The time has come for politicians to stop hiding behind unjust laws that they themselves helped to enact, and to abandon that convenient shield of demanding a vote on the rights of full citizenship because they do not understand the difference
between a constitutional democracy, which this nation has, and a «mobocracy,» which this nation rejected when it adopted its constitution.
Not exact matches
I'm not in the business of political analysis, but I really don't think the choice was
between being a banana republic and a
constitutional democracy.
SNP Westminster leader Angus Robertson said: «Today of all days we are reminded, notwithstanding our differences on political and
constitutional issues, we are as one in our dedication to
democracy, rule of law and harmony
between people of all faiths and none.»
All
democracies in the world are
Constitutional save for the UK and New Zealand, which are Parliamentary (the legislature makes the ultimate law)(Australia may qualify as they have
Constitutional Law, but not defined by one document), though the level of restrictions may vary
between country.
[1] This case raises troubling implications that strike to the heart of the
constitutional relationship
between the judicial and other branches of government in our
constitutional democracy.
She has stated publicly on several occasions that mutual respect
between the branches of government — and their respective roles — is essential in a
constitutional democracy.»
In Canada the creative tension
between the rule of law and
democracy —
constitutional principles recognised by the Supreme Court of Canada [1]-- provides a crucible in which judicial review doctrine is formed.