Introduction
This chapter will examine if decentralization make sense in Angola, highlights the major aspects of decentralization, and then compare with some African countries and to have a better understand of the potential causes behind this current decentralization, overlook at advantages and disadvantages and then analyze the implementation process in Angola.
() Decentralization is the process of distribution of functions and powers from a central location or authority to authority local or even to a lower level authority. Although decentralization, especially in the government sphere, is widely studied and practiced. The meaning of decentralization vary from country to country or from one place to another because decentralization can
…show more content…
& Cristina, 2011) argued that centralizing power and resources aided governments in the achievement of both goals Social and cultural, and trends contributed to making the state seem the natural and best form of civic society. In this case centralization may be a preferable strategy if it leads to a territorial justice or the redistribution of wealth. Despite existing successful process on decentralization in some countries, where they were fortunately with the process, on the other hand there is countries, that are strive to implement the process of decentralization and others countries decentralization may not be sustainable or applicable right now, because this process may take time to be fully operational. The design of decentralization is crucial, but very few generalizations emerge, and the ones that have been successful is said to “strengthen accountability, political skills and national integration” (Smith, 1982) , the need of some form of decentralization appears to be universal. Even the smallest states have some kind of local government with some degree of autonomy (King, 1982), in addiction to that (Duchacek, 1970) argue that small populations may geographically and ethnically require decentralization, because it brings government closer to people. It promote liberty, equality and well-being (Maas, 1959). It’s important to stress that in the case of Africa the countries that have been implemented the design of the decentralization few are fully operational, it’s not because there is not have a legal framework, its due to some factors which are: culture, religious, language, tradition, identity and heritage which are the strong characteristic in Africa, for instance for over ten years Tanzania has been striving after decentralization, however the progress has been slow, as public administration is reluctant to change and local communities are mostly excluded from the
The leaders of such a large nation would be unable to stay in touch with the people that they were representing and inevitably the nation would fall to tyranny. The motivation for a central government was essential
The central government has enough power to help some of the country’s major needs and the state government has enough power to help the state’s needs because the state’s needs may be more specific. From this, you may conclude that dividing powers between the central and state governments prevents
Federalism is a fair way to divide powers, so that one group or person would not have more power than the rest when they are building and enforcing laws. This is reliable because federalism equally shares the powers. Therefore, it would not be biased while constructing the laws since everyone would have a say, unlike if one ruler would have all the
The notion of centralized state system came out of black Africa. The towns’ centralized state system consisted of a chief, two appointed judges, and various laws. Within the town, they kept their culture intact. “African did not let go of their beliefs when they arrived in the Americas” (Diouf
10, advises that perhaps one of the foremost arguments that promotes the Constitution as the premier form of government, in countering the Anti-Federalist ideas, is the argument that a national, federal system is the best way to fight the factional elements found within. The representative government outlined in the Constitution, such that the citizens elect representatives who then vote and create law with the citizens’ best interest at the fore, is a much better alternative to the states current situation, that of broken unification and growing dissent. As opposed to direct democracy, where every citizen is involved directly in the law making process, is already at the outset not set up for success, because the aforementioned factions will form majorities and vote on law as best suited for themselves, and the minorities end up with no say or voice in the law-making process. Though factions are almost a given in any democracy, a strong, federal government that backs up the states will have much more power to quell any factional attempt to form majorities that until now the disenfranchised states had no power to
The United States has a democratic government, which means our citizens get to help choose how our country works. The Constitution is setup to include citizens in the law making and voting process and preventing the US from turning into a tryannical government. Three ways we do thi s is by using Federalism, Separation of Powers and Checks and Balances. Federalism is a system our country uses to make sure power doesn’t stay in one area (Doc A). This method gives specific responsibilities to Central Government and each state.
If popular government is going to survive, it must be organized to protect minorities from majorities who are going to pursue their own self-interests, ” (p.70). They believed that the central government must be stronger than local governments to prevent individuals or groups from attaining too much
It was very essential for the united states of America to come up with the federal system of government. There were a number of reasons for this effect, among which included fear for the power centralization in the American political system. Also, this kind of government was considered appropriate because of the size of the united states as a country. Alexander, & Alexander, (2005) argue that federal governments are usually proper in large countries like the united states because there are very many people and a diverse group of individuals. As such, these groups of people may also have needs that are diverse which could as well mean a common culture that put them together.
One brought together illustrative government; a various country could flourish, ruled by the larger part, yet with a decent measure of thought for
Generally, an overarching national government is responsible for broader governance of larger territorial areas, while the smaller subdivisions, states, and cities govern the issues of local concern. It is controlled by two diffent branches so not one will not have all the powerIt splits the goverment so it has more opinions. It was federalism which means its a system of government. It seperates all the power so its not in one place. It also makes it to where there is laws.
The delegation of smaller government allows the needs of specific groups and local representation to be more accessible to the people that
The United States Government can be described in two ways. There is unified government, which appears when the President and both houses of congress share the same party. Divided government is the opposite, it occurs when one party controls the white house, and another party controls one or more houses of Congress. A unified government should seem to be more productive because enacting laws would be much easier. A bill has to pass through both houses of congress as well as the president before it can be an official law.
Interactions amid the provinces and the federal government, from constitutional issues to the most irresistible topics bang up-to-date in the country, are indemnified beneath the umbrella of “Federalism”. Authorities are shared so that on some matters, the state governments are decision-holders, whereas on the other matters, national government grasps the autonomy. In last twenty-five years, the upsurge of federal fiats on both governments, local and state, has shifted the power amongst state and national governments. Now, the national government is beginning to have more governance over the state’s engagements.
Separation of powers refers to the idea that the major body of a state should be functioned independently and that no individual of a state should have power separately. Therefore, separation of powers means that splitting up of responsibilities into different divisions to limit any one branch from expurgating the functions of another. The intention of the doctrine is to prevent the application of powers and provide for checks and balances of governing a state. It is a doctrine of constitutional law under which the three branches of government, executive power, legislative power, and judicial power are been kept separately to prevent abuse of power.
Conclusion: Page 6 6. Bibliography: Page 6 Introduction: This an age old argument on whether the people should be ruled by one single all powerful leader who isn’t challenged or a leader who is democratically elected into power. In this academic piece I will be looking at the benefits and pitfalls of each form of government as well as give a few examples of each and decide if they were successful.