Exhaustive Study Notes on Comparative Federal Systems in the 1990s

THE RELEVANCE OF COMPARISONS

• Context in Canada (1990s): During the $1990$s, the future of the Canadian federation was in question, making it instructive to examine the theory and application of existing global federal systems.

• Canadian Reluctance: Traditionally, Canadians have emphasized the uniqueness of their political experience, viewing comparative studies with skepticism. Some perceived them as excuses for foreign travel by public officials or an acceptance of foreign pretensions.

• Focus of Previous Studies: Historically, Canadian comparative studies focused primarily on the United States, despite other federations (parliamentary or multicultural) being more similar or useful for comparison.

• Cautions in Comparison:     * There is no single "pure model" of federation; the concept involving shared-rule and regional self-rule within a single system is applied differently based on circumstance.     * Variations include: Economic/social diversities, number of constituent units, symmetry of resources, constitutional status, allocation of legislative/executive/expenditure responsibilities, taxing powers, and methods for conflict resolution.     * Institutional Behavior: Similar institutions can operate differently in different contexts.     * Referendum Example (Switzerland vs. Australia): Both require double majorities (national majority plus majorities in a majority of constituent units). In Switzerland, over $110$ amendments have passed since $1891$ (over $75\,\%$ of those initiated by Parliament). In Australia, of $42$ attempts since $1901$, only $8$ succeeded.

• Value of Comparison:     * Identifying overlooked options.     * Foreseeing consequences of specific arrangements.     * Drawing attention to the significance of native features.     * Learning both positive and negative lessons from the successes and failures of others.

A BRIEF HISTORY OF FEDERALISM

• Ancient Systems: The first documented federal system emerged among ancient Israelite tribes over $3200$ years ago. Other ancient examples include Bedouin tribe confederations and Native North American confederacies.

• Hellenic Leagues: Early leagues in Greece and Asia Minor aggregated democracies for trade and defense.

• Roman Republic: Established asymmetrical arrangements where Rome was the federate power and weaker cities were partners.

• Medieval and Early Modern Eras:     * Self-governing cities in northern Italy and Germany, and Swiss cantons (confederation established in $1291$, lasted until $1847$).     * United Provinces of the Netherlands: Established in the late $16^{th}$ century during a revolt against Spain.     * Federal Theory: Early writings included Althusius's "Politica Methodice Digesta" and German efforts to modernize the Holy Roman Empire.

• Modern Federations:     * United States: Formed in $1789$ (following the $1787$ Philadelphia Convention) to replace the failed $1781$ confederation.     * Switzerland: Transformed from a confederation into a federation in $1848$ after a brief civil war.     * Canada: Became the third modern federation in $1867$.     * Australia: Established as a federation in $1901$.

• Post-WWII Proliferation: Many federations were created in former colonial areas and Europe. Examples include India ($1950$), Pakistan ($1956$), Malaysia ($1963$), Nigeria ($1954$), and the German Federal Republic ($1949$).

• 1990s Revival: New interest in federal solutions appeared in Belgium ($1993$), South Africa ($1996$), Spain (de facto federation since the $1978$ constitution), and the European Union.

THE RELEVANCE OF FEDERALISM IN THE 1990s

• Paradigm Shift: The world is moving away from sovereign nation-states toward diminished sovereignty and increased interstate linkages.

• Current Statistics: There are currently $23$ federations containing approximately $2 imes 10^9$ people (roughly $40\,\%$ of the world population). These include $480$ constituent states compared to only $180$ politically sovereign states.

• Reasons for the Global Trend:     * Technological Pressures: Advancements in transportation and communication create pressures for both larger political units (for economic standard of living and security) and smaller units (for responsiveness to citizens and cultural/linguistic identity).     * Glocalization: A term by Tom Courchene describing the desire of people to be both global consumers and local citizens. The nation-state is often seen as too small for the global marketplace and too large/remote for democratic control.     * Market Economies: The spread of markets emphasizes contractual relationships, non-centralization, and diversity—conditions conducive to the federal idea.     * Subsidiarity: The principle that a "higher" body should only perform tasks that cannot be handled by a "lower" body. This encourages "citizen-oriented federalism."     * Resilience: Classic federations (USA, Switzerland, Canada, Australia) are among the longest-surviving constitutions and rank high in quality of life.

DEFINITION OF TERMS AND PRINCIPLES OF FEDERALISM

• Federalism (Normative): The advocacy of multi-tiered government combining shared-rule and regional self-rule. It is based on the value of combining unity and diversity to preserve distinct identities within a union.

• Federal Political Systems (Descriptive Genus): A broad category of systems with two or more levels of government. It encompasses a spectrum of forms ranging from quasi-federations to confederacies.

• Federations (Descriptive Species): A specific form where neither the federal nor constituent units are constitutionally subordinate. Key traits include:     * Two orders of government acting directly on citizens.     * Constitutional distribution of legislative/executive authority and revenue.     * Representation of regional views in federal policy-making (e.g., a second chamber).     * A supreme written constitution requiring constituent consent for amendments.     * An umpire (courts or referendums) for disputes.     * Institutions for intergovernmental collaboration.

THE SPECTRUM OF FEDERAL POLITICAL SYSTEMS

• Unions: Polities where constituent units preserve integrity through common organs of the general government (e.g., New Zealand, Lebanon, pre-$1993$ Belgium).

• Constitutionally Decentralized Unions: Unitary in form (ultimate authority at the center) but with constitutionally protected sub-national units with functional autonomy (e.g., Italy, United Kingdom).

• Federations: Compound polities with strong constituent units and general government, each directly elected and acting on citizens (e.g., Canada, USA, Germany).

• Confederations: Pre-existing polities join for limited purposes (defense, economy). The common government is dependent on constituent governments and lacks a direct fiscal/electoral base (e.g., European Union).

• Federacies: A large unit linked to a smaller unit; the smaller unit retains significant autonomy and the relationship only dissolves by mutual agreement (e.g., Puerto Rico/USA, Bhutan/India).

• Associated States: Similar to federacies but can be dissolved by either unit acting alone on prearranged terms (e.g., Marshall Islands/USA).

• Condominiums: Units under joint rule of two or more external states (e.g., Andorra under France and Spain, $1278$-$1993$).

• Leagues: Linkages for specific purposes through a common secretariat; members may unilaterally withdraw (e.g., ASEAN, NATO).

• Joint Functional Authorities: Agencies for joint implementation of tasks (e.g., IAEA, NAFO, Regio Basiliensis).

• Hybrids: Systems combining characteristics (e.g., initially Canada in $1867$ was a federation with quasi-unitary elements; the EU is a confederation with federal features).

ISSUES IN THE DESIGN AND OPERATION OF FEDERATIONS

• Constituent Units: Number of units, relative size, and relative wealth.

• Distribution of Functions: Form of authority (exclusive, concurrent/shared, or residual), and symmetry/asymmetry of powers assigned to units.

• Financial Resources: Allocation of taxing power and revenue resources.

• Intergovernmental Relations: Degrees of autonomy versus interdependence.

• Common Institutions: Nature of federal executive and legislative branches (parliamentary vs. non-parliamentary), and regional representation in the public service.

• Constitutional Role: Supremacy of law, roles of courts, rigidity vs. flexibility of amendment processes, and protection of rights.

CRITERIA FOR THE SELECTION OF FEDERATIONS IN THIS STUDY

• Developed Industrial Societies: USA, Switzerland, Australia, Germany, Austria (Relevant for similar economic/social traditions to Canada).

• Developing Multilingual Societies: India and Malaysia (Relevant as multicultural parliamentary federations modeled on the Canadian/Indian Act $1935$ structures).

• Emergent Federations: Belgium ($1993$) and Spain (de facto federation, $1978$). Russia and South Africa are noted but considered too transitional or different in circumstance for definitive Canadian lessons.

• Bicommunal Pathology: Czechoslovakia and Pakistan are studied as examples of federations that separated into independent states.

OVERVIEW OF SELECTED ESTABLISHED FEDERATIONS

United States of America ($1789$)

• Origin: Replaced the Articles of Confederation ($1781$) due to their failure.

• Units: $50$ states, $2$ federacies, $3$ associated states, $3$ local home-rule territories, $3$ unincorporated territories, and over $130$ Native American domestic dependent nations.

• Structure: Moderate decentralization. The Constitution lists federal powers (mostly concurrent/exclusive), with residual matters left to states.

• Institutions: Presidential-Congressional system based on the separation of powers and checks and balances. Equal state representation in the Senate (directly elected since $1912$).

Switzerland ($1848$)

• Origin: Converted from a confederation after the Sonderbund Civil War of $1847$.

• Units: $26$ cantons ($6$ are "half cantons" with half representation in the Council of States).

• Diversity: Three official languages (German, French, Italian) and two dominant faiths (Catholic, Protestant). Cleavages cross-cut each other.

• Decentralization: High degree of decentralization; the federal government depends on cantons for administering a large portion of legislation.

• Institutions: Collegial executive (Federal Council) of $7$ members with a rotating presidency. Extensive use of referendums and initiatives.

Canada ($1867$)

• Origin: Efforts to overcome political deadlock in the United Province of Canada. Developed into a union of $10$ provinces and $2$ territories ($3$ in $1999$).

• Structure: Originally centralized with federal override powers. Includes three forms of power: exclusive federal, exclusive provincial, and concurrent. Residual powers are federal.

• Innovation: First federation to fuse a federal system with parliamentary responsible government.

Australia ($1901$)

• Origin: United self-governing British colonies. Comprises $6$ states, $1$ capital territory, $1$ Northern Territory, and $7$ administered territories.

• Structure: Modeled the distribution of powers on the USA (enumerated federal, concurrent, and residual state powers) but evolved to be relatively centralized financially.

• Institutions: Combined federalism with parliamentary government. The Senate is powerful but operates more as a "party house" than a "regional house."

Austria ($1920$)

• Origin: Adopted after the demise of the Austro-Hungarian Empire; restored in $1945$.

• Character: Largely culturally homogeneous. One of the most centralized federations; units (Länder) often act as agents of the federal government.

• Institutions: Parliamentary; Chancellor and Cabinet responsible to the Nationalrat. Bundesrat (second chamber) is indirectly elected by Land assemblies.

Germany ($1949$)

• Origin: Formed from $11$ Länder after WWII; expanded to $16$ in $1990$ after reunification.

• Character: Features an "interlocked" relationship where Länder have mandatory responsibility for administering most federal laws.

• Institutions: The Bundesrat consists of ex-officio delegates (ministers) from Land governments and holds a veto on all federal legislation affecting them (approx. $60\,\%$ of laws).

OVERVIEW OF MULTILINGUAL AND EMERGING FEDERATIONS

India ($1950$)

• Context: Diverse multilingual society ($18$ regional languages, Hindi official). States were reorganized on ethno-linguistic lines ($1956$-$1866$).

• Structure: Parliamentary "federation with a strong Centre." High Union powers include intervention in emergencies, though it functions in a multi-party context.

• Units: $25$ states, $7$ union territories, $1$ federacy, $1$ associated state. Includes asymmetry for Jammu and Kashmir.

Malaysia ($1963$)

• Context: Multi-ethnic (approx. $59\,\%$ Malay, $32\,\%$ Chinese, $9\,\%$ Indian).

• Structure: High degree of centralization with residual powers to states. Features significant asymmetry: the $11$ peninsular states are symmetrical, but the $2$ Borneo states (Sabah, Sarawak) have greater autonomy.

• Unique Feature: A rotating monarchy (Yang di-Pertuan Agong) selected for a $5$-year term from among nine hereditary rulers.

Belgium ($1993$)

• Context: Devolution from a unitary state. Bipolar character (Dutch-speaking vs. French-speaking).

• Units: $6$ units—$3$ territorial Regions (economics) and $3$ non-territorial Communities (culture/education).

• Structure: High decentralization. Powers are mostly exclusive. Significant asymmetry, particularly regarding the capital, Brussels.

Spain ($1978$)

• Context: Devolution following the Franco dictatorship. Not explicitly called a federation but functions as one ("federation in all but name").

• Units: $17$ Autonomous Communities. Uses asymmetrical devolution where regions gain autonomy at different speeds through negotiated "states of autonomy."

BICOMMUNAL FEDERATIONS THAT HAVE SEPARATED

Czechoslovakia ($1920$-$1992$)

• Timeline: Split on January $1$, $1993$ into the Czech and Slovak Republics.

• Conflict: Slovaks ($1/3$ of population) sought a confederation focused on economic/foreign policy. Czechs preferred a full federation. Separation was agreed upon by leaders without a referendum.

• Lesson: Illustrates the danger of cumulative bipolarization and rapid disintegration in bicommunal systems.

Pakistan ($1947$-$1971$)

• Context: Originally two fragments separated by $1000$ miles of Indian territory. West Pakistan (Urdu, $45\,\%$ population) and East Pakistan (Bengali, $55\,\%$ population).

• Outcome: Political polarization led to civil war in $1971$ and the birth of Bangladesh. West Pakistan subsequently became a federation of $4$ provinces in $1973$.