Politics of the Erishlands

Political system of the Erish Realm
Det Erischryk's politisch't system

State type	Unitary parliamentary constitutional monarchy
Constitution	Constitution of the Erish Realm
Legislative branch
Name	Folksting
Type	Semi-bicameral
Meeting place	Folksting building
Presiding officer	Jedolf Ouscheirson Speaker of the Folksting
Executive branch
Head of State
Title	Monarch
Currently	Liexne III
Appointer	Hereditary
Head of Government
Title	Realm Chancellor
Currently	Eirik Geiralkson
Appointer	Monarch
Cabinet
Name	Realm Cabinet
Current cabinet	First Geiralkson cabinet
Leader	Realm Chancellor
Appointer	Monarch
Ministries	13
Judicial branch
Name	Erish judiciary
Supreme Court
Chief judge	Rif Routgeirson

The politics of Erishland take place within the framework of a representative democratic constitutional monarchy. Under the 1940 Constitution of the Erish Realm, the authority of the state derives from the public will, and it is obligated to uphold both "the provisions and soul of the constitution".

The Erish political system operates as a parliamentary constitutional monarchy, wherein the monarch, currently Queen Liexne III, is the ceremonial head of state whilst the Realm Chancellor, currently Eirik Geiralkson, is the head of government, the latter leading the Realm Cabinet. Legislative power is vested in the semi-bicameral Erish Folksting. The judiciary is independent, and follows a civil system of law. The highest court, the Supreme Court, has the power to strike down unconstitutional laws.

Erishland has a multi-party system, though it is dominated by the Democratic and Liberal parties. Members of the Folksting are elected by mixed-member proportional representation, and the government is formed by the party which holds the most constituency seats. It has been the case since 1940 that the Cabinet is a minority government without a coalition, though due to the institutional setup of the Folksting, they tend to be fairly stable.

Erishland is a devolved unitary state wherein the eleven Lands are delegated the tasks of implementing national laws, and are additionally granted varying levels of autonomy. The form of government used by the Lands is the same as that of the national government, having a parliamentary system with semi-bicameral Land Assemblies and Land Councils accountable to said Assemblies.

Constitution

Life, freedom and dignity are the sovereign, inborn, and supremely inviolable rights of all people.

— Article I, Chapter 1, Section 1 of the Constitution of the Erish Realm (1940)

The Constitution of the Erish Realm (Erish: Det Erischryk's Konstitution) is the supreme law of Erishland. Adopted in 1940 after a national referendum, it declares the intentions of the constitution, recognizes the personal, political, civil and social rights of all people, and establishes the framework of a government, whose authority derives from the people, at the national and Land levels. All of these are binding upon the government in both provision and spirit; to enforce this, the Supreme Court is able to exercise judicial review over any law or policy. Amendments require a two-thirds majority in two consecutive terms of the Folksting, and then a majority of the national vote in a referendum, but cannot restrict personal rights or get rid of the Folksting; to date, no amendments have been ratified.

Constitutional background

The people do not want anything but what both Royalists and Republicans promised them.

— Adolv Eirikson, Interview with Haven Dagblad (12 April 1938)

Following the re-establishment of Erish independence, it was not immediately clear what the best path forward would be for the once more independent country. Even after the dominant Royalist faction successfully defeated the Shraderists, there was great controversy as to what Erish democracy should look like. The memory of the Republican era of the mid-to-late 1800s, begun with high hopes of a federal democratic republic but ending in dictatorship as the already strong president used gridlock to take even more power, weighed heavily upon those who came to be responsible for creating a new system. At the same time, however, old concerns such as skepticism of parliamentarianism resurfaced alongside new ones, such as what rights should be protected, and what the role of the Lands was.

The basic framework of government for the new Erish state was the main focal point of controversy. Neither presidentialism nor parliamentarianism was favored by even a plurality of the authors of the constitution. Debates raged on for months over whether there should be a presidential or semi-presidential system of government, until finally, the idea of semi-bicameralism arose as the final solution for the issue.

The paradigm of rights was just as controversial. Conservatives and moderate liberals favored the framing of rights as applying to Erish citizens and being of a purely civil and political nature; more radical liberals and social democrats argued for the universality of rights and the inclusion of economic rights. Eventually, the latter faction won out, though primarily as a consequence of what Orlajsdochter (2013) calls "a concerted effort to undercut the legitimacy of the Shraderists".

Despite the relative autonomy the constitution would grant, the issues of relations between the national government and the Lands were few. People had and still held a sense of regional identity, but the joint experience of Ottonian rule had created a strong enough sense of national identity that a modernization of the unitary state from prior to the Republic was quickly agreed upon. The largest controversy was over how the Lands should be represented in the national legislature, with more hardline regionalist factions insisting upon an upper house where the Lands were equal, and others arguing for a unicameral legislature elected by mixed-member proportional representation. Ultimately, the issue would be resolved by the resolution of the controversy over the form of government: the Deputies representing the Lands having exclusive powers of confidence proved enticing.

Despite the consensus which eventually came to be agreed upon by the authors of the constitution in early 1939, the case to be made to the public which was to adopt it - by an audacious two-thirds vote, at that - still had to be made.

Constitutional theory

The old Republic fell when they believed two branches must sprout from a trunk, rather than a branch.

— Realm Chancellor Osin Torlovson, Question Time (5 July 1941)

A focal point of Erish constitutional theory is the establishment of a system where the independent, democratically elected executive and legislature of a presidential system can co-exist with the accountable executive of a parliamentary system, whilst avoiding the executive personalization and gridlock of presidentialism, and the fusion of powers and executive instability of parliamentarianism (a multi-party system, desired by the Erish constitution's authors, being prone to more unstable coalition or minority governments). The solution devised by the authors of the Constitution was the system of semi-bicameralism (Erish: halv-bikameralismus).

Instead of electing two separate branches, two halves of the unicameral Folksting are elected by mixed-member proportional representation: local Deputies elected by plurality vote, and national Deputies elected by a national proportional vote. Because only local Deputies have the power of confidence and qualify for Cabinet membership, a separation of powers is maintained whilst depersonalizing the executive and providing an avenue for breaking gridlock (a vote of no confidence triggering new elections); to provide a balance of power against this "executive half" of the Folksting, the legislature as a whole can initiate a referendum on gridlocked legislation. Furthermore, because the electoral system used for local Deputies almost guarantees that they will come from one of two parties, it and the local Deputy's powers also address the problem of executive stability, since it follows from both that Cabinets will very likely be of one party.

In the Erish Constitution, rights are not exclusive to Erish citizens; the rights recognized and protected by the Constitution are framed as belonging to all people. There are four categories of rights (though others are explicitly stated to not be restricted or denied): personal rights by virtue of being a person (primarily rights regarding trials), political rights by virtue of being subject to the power of the state (primarily rights against searches and seizures), civil rights by virtue of being able to participate in democracy (such as freedom of expression and voting), and social rights by virtue of being able to participate in society (such as education or protections against discrimination). In Erish constitutional theory, it is held that personal rights are especially absolute. For example, a person may never be subjected to torture because it is a personal right inherent from being a person. A person making an incitement to violence, however, is not protected by freedom of speech; the latter is a civil right protecting participation in a democratic society and the former is both a subversion of said society. However, decisions of this sort defining what is protected and what is not can only truly be made by the Supreme Court, which has exclusive jurisdiction over such matters.

A legal concept which is never explicitly stated in the constitution, but which quickly arose when the state it established became effective, is the idea of demokratiewacht "democracy defense". The idea is that the state has the authority to protect the liberal democratic order established by the constitution against political parties which seek to overthrow the democratic order, based upon the constitutional requirement that "their internal structures shall conform to the basic democratic principles [of the] constitution." This was the argument made and accepted by the Supreme Court in Shraderist Party v. the Realm (1942), when the national government defended the 1941 Act to Disband the Shraderist Party, though the Supreme Court struck down the law itself, ruling that only the Court had the authority to make such judgements. To date, only the Shraderist Party has been banned.

Legislative branch

The citizens of the realm shall be represented by the directly-elected Folksting.

— Article III, Chapter 1 of the Erish Constitution (1940)

The Erish legislature consists of the unicameral Folksting. Housed in the Folksting building in Serdstad, it is at the core of Erish democracy, being the supreme elected body. The Realm Chancellor and all other Chancellors of the Realm Cabinet come from the Folksting, and are consequently responsible to their fellow Deputies during question time, debates, and so on. If the Cabinet is subjected to a vote of no confidence by the locally-elected Deputies - in practice, generally only possible if the governing party desires to either get rid of an unpopular government or resolve gridlock - the parliament is dissolved so that new elections can be held.

Composition and elections

Every four years, this country offers the world almost two hundred and fifty men, women, and seimenn to lay bare its soul...

— Queen Liexne III addressing the Folksting, 3 January 2012

The 240 members of the Folksting, called Deputies, are elected by mixed-member proportional representation every four years or following the dissolution of the Folksting. Half of these deputies are elected in single-seat constituencies by plurality voting, whilst the other half of seats are apportioned to resemble the outcome of a national proportional vote. In order to qualify for these apportioned seats, a party must either win a district, or receive at least 2 percent of the proportional vote. With this fairly low threshold, it is the norm for many parties to be in the parliament; as of 2020, for example, there are eight parties in the Folksting.

It has almost always been the case that locally-elected Deputies are either of the Democratic or People's Party, with only two independent and one Labour local Deputies having ever been elected. Consequently, several smaller parties do not even contest these constituency seats, although the Labour, Justice, and New Right parties have made a controversial point of doing so in recent times. Voter turnout is generally high, numbering somewhere above 80 percent; recent elections have seen a downturn in turnout, however, and turnout in local elections is normally lower.

2019 election

Party		Constituency			Party list			Total seats
		Votes	%	Seats	Votes	%	Seats
	Democratic Party (D)	1,743,765	43.4	66	1,142,461	28.5	6	72
	People's Party (P)	1,611,035	40.1	59	984,538	24.5	3	62
	Labour Party (A)	244,157	6.1	0	493,431	12.3	31	31
	Justice Party (J)	219,000	5.4	0	491,210	12.2	31	31
	New Right (NR)	150,892	3.8	0	362,748	9.0	23	23
	Liberal Party (L)	17,107	0.4	0	188,080	4.7	12	12
	Green Party (G)	12,907	0.3	0	174,679	4.4	11	11
	Agrarian Party (G)	8,831	0.2	0	128,933	3.2	8	8
	Worker's Party	1,540	0.0	0	12,732	0.3	0	0
	Pirate Party	5,350	0.1	0	8,953	0.2	0	0
	Proletarian Union	1,074	0.0	0	6,443	0.2	0	0
	Center Party	3,229	0.1	0	3,239	0.1	0	0
	Others	2,039	0.1	0	16,556	0.4	0	0
	Independents	1,409	0.0	0	–	–	–	0
Invalid/blank votes		38,144	–	–	46,476	–	–	–
Total		4,060,479	100	125	4,060,479	100	125	250
Registered voters/turnout		5,399,635	75.2	–	5,399,635	75.2	–	–
Source: Realm Election Commission (2020)

Semi-bicameralism

I don't envy any person in a position like mine that has to broker a Cabinet.

— Realm Chancellor Egbald Framolkson, 26 October 1987

Although the Folksting is a unicameral body, it is described as "semi-bicameral". This is because only locally-elected Deputies may be members of the Cabinet, conduct a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet (and consequently trigger new elections), and pass budget bills (having been feared as becoming de facto no confidence votes if involving the whole Folksting) - features which the authors of the constitution conceived of as making these Deputies partially a "lower house" of the Folksting.

As was expected by the theory underlying the Erish constitution, the Cabinet has always been of the largest party in the local bloc (and the opposition the second-largest), and, despite these Cabinets always being minority governments, have generally been fairly stable, early elections having only occurred five times since 1940. Although Landtings copy the national model and have generally followed the same trends, there have been more exceptions at the Land level.

In disputes "between houses", the vote of no confidence serves as one mechanism by which gridlock can be resolved, though by custom, it can only be used for gridlock if core planks of the governing party's platform are jeopardized. The more common dispute resolution mechanism is the Folksting as a whole putting a bill to a national referendum. In practice, however, these are rarely used, because both usually carry more risks than negotiating and compromising on a bill. When combined with governing parties generally having to form coalitions on particular legislative issues to actually gain majorities to pass laws, this has made consensus is an important component of Erish democracy.

This semi-bicameralism is the point of some contention within Erish politics. The Labour, Justice, and New Right parties all advocate in their party platforms that the Folksting should be made completely unicameral, generally arguing that parties other than the Democratic and People's parties should get a realistic chance of being a part of government. Starting in the 2011 elections, they began contesting local elections, a decision which has seen them gain hundreds of thousands of votes, but which has been criticized by commentators for splitting the vote and potentially threatening the stability of a Cabinet government. Other parties currently in the Folksting have not taken an official stance on the matter; several individual Deputies retort that unicameralism would jeopardize separation of powers, and reduce the flexibility parties have with working on a given issue. Polling on the issue in 2019 showed that 59 percent of voters felt that the semi-bicameral system didn't need to be reformed, 24 percent felt it did, and 17 percent were neutral.

Legislative process

Yeah, I'm just a bill...

— Episode of LearnDance, 27 March 1976

The legislative process begins with a bill proposed either by a Deputy, or by a petition signed by at least 50,000 people. After being proposed, it is sent to the appropriate committee to be scrutinized, amended, and, if supported by the majority of the committee, presented once more to the Folksting at large. If a majority of Deputies vote in favor, the bill is sent to the monarch for assent. Seven days after assent is granted, or earlier or later if the legislation makes a specification, the bill goes into effect. The monarch has the power to withhold assent, but this is a reserve power, and could still be overridden by simply passing the bill again; to date, assent has always been granted. Budget bills have a special procedure: in order to pass, the majority of just the constituency Deputies must vote in favor; national Deputies lack the power to vote on budget bills.