Introduction
Democratic systems of governance are better as compared to monarchial system. It will be evident from this work that this is true. This paper explores these two systems of governments, their advantages, disadvantages and a comparison of the two citing examples of the two in Saudi Arabia (monarchy) and Egypt (democratic).
Monarchy refers to a form of leadership is by the king or the queen. The king is the absolute source of authority.The Saudi Arabian kingdom was established in the year 1932 by Abdul-Aziz Rah man Saud. It is a hereditary monarchy, meaning it is the family of Abdul-Aziz that will rule it forever, unless the system is changed. The responsibilities and the rights of the government are spelt in the document known as Basic Law of Government. This government has three branches namely, the executive, legislature and the judicial. The executive is made up of the king who is the prime minister of the state, the commander in chief of the military, the head of the state and the head of the government as well. In this systems, no elections. An allegiance commission is in place to select a prince to take the kingship. In the legislature, there is a consultative council that proposes new, amends laws. This council has membership from every ministry. This country is governed according to the Islamic laws. The king appoints the judges; the king acts as the court of appeal. (Kechichian, 2000)
From this example we can deduce the on and offs of Monarchy. In absolute monarchy, selection of leaders is very simple in that anybody thought of leading the country can just be hand picked. This has led to picking of very good leaders. Also, very little time and effort is spent in decision making. In constitutional monarch, the ruler’s decisions are highly influenced by the people.
However, monarchy has a number of demerits. Firstly, in absolute monarchy, people have no voice in politics and the decision of the king is final. It can also lead to misuse of power especially when the monarchy is absolute. When it is consultative monarchy, people may have some say but the overall say lies with the king. This means that he can even overrule the decisions of the people. (Kechichian, 2000)
Democracy refers to a political system where power lies with the citizens who elect fellow citizens to represent them. (Barak, 2006)
Egypt has a kind of fixed day democracy. This is where no elections are planned in the awareness of the public. It is announced some days before the election date. In Egypt the elections are not free and fair as it should be. Majorly the leading party emerges with a landslide win i.e. the National Democratic Party. In Egypt the head state who is the president is the chief in command of the armed forces and can dictate the way he feels best. However, they have a mockery system of democracy where people are cheated that they lead and yet they are not. Due to this, the incumbent president can use the state machinery to get back to his position.
Generally, the advantages are self evident and they include provision of changes with no chaos in the government. Here there is transfer of power through elections. Thus the verdict of the people rules. This kind of governance curbs monopoly in leadership since every party is able to compete in elections. In democratic government the citizens have a feeling of obligation. They feel like they should participate in elections and in return the government should will always feel very grateful towards them. This serves in their motivation towards the achievement of the government. In democratic government there is also the gaining of the sense of participation in the people. The people gEt to air their views through voting. (Barak, 2006)
Despite these advantages, democracy has a number of demerits. These include the fact that not all citizens are up to date with the political scenarios and yet they are responsible for the election of their representatives who are to act as the leaders of the country. They can thus elect wrong leaders. Secondly, it is also possible that the leaders elected may work with an aim of winning the votes but not working for the people. Also, in democracy the mobs can easily influence the peoples decision. This will be very deceiving and thus not good leaders may be elected.
In comparing these two types of governments it is in order to mention some similarities that they show. First, they are both forms of government and both have leaders. They are all intended to bring the society together in a fair way.
The comparisons of these government types include the difference that come from their headship. Monarchy is headed by a monarch while democratic governments are headed by representatives who are elected. Another difference is that in monarchy, power and the positions of leadership are passed through inheritance while in democracy they are passed through elections. In monarchy, the top man has almost all the executive powers while in democracy the power is exercised by the people either directly or indirectly. Lastly, monarchs are always above the law while in the democratic type the law is above everybody else. (Herb, 1999)
References:
Barak, A. (2006) Judge in Democracy, London: Princeton University Press,.
Kechichian J. (2000) A power and succession in Arab countries. Los angels; Lynne Reiner publishers,.
Herb, M. (1999) All in the Family: Absolutism, Revolution, and Democracy in the Middle Eastern Monarchies.New York; State University of New York Press,.
