to be shifted from office and because of the case (or rather, passivity is "ignoring direct responsibilities"), in no way representing a crime.

Decuting procedure.

The election of the president with direct popular voting, and it took into account the most than 20 European countries, it is naturally implies that the problem of early cessation of its capabilities is obliged to resolve the population, and rather, the selective state building, to whom the country's leader must be a private administration. So that no less given is, as the principle, the privilege of the supreme impressive state body. Only in 3 European countries - Austria, Romania, Iceland - the final term belongs to this, to whom the chapter should be his own mandate, in this case to eat the people, what a solution to this problem through a referendum. In this case, the Assembly activates the operation and assumes the permit for the renunciation of the president and then focuses him into the thesis of Luda. If the constituency is made opposed to the conclusion of the parliament, absolutely natural and correctly the constitutional order of the dissolution of the Supreme Solid Organ, the permission of which has gross in a disagreement with the good will of Luda, in which case to eat with the principle of nationwide sovereignty laid in the base of current constitutionalism. The most this, in accordance with the Concycling of Austria, the thin decision of the voters is regarded as president's re-election in the new period.

In the connection of the head of the country, the president only mentions the operation of the impeachment. The renunciation is the elimination of the head of the President from the administration due to the proposed pathology of the Constitution, the law, which or crimes, in this case to eat due to the implementation of operations, in no way consistant with the highest position of the country's head. The term "renunciation" is the British name already appeared at the end of the XIV century and used in order to blame the Supreme Official Persons of the English Autocracy. The name was taken by the Americans, and they connected this operation to the Constitution. The head of America, to the sample, has the ability to be exposed to the impeachment in the case of treason, bribery or other severe offense. The operation of the impeachment over time is killed Cortesa - Parliament America. Nature room - the agent room - stimulates the action and inspects certain conditions, and then takes permission for guilt, thoring in the property of the date always. Congressmen are thinking by voting, the chapter is guilty or not guilty. In case the guidance of the president is confirmed by the ward, in this case, the action according to the essence is considered by the Senate before the chairmanship of the supervisor of the Supreme Sign. In order to "confirm the notes of the impeachment" you need the eternal part of the readers of the agents choir, and the permission of the censure begins 2/3 of the readers of the Senate members: only in this case the head is removed from the administration. If the senators do not recover the necessary number of glazers, the chapter remains in position.

Other constitutions also take into account the types of attraction of the head of the country to justice. In this way, for example, in France, an action on a crime, the overall leader of the country, is considered in the two chambers of parliament, which are obliged to prove comparing 2 thirds of the eyes. Next, complaints are considered by the highest tribunal.

Similar operations are introduced by the constitutions of other states. The impeachment process, for example, did not exist so long ago in Brazil. As a result, due to the permitted crimes in 1995, the head of Fernando Kollor -de Melo was removed from the administration.

In Ukraine, in the country of Kazakhstan and individual other post-socialist countries, this process is significantly complicated. The impeachment problem has the ability to be installed only with a significant partially members of the Palace, after that, that a specialized council is being formed, covering the inscription. The exercise takes part constitutional and main gossip that miscalculate their own decisions. The conclusions are perceived by the competent majority of glazers, the lapidarity period is determined, in the development of which this process is to be crowned. In case, in a certain period, the permission is not enough for nothing, complaints against the president is rejected.

In individual states, there are all chances to be used other operations than renunciation. In Slovakia, the chapter has the opportunity to be shifted from office by parliament due to the impact, aimed opposite the democratic regime, the wholeness of the country, the main mass of 3/5 of the glands. A similar desire was made, however, the required number of glasses was not acquired. In Romania, Azerbaijan in accordance with the 1995 Constitution, this permission begins the bulk of only the composition of the parliament, but is brought up into a vote, which one takes full permission. In Austria, Iceland, the chapter has the opportunity to be withdrawn from his own post by voters (this principle did not use the letter alone). In Poland and France, Convent has the opportunity to approve the indictment decision, and the president judges a special judgment.

In practice, in the individual post-Soviet republics (Country) at the basis of the 90s, certain presidents were shifted from their own posts by voting voters, but there were no hustling actions. The episodes of the proper resignation of the president (country), forced resignation (America) were given, besides, the elimination of the president from the administration was sometimes accompanied by a multicressed war (Iberia).

In parliamentary republics, due to exceptional lowering (for example, in Slovakia), due to the acts, according to the Office of the country, the head of responsibility does not give any way. Because of this, ministers are paid, leadership, according to the recommendation of which chapter assumes respective acts. In the presidential and semi-presidential republics, the head in addition does not give birth to parliament in any way (in addition to the more inspected by the impeachment).

The vice-chapter does not contain significant capabilities of the letter in one state. Someone replaces the president in the event of its unavailability, made by the "charter president" near the difficult disease, died, the resignation of the president, but presidential election is obliged to develop regarding short-term time.

The vice-chapter is usually preferred in a twice with the president as well as contenders of one party and according to that organization, that is the head. In single developing states, the Vice-Chapter is appointed by the President (Country), besides, sometimes some number of vice-presidents happens: the best, 2nd and in such a way. In the people, one period was 3 vice president. In some states, the place of Vice The preview is not taken into account. In these states, in which the position of the Vice-President is not available, the president as a rule replaces the head of one with the Chambers of Parliament (more - Senate) or the head of the government. In the event of the president's unavailability, he is replaced by the head of the Senate (country), Prime Minister (country), head of the unicameral parliament (country). The figure of Bulgaria determines that the vice-chapter is not obliged to be marked opposite the political figures of the president, near the misfits, someone is obliged to dismiss.

If you try to group respective operations, in which case they have all the chances of being combined to 2 groups. 1st: permission in the final result takes on itself, and 2nd: full permission begins by constitutional control by the constitutional tribunal (asteroid, Germany, country). In this way, or otherwise, a constitutional judgment is equal to the principle, involved in this course. The organizer of the operation operation only represents punching. The importance of a constitutional date is combined or to the significance of the connoisseur designed to give an assessment of the implementation of the Constitution in this course, or to final instance providing permission from parliament.

There are the most unique operations. In Greece, the head of the areaopague with 12 arbitrators, put on parliament with members of the Areopag, takes full resolution (Art. 86).

A fairly unique place is to the Constitution of Kazakhstan (Art. 47). In case of the difference with the two chambers of parliament, the initiative of one thirty percent of the chief of parliament on the depreciation of the president, the past must be premature (the end of their own capabilities. Equally, as described - the offer is punishable.

Curious the process of presidential rejection in Latvia. The problem of attracting it to criminal responsibility is made by the Symmer's decision (2 thirds of Persons). In this condition, the chapter has the opportunity to withstand the issue of the Seimas RosPask (Art. 48). If the electorate is affected opposite the dissolution, the chapter shifts from his own post.

In Austria, deliverance from office has the ability to be accompanied by a technician deprivation of selective fair (Article 142).

There, in what place is the cause of the deregistration, the offense is presented, certain constitutions take into account the decision of the supreme talented instance of the cumulative jurisdiction about the presence of an offense in the actions of the president. The stateless marital infidelity is as the reason for the president's regeneration implies the subsequent oppression of the former president now in the property of a personal person. And so, it is clear that the final arbiter in its process is sufficiently this general judgment, in objectivity and objectivity of which is initially allowed to doubt, in such a way as someone is associated with its own positive solution in the period of president's regeneration period. The problem, the solution in which I do not provide The letter of the Constitution, the letter constitutional experience. Yes, we will not win the conditions with you, if the solution is quite unfavorable. Combines a unit of impeachment operation. If and, in this case, one is allowed to interpret the sovereignty of parliament in this exercise. In the event that There is no, in this case, what is the value of rotation due to the solution into a suzenny judgment. Is it really not the most.

Objectively, the process of disintegration drives the components of the housing stroke. In this relationship, the problem appears: the basis of one or another laws is obliged to function by the convention - routine or housing operations. Absolutely mediocre permission provides the figure and constitutional experience of America. Over time, the agent room presents complaints and keeps him in the Senate, in this case it is to eat in the property of the prosecutor, and the old man is in the importance of a huge stay before the chairmanship of the Chairman of the Supreme Signal of America, with respect to absolutely all attributes of the Hard Process - the cartel and the eyewitness drive, analysis of the certificate, As for Europe, in this case, the formation of special housing instances is more common, according to the sample of the Highest Palace of Justice in France, which, according to finding a tested body with absolutely all properties characteristic of it. A similar permission removes the chain of problems, and is initially only about the importance and state of parliament during deregistration.

Until the final time, the constitutional story of the European republics does not have the attention of the violent rejection of the president from office. In 2004, for the first time in the situation of the Republican European countries, the country taught the country's own Western European teachers - as well as allowed to be freed from the country's head, a tool of which, according to the essence in De Yura, not true precedents. Otherwise, it is impossible to perceive the Russian mafiopic by Russian mafiopic, as if involved in the payment of his presidential firm involved in the provision of Lithuanian citizenship. However, the process is observed: the river is a constitutional judgment - the "famous majority" of the Parliament, and as a result of the refusal of the person of the person, which Lithuanian population reserves the authorities of the country. As, however, I could not have completely prevented the undisputed president to put your own candidate in the wound presidential elections with some chances in the laurel wreath. I wonder how the parliament was obliged to direct himself in case of victory only as a candidate shovel? Since, according to the essence, similar to the end of the elections was marked by the reflection of the Lithuanian people in doubt the Seimas. Most likely, the incomprehensibility of the condition was aware of the deputies of the parliament, now in the process of the election campaign, which voted due to changes in the law on the election of the president, in accordance with which chapter, forcibly suspended from the post, is lost the authority to write its own candidate in the wound election of the country's head.

Of course, it is impossible to overtake the operation of the domestic president in the situation. The desire to regenerate the former President of Boris Yeltsin with a whole, preferably presented that the parliament actually does not have a chance of result, if we assume a premature breaking of the opportunities of the head of the country due to criminal actions. The All-Russian De Yura Cathedral and is actually inconvenient in carrying out a complete consequence of the actions incriminated by the President. In fact, the illegitimacy of the domestic parliament to form commissions according to the investigation creates a special commission according to the formulation of the Palace who pedalized by the Duma, which is not expanding the area of \u200b\u200bresponsibility due to its borders. The likelihood of demanding the necessary papers will find out in the site, discuss. ant. ignore the robust to the process of persons is limited to good-natured by the goodwill of organizations and persons, which is addressed to the Commission's interest. What consequences have the opportunity to be a conversation, if most of these, who exactly was due to the commission with the purpose of testimony, simply this statement.

The relay of the presidential administration. The functions of the president in the case of a premature stop of his capabilities assigned to the head of government. Three appearance in the country, European constitutions, as well as the principle, refer to the chairman of the upper choir of parliament. As for the further hierarchy, in this case it is allowed to weigh it with the order of presenting a constitutional substance of relatively supreme organizations of the administration of the state.

The solution is allowed to testify 2 conditions. At the first place. Possed near the European countries of the president's regeneration from office not only because of the de-Yura, calarated actions, however, because of non-unhealthy, immoral action. In second place. The process of deducting has a rather difficult form, and this is absolutely legitimate - as the conversation will be so about the 1st person in the country, if the case of the loss of the Supreme National Panibrate office is either unexpectedly seemingly confirming the incorrect preferences of civilization or the error of these, to whom the head "must" by the displacement .

B Differences from the monarch, the president is responsible for his actions. He is responsible for state treason, bribery, committing other grave crimes.

Analysis of the prescriptions of the Constitution of the European republics concerning the grounds for bringing to the responsibility of the President leads to the conclusion that these constitutions can be divided into two groups.

The first group is a constitution that envisage the early removal of the president from his position if he does not fulfill its constitutional duties. In other words, the grounds for early removal of the President from office, in accordance with these constitutions, are facts indicating that the president does not act in accordance with its constitutional function, does not cope with those tasks that, according to the Constitution, he must decide does not implement the rights that are included in its competence or inappropriately use them, and also does not fulfill the duties included in its legal capacity.

The Constitution belonging to the second GPUPE provides for completely other grounds for early removal of the president from his office, who have nothing to do with presidential activities. As a basis for attracting the president, these Constitutions provide for the commission of a criminal act - to betray the Motherland or another serious crime. A similar crime may not be committed not only by the president, but also any guy, and the punishment for his commit will be the same for both the president and for a citizen. The difference consists only of the procedure for attracting the president and citizen to criminal liability. Consequently, according to this GPUPE of the constitutions, the president is not directly responsible for its activities.

Some constitutions have special prescriptions, in categorical form prohibiting the president for responsibility for non-fulfillment of their constitutional duties. For example, in the Constitution of the Republic of Iceland, it is said: "The president is not responsible for its official actions" (Part 1 of Art. 11). The Finnish Constitution decides: "The case against the president for execution of their official authority cannot be initiated" (§ 113). In accordance with Art. 68 The Constitution of the French Republic "The President of the Republic is responsible for the actions committed by him in the performance of their duties, only in the case of state treason." According to the Constitution of the Czech Republic, "The President of the Republic is not responsible for the implementation of its function" (paragraph 3 of Art. 54).

The liberation of the president from responsibility for the inclusion of its constitutional duties, from a legal point of view, means that all that is stated in the Constitution on the function of the president, its tasks, competence and legal capacity, everything that is said in the oath of the president - loud, but Unfortunately, empty words.

Thus, the conclusion is obvious: if the Constitution does not enshrine as a basis for early removal of the president from his post office by the president of his constitutional duties, then it undoubtedly weakens control over the activities of the President.

Early cessation of the powers of the President of the Republic in European states.

The separation of the president may be voluntary. In this case, as an act of goodwill of the Supreme Officer of the State does not need to be adopted by some organ. If the question arises, then it concerns who a resignation is to be addressed. Apparently, it should be sought in the method of legitimizing the presidential mandate. Where it is received from the voter, the appeal must be addressed to the people, if it is a parliament - then to parliamentary, that is, the election method determines and the addressee.

Consider the foundation of early incomplete termination of powers. Among them appear:

• ? violation of the Constitution (Austria, Albania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Germany, Greece, Georgia, Iceland, Lithuania, Macedonia, Moldova, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Croatia);
• ? State treason, treason of homeland (Armenia, Bulgaria, Greece, Georgia, Italy, Kazakhstan, Cyprus, Russia, Romania, Slovakia, Turkey Ukraine, Finland, France, Czech Republic);
• ? grave crime (Azerbaijan, Armenia, Belarus, Russia, Romania, Slovenia, Finland);
• ? Crime (Austria, Georgia, Ukraine);
• ? Violation of the Law (Hungary), an established offense (Ireland);
• ? Crime against humanity (Finland);
• ? Other foundations: Entry into force of the conviction (Estonia), low or morally disgraced misconduct (Cyprus), the denial of the performance of functions, unworthy behavior (Malta).

Thus, these foundations can be reduced to three groups:

• 1) violation of the Constitution;
• 2) criminal or administratively pursued offenses
• 3) Amoral, immoral misconduct.

The constitution of some countries (it is mainly of states that have arisen in the post-Soviet space) provide for early termination of the presidential authority due to the inability for health reasons to implement presidential functions. As for the procedures, the Constitution is hardly given exhaustive answers to the questions arising in this regard. First of all, the question arises of who can state this resistant inability. Also as experts in this delicate case should only be parliamentarians. And if a medical conclusion is required, then who should give it and how much does it bind to the parliament? The arguments on this score sounded in Russian legal press. But they have a purely speculative importance, since they did not receive a legal decision.

The peculiar composition of the commission created on this issue offers the Constitution of Kazakhstan, according to which physicians and parliamentarians are included in this commission. It is difficult to say, asking "fruitful" will be such a composition, since, unlike the doctor, the deputies are mostly not burdened with special medical knowledge. Yes, and the "symbiosis" of the electedies of the people and guards of health within the parliamentary commission does not fit into traditional forms of parliamentary activities.

The interpretation of "Violation of the Constitution" is the most difficult from the number of revenues. Indeed, the multivalousness of the main document of the state introduces a significant proportion of uncertainty in the content of the responsibility for violation of the Constitution in this case by the president. The answer to this question seems to be within the competence of the constitutional control authority.

We add to this that the entry into the position of the president binds to the moment of taking the oath, in which the loyalty and compliance of the Constitution appears as one of the main responsibilities of the head of state. In this context, a conscious violation by the President of the Basic Law of the Country may be regarded as "oath", that is, as a misdemeanor, even if he is not pursuing a criminal procedure, a fairly attributable one of the most grave moral and ethical misconducts. And if this oath is applied on the Bible, which is quite natural for Christian Europe, then this is also a crime before God.

A curious constitutional initiative spoke in the summer of 2003 French President Jacques Chirac, the face would seem to be in the smallest degree interested in expanding the legal grounds for the deprivation of the presidential mandate. The French Constitution provides for the only basis for the criminal responsibility of the president - state treason. However, the positions of the Constitutional Council and the Court of Cassation regarding the limits of the presidential immunity did not coincide. And this, apparently, one of the main motives of the constitutional amendment with which the president spoke.

According to the decision of the Constitutional Council of January 22, 1999, the immunity applies to any actions committed by the President during the execution of its functions, except for the act of state treason. As for the actions committed before the execution of presidential functions, or actions that are related to their implementation, criminal liability may occur only according to the procedure provided for by the Constitution, namely, in jurisdiction of the High Chamber of Justice (Art. 68 of the Constitution).

A somewhat different position in the Court of Cassation, which in the plenary session on October 10, 2001 determined that the competence of a high chamber of justice is limited only by the only fee of the crime - state treason. As for other offenses committed before or during the execution of presidential functions, the President of the Republic is protected by absolute immunity. And the statute of limitations is simply suspended for the period of execution of the presidential mandate.

The constitutional amendment does not attempt to the inviolability of the president, which, however, is not absolute. Indeed, the president cannot be subject to criminal or administrative persecution during the execution of its functions. However, within a month, after the end of the mandate, the prosecution for misconduct, committed before or during the implementation of the presidential powers, may be resumed or initiated.

Expands and the foundation of deregistration. The possibility of deregistration for crimes, falling under the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court, and for disregarding with its duties, clearly incompatible with the presidential mandate. Decision is carried out by Parliament, which is transformed into a high court. The proposal to meet a high court can come from one of the chambers of the Parliament and is introduced into another chamber, which should speak on this occasion within 15 days. The decision to convene a court suspends the execution of presidential duties, which, before deciding, is temporarily assigned to the Chairman of the Senate. The High Court chaired by the Chairman of the National Assembly with secret ballot is obliged to decide on the renunciation within a two-month term. His decision comes into force immediately.

Thus, the proposed project significantly expands the foundations (compositions of the crime) of the president's rejection, which is practically determined by the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court. Moreover, the president can be dismissed and for the action (more precisely, inaction is "neglect of responsibilities"), who is not an offense.

Decuting procedure.

The election of the president by direct popular voting, and it is provided for more than twenty European states, it suggests that the issue of early termination of its powers should solve the people, or rather, the country's electoral building, to whom the head of state is obliged to be its authority. Nevertheless, it is usually the prerogative of the highest representative body of the country. Only in three European states - Austria, Romania, Iceland - the last word belongs to someone who is obliged to the second mandate, that is, the people who by referendum solves this issue. In this case, the Parliament initiates the procedure and decides on the depreciation of the President and then sends it to the statement of the people. If voters speak out against the decision of the parliament, it is quite logical and fairly constitutional demand for the dissolution of the highest representative body, the solution of which has become contradiction with the will of the people, that is, with the principle of popular sovereignty, which is based on modern constitutionalism. Moreover, according to the Concycling of Austria, the negative response of voters is regarded as the re-election of the president for a new term.

Regarding the head of the state, the president most often mention the impeachment procedure. The impeachment is the removal of the head of the state - the president from the authorities for the violations of the Constitution, the law, any offenses, that is, for the commission that is not compatible with the high position of the head of state. The word "impeachment" is an English term, appear at the end of the XIV century and used to condemn the highest officials of the British monarchy. The term was borrowed by the Americans, and they included this procedure into the Constitution. The President of the United States, for example, may be subjected to a impeachment procedure in case of treason, bribery or another serious crime. The impeachment procedure there is a parliament - the US Congress. Lower Chamber - the House of Representatives - initiates the case and considers specific circumstances, and then decides on guilt, acting as a jury court. Congressmen solve the vote, the president is guilty or not guilty. If the guilt of the president is confirmed by the Lower Chamber, then the case is essentially considered by the Senate chaired by the head of the Supreme Court.

In order to "approve the impeachment articles", the absolute majority of the votes of the House of Representatives are necessary, and the decision to condemnation takes 2/3 of the votes of the members of the Senate: only in this case the president is removed from power. If senators do not gain the right amount of votes, the president remains in position.

Other constitutions also provide for the options for attracting the head of the state to justice. For example, in France, the case of an offense, the perfect head of state, is considered in both chambers of parliament, which must confirm the charge with two thirds of the votes. Next, the charge is considered by the Supreme Court.

Similar procedures are established by the constitutions of other countries. The impeachment procedure, for example, was recently implemented in Brazil. As a result, the president of Fernando Kollor de Melo was removed in 1995 for admitted offenses.

In Ukraine, in Kazakhstan and some other post-socialist states, this procedure is significantly complicated. The impeachment question can be delivered only to a significant part of the members of the Lower Chamber, after which a special commission is created, which prepares the text of the charges. The procedure involves constitutional and supreme courts that give their conclusions. Decisions are made by a qualified majority of votes, a compressed period has been established, during which this procedure should end. If the decision will not be taken within the specified period, the prosecution against the president is considered rejected.

In some countries, other procedures can be applied than impeachment. In Slovakia, the president may be dismissed by Parliament for actions directed against the democratic system, the integrity of the state, by a majority of 3/5 votes. Such an attempt was made, but the necessary number of votes was not received. In Romania, Azerbaijan under the 1995 Constitution, such a decision is made by a majority of votes of the entire composition of the parliament, but is submitted to a referendum, which takes the final decision. In Austria, Iceland, the president may be withdrawn from his post by voters (this rate has never been applied). In Poland and France, Parliament may accept an indictment, and the president judges a special court.

In practice in individual post-Soviet republics (Azerbaijan) in the early 1990s, some presidents were shifted from their posts by voting voters, but there were no trials. There were cases of voluntary resignation of the President (Czechoslovakia), forced resignation (USA, Yugoslavia), and the presidential removal from power was sometimes accompanied by an armed struggle (Georgia).

In parliamentary republics, for the rarest exceptions (for example, in Slovakia), the state of responsibility is not responsible for acts on government management. For this, the ministers are responsible, the government, on the advice of which the president adopts relevant acts. In the presidential and semi-presidential republics, the president is also not responsible to parliament (except the impeachment under consideration).

Vice-President does not have significant powers in any country. He replaces the President in the case of his absence, becomes a "temporary president" in severe illness, death, resignation of the president, but for a relatively short period, presidential elections must be held.

Vice-President is usually elected a couple with president as candidates of one party and on the same system as the president. In some developing countries, the Vice-President is appointed by the President (Egypt), and sometimes there are several vice-presidents: the first, second, and so on. In Somalia, at one time there were three vice president. In some countries, the position of vice president is not provided. In those countries where the post of vice-president, the president usually replaces the chairman of one of the chambers of parliament (more often - Senate) or the head of government. In the absence of the president, he is replaced by the Chairman of the Senate (France), Prime Minister (Ukraine), Chairman of the One-Parliament Parliament (Hungary). The Constitution of Bulgaria establishes that the vice-president should not oppose the presidential policy, with disagreements he must resign.

If you try to systematize the relevant procedures, they can be reduced to two groups. First: the decision in the end is taking parliament, and the second: the final decision is made by the constitutional control body - the Constitutional Court (Hungary, Germany, Slovakia). One way or another, the Constitutional Court is usually involved in this process. The initiator of the deduction procedure is most often parliament. The role of the Constitutional Court is reduced by either the role of an expert designed to assess the compliance of the Constitution in this process, or to the ultimate instance that approves the decision of the Parliament.

There are more original procedures. In Greece, the Chairman of the Areopague together with the twelve judges appointed by the Parliament from the members of the Areopagu, takes the final decision (Art. 86).

A rather original position is contained in the Constitution of Kazakhstan (Art. 47). In the case of deviations by both chambers of parliament, the initiative of one third of the deputies of the Parliament on the renunciation of the President, the latter are obliged early to stop their powers. As they say - the initiative is punishable.

Curious procedure for rejoicing the president in Latvia. The question of bringing it to criminal responsibility is solved by the Seimas (two thirds of the votes). In this situation, the president can make the question of dissolution of the Seima on a popular vote (Art. 48). If voters speak out against the dissolution, the president shifts from his post.

In Austria, the depreciation may be accompanied by a temporary deprivation of electoral rights (Art. 142).

Where the basis of the regeneration is a crime, some of the Constitution provide for the conclusion of the highest vessel of the general jurisdiction on the presence of a crime in the deeds of the president. Obviously, state treason as a foundation of president's regeneration implies the further prosecution of the former president already as a private person. And it is just as obvious that the last judge in his case will be the same Supreme Court, in the impartiality and objectivity of which initially can be doubted, as it is connected with his positive conclusion at the stage of rengening the president. The question is, the answer to which neither the Constitution nor the constitutional practice is given. We do not affect situations here when the court's conclusion will be negative. Does it block the impeachment procedure? If so, is it possible to talk about the sovereignty of parliament in this procedure? If not, what is the meaning of addressing the conclusion in the Supreme Court? Is that in obtaining information and no more.

Objectively, the procedure of deregistration wears the elements of the trial. In this regard, the question arises: on the basis of what rules the parliament should act, regulations or judicial procedures. The Constitution and Constitutional Practice of the United States gives a satisfactory decision. There, the House of Representatives deals with the charge and supports him in the Senate, that is, acts as a prosecutor, and the Senate - in the role of the forensic presence, chaired by the Chairman of the US Supreme Court, compliance with all trial attributes - a challenge and interrogation of witnesses, evidence evaluation. As for Europe, the creation of special judicial instances in the example of a high chamber of justice in France is most logical, which is by definition is a judicial body with all attributes peculiar to it. A similar solution relieves a number of questions, and above all about the role and position of parliament in the process of deregistration.

Until recently, the constitutional history of the European republics did not know the compulsory rejection of the president from office. In 2004, for the first time in the history of republican countries, Europe, the Republic of Lithuania taught its Western European teachers a lesson - how to get rid of the head of state, whose wines are in essence in legally not proven facts. Otherwise, it is impossible to regard the accusation of the provision of Lithuanian citizenship to the Russian businessman, allegedly mixed in financing its presidential company. However, the procedure is observed: the Syme - the Constitutional Court - the "qualified majority" of the Parliament, and as a result, the depreciation from the position of the person to whom the Lithuanian people entrusted the leadership of the state. What, however, did not prevent the president to expose his candidacy for early presidential elections with the desired chances of winning. Curious how to behave in the event of a victory just shifted by the applicant to them? After all, in essence, a similar outcome of the elections would mean the expression by the Lithuanian people distrust by the Seimas. Probably, the ambiguity of the situation understood the deputies of the parliament, already during the election campaign, who voted for changes in the law on the presidential elections, according to which the president, forced separately, deprived of the right to exhibit his candidacy for early elections of the head of state.

Of course, it is impossible to bypass the silence of the procedure for deregistration from the post of Russian president. Attempting to reject the former President Boris Yeltsin clearly showed that the parliament has almost no chance of success if you consider the early termination of the powers of the head of state for criminal acts to be successful. The Russian Parliament is legally and practically helpless in carrying out a full investigation of the acts incriminated by the president. Indeed, the unauthoriness of the Russian parliament to create a investigation commissions makes a special commission on the formulation of the accusation of the Duma by the internal authority of the Chamber, the competence of which does not apply to its limits. The ability to recruit the necessary documents, to conduct an investigation in place, to hear the persons involved in the case is limited to the goodwill of the bodies and persons to which the attention of the Commission is drawn. What kind of investigation can be a question if most of those who have been called to the Commission to testify, simply ignored this appeal.

The continuity of presidential power. The presidential functions in the event of early termination of its powers are assigned to the head of government. The third face in the state, the European Constitutions, as a rule, is called the Chairman of the Upper Chamber of Parliament. As for the subsequent hierarchy, it can be judged on the basis of the sequence of presentation of the concentration material regarding the highest authorities of the country.

In conclusion, two circumstances can be stated. First. The admissibility of a number of European states of presidential rejection from office not only for legally punishable acts, but also for immoral, unworthy behavior. Second. The procedure of renovation is quite complex, and this is quite justified - because we are talking about the first person in the state, when the fact of deprivation of the highest state office or involuntarily is evidenced by the erroneous selection of the nation or the error of those whom the President "is obliged" by the displacement.

2.3 Responsibility of the Head of State

Legal responsibility of the head of state is perhaps the most convincing indicator of the legal state. Until the head of state is free from liability for his actions, the idea of \u200b\u200ba legal democratic state cannot take place. It is not by chance, in the authoritarian countries, the legal responsibility of the first persons is missing.

The responsibility of the head of state characterizes its constitutional situation, is an element of constitutional and legal status, along with the rights and responsibilities of the head of state.

As practice is evidenced, the basis of the responsibility of the head of state is essential in the legal qualifications of this responsibility, in view of which they require careful legislative formulation. I.A. Alekseev rightly indicates that "one of the structural elements of the content of responsibility is its foundations"

The following foundations of the impeachment of the head of state in foreign countries can be distinguished:

1) violation of the Constitution - Austria, Moldova, Croatia;

2) violation of the Constitution or Laws - Hungary, Macedonia; Turkmenistan;

3) State treason - Kazakhstan, Turkey, France, Czech Republic;

4) committing a grave crime - Azerbaijan, Romania;

5) State treason (treason of homeland), committing other (grave) crimes - Armenia, Georgia, Belarus, Republic of Cyprus;

6) committing offenses - Ireland;

7) Violation of the oath - the Republic of Lithuania;

8) Unworthy behavior - Malta, Rwanda.

The practice of rejugging the head of state from office indicates that the renewal is always preceded by the chapter of the state of the state of the state, that is, bringing him to justice, formulating the impeachment articles. Moreover, the deposit from the post and the presentation of the charges, as a rule, is carried out by different subjects, which guarantees the objectivity of the process. In the two-chamber parliament, the accusation and punishment features are always divided into chambers. Shashkova.A.The Constitutional law of foreign countries: Tutorial / A.V.Shashkova.-M.: Norm, 2008.- 288 p.

Depending on the degree of parliamentary participation in the impeachment, the following varieties of the responsibility of the head of state can be distinguished:

A) full parliamentary responsibility of the head of state

Its specificity is that the accusation of the head of state and his deposit from office is carried out in parliamentary walls, within the framework of a special parliamentary procedure. Such responsibility in the world is predominant.

B) incomplete parliamentary responsibility of the head of state (semi-parliamentary responsibility)

The peculiarity of this model is that the charge is nominated by the Parliament (parliament's chambers), and the decision on the renunciation of the head of state from office is carried out outside the parliament, other subjects of constitutional law. Smolensky. M.B., Ivannikov. I.A. Constitutional law of foreign countries: Educational Posoo / M.B.Smolensky., I.A.Ivannikov. - M.: Dashkov and Co., 2008.-336 p.

There are three main models for conducting the impeachment of the head of state:

According to the first model, the whole process of implementing constitutional responsibility arises in parliament as such; On its completion, legal processes may be followed, which may consider the courts of general jurisdiction.

The second model is that the parliament (either one of the chambers of parliament) acts as an accusation in the process, and the case of constitutional responsibility is solved in the judicial authority, specially formed by Parliament from its environment, and this body allows the issue not only about constitutional responsibility, but And, if necessary, issues of criminal liability, act as an ordinary court.

The third model is similar to both the first and second, here the parliament also acts as an indictment, but further is essentially considered by the authority of the constitutional justice, which makes a decision on impeachment, after which the case can be transferred to the court of total competence.

An example of the first model can serve as a impeachment procedure in the United States. He excites the case of the impeachment of the House of Representatives). The declared initiative is considered in the legal committee of the Chamber, which produces a prosecution formula as an impeachment articles. Then the House of Representatives discusses him, and if approves by a simple majority of votes, then transfers to the Senate, which is authorized to resolve the case. Getting Started, senators must bring oath or make a solemn statement. The impeachment procedure presides in the Senate the chief judge of the Supreme Court. Having heard the views of the parties, the Senate with secret ballot makes a decision for each impeachment article, and for the indictment, most of at least two thirds of the present senators are required. Only if for all the impeachment items such a majority is available, the accused face shifts president. During the consideration of the case, the Senate has the right to cause and hear witnesses and perform other procedural actions to study evidence. Chetorerin D.A. The procedure for bringing to the responsibility of the head of state in foreign countries / D.A.Chtorerin // - M.: Norm, 2005.-370 Thus, the entire procedure for early displacement from the post of head of state is carried out under the Congress.

The impeachment procedure in France is an example of the second model. The President of the Republic may be charged only by two chambers of the National Assembly, which endure identical decisions by the absolute majority of members of parliament. Further, the case is transmitted to the High Justice Chamber, which considers the case on the merits of the charges. The High Chamber of Justice, according to 24 members chosen on the parity principles by the National Assembly and Senate, called constant judges, as well as 12 substituents. If the High Chamber of Justice decides on the impeachment of the President, then it acts as the highest court of common competence.

An example of the third model of impeachment can be considered on the basis of the FRG Constitution. The German Constitution gives the right to be like Bundestag and Bundesrat, to initiate a prosecution against the president in an intentional violation of them by the Constitution or other federal law. The proposal to initiate the charge must be submitted on behalf of at least a quarter of the deputies of the Bundestag or a quarter of the representatives of the Bundeszrat. The decision to excite the charge is taken at least two thirds of one of the chambers of parliament. URL: http://worldconstitutions.ru

Analysis of the legal status, powers and forms of interaction between the government and the head of state in the Parliamentary Republic

The head of state - the President occupies a rather modest place in the system of state bodies of the parliamentary republic. Although formally, it can be endowed with extensive powers ...

Interaction of the President of the Russian Federation with the executive authorities of Russia

The head of state is usually a person holding a higher place in the hierarchy of public posts and carrying out the Supreme Representation, both in domestic political life and in the international arena ...

Institute of President of the Russian Federation: Sources, Status, Powers

The president can be called the state symbol and the official representative of the entire people. The word "president" is literally translated from the Latin "presides" - "Sitting Ahead" ...

Institute of Presidency in Russia: the history of creation and a modern state

The post of head of state exists with all forms of government. In monarchical states, this is the hereditary monarch, in the republics - the elected president. The state is needed by the existence of an official ...

The head of state is solely and collegial. In the first case, this is a monarch or president, in the second - constantly operating body of parliament, they are elected. In the past, these were the Presidues of the High Representative Bodies ...

Constitutional and legal status of the head of state in overseas countries

The head of state is such a state-legal and political figure, which has the specifics and characteristic features inherent in it, as well as the powers ...

Constitutional status of the President of the Russian Federation

From the moment of entry into position and for the entire period of its execution, the President of Russia has inviolability, which is enshrined in Article 91 of the Constitution. In this case, under inviolability, in addition to the physical aspect ...

Constitutional status of the President of the Russian Federation

The President as the head of the Russian state interacts with all branches of power. The President interacting with the Federal Assembly: · The Russian President has the right of veto to laws adopted by the Federal Assembly ...

Powers of the head of state in the system of government

Unlike the "classic" branches of the government - parliament, government, court (legislative, executive and judicial authority) - the actual and legal position of the head of state is unambiguously determined to determine ...

In all developed democratic states, the implementation of state power is based on the principle of separation of legislative, executive and judicial authorities. Each branch of power is distinguished by a certain independence ...

The powers of the head of state and the procedure for their implementation

In the overwhelming majority of countries, national legislation empowers the head of state by extensive rights and powers in various fields of state activities. Practice of the functioning of the constitutional mechanism ...

Positions of the President of the Russian Federation in the system of government bodies

The post of head of state exists with all forms of government. In monarchical states, this is a hereditary monarch, in the republics - a selection president. The state is needed by the existence of an official ...

The concept of the head of state

The president can be called the state symbol and the official representative of the entire people. The word "president" is literally translated from Latin (Prasides) - "Sitting Ahead" ...

Legal status of the head of local education

Currently, like many other institutions of municipal law, the institution of responsibility of the head of the municipality is in the process of their formation. It should be recognized...

The head of state is an official (body), which is usually formally higher than the highest place in the hierarchy of state institutions and carrying out the Supreme Representation of the country in domestic political life and international relations. The head of state is the constitutional authority and at the same time a higher officer of the state representing the state inside and outside the country, the symbol of statehood of the people.

Classification of state chapters:

Chosen president;

Hereditary monarch;

Selected monarch (Malaysia, UAE).

Monarch is an inviolable face. It cannot be attracted to administrative, criminal responsibility, a civil lawsuit cannot be addressed against him. For the actions of the monarch on government management political responsibility, his ministers are liable. In practice, however, during the British and French bourgeois revolutions in the XVII and XVIII centuries. The kings were executed, in the Central African Republic, he was judged by the coup of 1979 by the emperor Bokassu. In Muslim countries, "noble", the ruling family (part of the dynasty) with the participation of higher priests and Muslim scientists (rules) shifts the king and puts in his place of another family member (so it was zb., In Saudi Arabia due to the accusation of the king in insufficient piety) At the same time, displaced monarchs usually sharpen in the dungeon.

Unlike the monarch, the president is responsible for his actions. He is responsible for state treason, bribery, committing other grave crimes. Forms, procedures and conditions for this responsibility Special: Criminal liability comes only after the president's rejection from office. In the United States, the indictment takes the Lower Chamber, and judging the president, i.e. Decides the question of removing him from office, Senate. In Ukraine, in Kazakhstan and some other post-socialist states, this procedure is significantly complicated. The impeachment question can be delivered only to a significant part of the members of the Lower Chamber, after which a special commission prepares the text of the charges. The procedure involves constitutional and supreme courts that give their conclusions. Decisions are accepted by a qualified majority of votes, a compressed period has been established, during which the procedure must be completed. If the decision will not be accepted within the specified period, the charge against the president is considered rejected.

In the US, impeachment against the president tried to apply repeatedly, but the case before the procedure came only twice (not counting V. J. Clinton), both times without success: once in the Senate for the president's shift did not have one vote, and President Nixon in 1974 G. He himself resigned, without waiting for the impeachment. The impeachment took place in Brazil in 1992, in Venezuela in 1993

In some countries, other procedures other than impeachment can be applied. In Slovakia, the president can be shifted by Parliament for actions against the democratic system, the integrity of the state, by a majority of 3/5 votes. Such an attempt was made, but the necessary number of votes was not received. In Romania, Azerbaijan under the 1995 Constitution, such a decision is made by a majority of votes of the entire composition of the parliament, but is submitted to a referendum, which makes the final decision. In Austria, Iceland, the president may be withdrawn from his post by voters (this rate has never been applied). In Poland and France, Parliament may accept an indictment, and the president judges a special court.

In practice in individual post-Soviet republics (Azerbaijan, etc.) in the early 90s. Some presidents were displaced from their posts by voting voting, but there were no trials. There were cases of voluntary resignation of the President (Czechoslovakia), forced resignation (USA, Yugoslavia), and the presidential removal from power was sometimes accompanied by an armed struggle (Georgia).