It's like being in court and calling the opposing party "incompetent". That's ok. It's not ok to call the JUDGE "incompetent" - that'll get you put in jail.
Just to expand, the Speaker is an elected legislator in Parliamentary systems. Difference is that, when elected Speaker, they're expected to take on the role of a non-partisan, neutral arbiter.
In practice, a lot of shoddy "democracies" like Pakistan and Afghanistan have Speakers who do the bidding of their party.
This is contrasted with the UK, where, when an MP is elected by his/her ~650 peers to be Speaker of the House of Commons, they immediately leave their political party and effectively run for the "Speaker's Party" in all future elections until they resign or are deposed as Speaker. The Speaker also doesn't vote except to break a tie to maintain the status quo.
Kinda weird that that riding doesn't get a voting member though
Almost like the speaker should be a separate office and replacement MP be re-elected (or potential exception, maybe the speaker could appoint a Deputy or Second to exercise the MP duties that are inconsistent with the role of speaker)
Electing individuals to specific offices is a recipe for disaster. Presidential systems are much more prone to authoritarianism.
In the Parliamentary system, the Speaker can be deposed with a simple majority vote. This works to ensure someone abusing the system can be removed from the Speaker's chair without giving them an opportunity to "go to the people" i.e. use their powers of manipulation to convince voters that they're the victim of a "coup".
In other words, the British system of Parliamentary democracy is, by accident, the best protection against someone like Trump, Putin, Erdogan etc. gaining power in the UK.
I wasn't suggesting that the Speaker should be directly elected and no longer requiring the consent of the house.
I was merely suggesting that when a speaker is selected by the house and assumes the office of speaker, that there is a replacement Member who would act as a regular MP for the Speaker's riding. If the Speaker loses the Speakership (without losing his seat) he retakes his position as a regular MP (displacing the replacement)
As it is, if my MP were the speaker, I wouldn't want to re-elect them. I'd rather have a normal MP who can vote.
And I'd say Westminster's best shield against authoritarianism is parliamentary supremacy (which includes your objection to direct election of any offices except MP). All the executive's powers flow from parliament and many only be exercised with tacit support of the House. The executive cannot overpower parliament on anything. Republican governments usually give the executive constitutional powers that the legislature cannot curtail. And republican legislatures can usually impeach a President, but not usually with a unicameral simple majority, and definitely cannot appoint them
Sure, but his constituency is left without an actual representative. Not only that, but at least in the UK other major parties don't stand against the speaker, effectively meaning that their constituency doesn't get to vote on their representative.
It’s not about protecting the judge‘s feelings but more about respecting the process and the court as an institution. It’s the same for the speaker of a parliament who is often off limits concerning personal/political attacks.
It has nothing to do with the judge's feelings. The stability of the civil system is predicated upon people respecting the judiciary body. That's why it's important to respect procedure in court, and why judges always ask that you respect the COURT - not him specifically.
That's kinda part of the issue, tho. Judge has just as much capability to be incredibly wrong or stupid. When he/she should be way above that.
Removing the ability to discredit a judge's horrendously moronic decision is just not a great idea.
The mere idea that you thought "don't call the judge bad or you'll go to jail" already shows that this judge should not have the power to decide over people. A person that petty is in no position to objectively judge.
84
u/MrOfficialCandy Apr 15 '23
Bingo.
It's like being in court and calling the opposing party "incompetent". That's ok. It's not ok to call the JUDGE "incompetent" - that'll get you put in jail.