Meksikos konstitucijos ypatumai.
In Latin America there are two models of constitutions - the liberal and the most stable Constitution of the Argentine Nation, drafted in 1853, (which was discussed in our previous article) and one of the most radical, comprehensive and unstable – the Constitution of the United Mexican States of 1917. Although both of them were constructed under the model of the US constitution with the influence of Spanish and French constitutionalism and local national traditions, the Argentine constitutionalism has developed on the grounds of the American legal system, as the Mexican one still could not break with the civil law tradition.Since declaring independence in 1810, Mexico has adopted a number of constitutions and other basic legal documents with constitutional effects. But the only those enacted in 1824, 1857, and 1917 are generally considered fully fledged, operational constitutions. The constitutional texts of them have a number of common elements, such as fundamental rights, separation of powers, a federal system of government, the notion of habeas corpus, etc. In reality all of them were never fully observed by politico- military leadership in the nineteenth century and single – party democracy and authoritarian presidencialismo that dominated Mexico’s political culture throughout much of the twentieth century. The series of internal wars, the reiterated disavowals of power, the recurrent uprisings and the impossibility of conducting national life in accordance with what is proposed in the Constitution are sufficient reasons to state, on the one hand, that there was never any constitutional continuity, and, on the other, that the lack of continuity hindered the construction of the constitutional theory. The demise of a single party democracy not only created a new political order; it also generated fundamental changes in Mexican constitutionalism, with formal constitutional and legal reforms playing an important but secondary role in revisingMexico’s constitutional structure. The authoritarian government now has been replaced by disempowered presidency and divided Congress, with revamped judicial power. However, the latter remains the weakest of its federal government’s three branches for a variety of historical, structural, political, socio-cultural reasons and constitutional limitations. The purpose of this article is to analyze some historical and theoretical aspects of the Mexican constitutionalism, the doctrinal basis of the modern Mexican constitution, form of government provided by the Constitution, federal government structure, the formation and the competence of the federal legislative, executive and judicial institutions.
- Straipsniai / Articles