what happens to presidents power when they aree impeached

Process for charging a public official with legal offenses past the legislature(south)

This article is about the process of charging a public official. For challenging a witness in a legal proceeding, see Witness impeachment.

Brazilian president Dilma Rousseff (left) and South Korean president Park Geun-Hye (right) were both impeached and removed from office in 2016.

Impeachment is the procedure by which a legislative trunk or other legally constituted tribunal initiates charges against a public official for misconduct.^{[1] [2]} It may be understood as a unique procedure involving both political and legal elements.^{[3] [4] [5]}

In Europe and Latin America impeachment tends to be bars to ministerial officials^[6] as the unique nature of their positions may place ministers beyond the reach of the constabulary to prosecute, or their misconduct is non codified into law as an offense except through the unique expectations of their high function. Both "peers and commoners" have been bailiwick to the process yet.^[7] From 1990 to 2020 there have been at least 272 impeachment charges against 132 different heads of state in 63 countries.^[8] Most democracies (with the notable exception of the United States) involve the courts (often a national constitutional court) in some fashion.^{[9] [1]}

In Latin America, which includes nigh twoscore% of the globe'due south presidential systems, ten presidents from vi countries were removed from office by their national legislatures via impeachments or declarations of incapacity between 1978 and 2019.^[10]

National legislations differ regarding both the consequences and definition of impeachment, but the intent is near always to expeditiously vacate the office. In virtually nations the process begins in the lower house of a bicameral associates who bring charges of misconduct, then the upper business firm administers a trial and sentencing.^[6] Most commonly, an official is considered impeached after the house votes to accept the charges, and impeachment itself does non remove the official from part.^[vi]

Because impeachment involves a departure from the normal ramble procedures past which individuals achieve loftier role (ballot, ratification, or appointment) and because it generally requires a supermajority, they are normally reserved for those accounted to accept committed serious abuses of their office.^[11] In the United States, for instance, impeachment at the federal level is limited to those who may have committed "Treason, Bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors"—the latter phrase referring to offenses against the authorities or the constitution, grave abuses of power, violations of the public trust, or other political crimes, even if not indictable criminal offenses.^{[4] [12]} Under the United States Constitution, the House of Representatives has the sole power of impeachments while the Senate has the sole power to try impeachments (i.e., to behave or convict); the validity of an impeachment trial is a political question that is nonjusticiable (i.e.., is not reviewable by the courts).^[13] In the United States, impeachment is a remedial rather than penal process,^{[13] [14] : eight} intended to "effectively 'maintain constitutional government' by removing individuals unfit for office";^{[14] : 8} persons discipline to impeachment and removal remain "liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, co-ordinate to Law."^[14]

Impeachment is provided for in the ramble laws of many countries including Brazil, France, India, Ireland, the Philippines, Russia, S Korea, and the United States. It is singled-out from the motion of no confidence process bachelor some countries whereby a motion of censure can exist used to remove a authorities and its ministers from office. Such a process is not applicative in countries with presidential forms of government like the United states.^[15]

Etymology and history [edit]

The word "impeachment" probable derives from Old French empeechier from Latin discussion impedīre expressing the thought of catching or ensnaring past the 'foot' (pes, pedis), and has analogues in the modern French verb empêcher (to forbid) and the modern English impede. Medieval popular etymology as well associated it (wrongly) with derivations from the Latin impetere (to attack).

The procedure was first used by the English "Good Parliament" against William Latimer, quaternary Baron Latimer in the second half of the 14th century. Following the English language example, the constitutions of Virginia (1776), Massachusetts (1780) and other states thereafter adopted the impeachment machinery, but they restricted the punishment to removal of the official from office.

In West Africa, Kings of the Ashanti Empire who violated any of the oaths taken during his or her enstoolment, were destooled past Kingmakers.^[16] For example, if a king punished citizens arbitrarily or was exposed to be decadent, he would be destooled. Destoolment entailed Kingmakers removing the sandals of the king and bumping his buttocks on the ground 3 times. Once destooled from office, his sanctity and thus reverence are lost equally he cannot practise any powers he had as king; this includes Chief ambassador, Judge, and Military Commander. The at present previous king is disposed of the Stool, swords and other regalia which symbolize his part and authority. He as well loses the position as custodian of the land. However, despite existence destooled from office, the male monarch remains a member of the Imperial Family from which he was elected.^[sixteen]

In various jurisdictions [edit]

Brazil [edit]

In Brazil, as in most other Latin American countries, "impeachment" refers to the definitive removal from function. The president of Brazil may be provisionally removed from office by the Bedroom of Deputies and and then tried and definitely removed from office by the Federal Senate. The Brazilian Constitution requires that two-thirds of the Deputies vote in favor of the opening of the impeachment process of the President and that ii-thirds of the Senators vote for impeachment. State governors and municipal mayors can besides be impeached past the respective legislative bodies. Commodity 2 of Law no. 1.079, from ten Apr 1950, or "The Police force of Impeachment", states that "The crimes defined in this law, fifty-fifty when simply attempted, are subject to the penalty of loss of office, with disqualification for up to five years for the exercise of any public function, to be imposed by the Federal Senate in proceedings against the President of the Republic, Ministers of State, Ministers of the Supreme Federal Tribunal, or the Attorney Full general."

Initiation: An accusation of a responsibility law-breaking against the President may exist brought by any Brazilian citizen however the President of the Chamber of Deputies holds prerogative to take the charge, which if accepted will exist read at the side by side session and reported to the President of the Republic.

Extraordinary Committee: An extraordinary committee is elected with member representation from each political party proportional to that political party'southward membership. The President is then immune x parliamentary sessions for defense, which lead to 2 legislative sessions to form a rapporteur'south legal stance as to if impeachment proceedings will or volition not be sent for a trial in the Senate. The rapporteur's opinion is voted on in the Committee; and on a elementary bulk it may be accepted. Failing that, the Committee adopts an opinion produced past the majority. For example, if the rapporteur's opinion is that no impeachment is warranted, and the Commission vote fails to take it, and then the Committee adopts the opinion to proceed with impeachment. Likewise, if the rapporteur's opinion is to proceed with impeachment, but it fails to accomplish majority in the Committee, so the Committee adopts the opinion not to impeach. If the vote succeeds, then the rapporteur's stance is adopted.

Chamber of Deputies: The Chamber issues a call-out vote to accept the opinion of the Committee, requiring either a supermajority of 2 thirds in favor of an impeachment opinion (or a supermajority of two thirds confronting a dismissal stance) of the Committee, in order to authorize the Senate impeachment proceedings. The President is suspended (provisionally removed) from function as presently as the Senate receives and accepts from the Chamber of Deputies the impeachment charges and decides to proceed with a trial.

The Senate: The procedure in the Senate had been historically defective in procedural guidance until 1992, when the Senate published in the Official Diary of the Union the pace-by-step process of the Senate's impeachment procedure, which involves the formation of another special committee and closely resembles the lower house process, with time constraints imposed on the steps taken. The commission's opinion must be presented within 10 days, after which it is put to a telephone call-out vote at the next session. The vote must continue within a single session; the vote on President Rousseff took over xx hours. A simple majority vote in the Senate begins formal deliberation on the complaint, immediately suspends the President from function, installs the Vice President as acting president, and begins a twenty-day period for written defence force as well as upwardly to 180-days for the trial. In the effect the trial proceeds slowly and exceeds 180 days, the Brazilian Constitution determines that the President is entitled to return and stay provisionally in part until the trial comes to its conclusion.

Senate plenary deliberation: The committee interrogates the accused or their counsel, from which they take a right to abstain, and also a probative session which guarantees the accused rights to contradiction, or audiatur et altera pars, allowing access to the courts and due procedure of police force under Article five of the constitution. The accused has 15 days to present written arguments in defense and answer to the prove gathered, and so the committee shall upshot an opinion on the merits within 10 days. The entire parcel is published for each senator earlier a single plenary session issues a call-out vote, which shall keep to trial on a elementary majority and close the example otherwise.

Senate trial: A hearing for the complainant and the accused convenes inside 48 hours of notification from deliberation, from which a trial is scheduled by the president of the Supreme Court no less than ten days afterward the hearing. The senators sit as judges, while witnesses are interrogated and cross-examined; all questions must be presented to the president of the Supreme Court, who, as prescribed in the Constitution, presides over the trial. The president of the Supreme Court allots time for fence and rebuttal, afterward which time the parties leave the chamber and the senators deliberate on the indictment. The President of the Supreme Court reads the summary of the grounds, the charges, the defense and the evidence to the Senate. The senators in plough consequence their sentence. On conviction past a supermajority of ii thirds, the president of the Supreme Court pronounces the judgement and the accused is immediately notified. If in that location is no supermajority for conviction, the accused is acquitted.

Upon conviction, the officeholder has his or her political rights revoked for 8 years, which confined them from running for any office during that time.^[17]

Fernando Collor de Mello, the 32nd President of Brazil, resigned in 1992 among impeachment proceedings. Despite his resignation, the Senate nonetheless voted to convict him and bar him from holding any role for 8 years, due to show of bribery and misappropriation.

In 2016, the Bedroom of Deputies initiated an impeachment case confronting President Dilma Rousseff on allegations of budgetary mismanagement, a offense of responsibleness nether the Constitution.^[eighteen] On 12 May 2016, after 20 hours of deliberation, the admissibility of the allegation was approved by the Senate with 55 votes in favor and 22 confronting (an absolute majority would accept been sufficient for this pace) and Vice President Michel Temer was notified to presume the duties of the President awaiting trial. On August 31, 61 senators voted in favor of impeachment and 20 voted confronting information technology, thus achieving the 2⁄3 majority needed for Rousseff's definitive removal. A vote to disqualify her for five years was taken and failed (in spite of the Constitution non separating disqualification from removal) having less than two thirds in favor.^[17]

Croatia [edit]

The process of impeaching the president of Republic of croatia can be initiated by a two-thirds majority vote in favor in the Sabor and is thereafter referred to the Constitutional Court, which must accept such a proposal with a ii-thirds majority vote in favor in order for the president to be removed from role. This has never occurred in the history of the Republic of Croatia. In case of a successful impeachment motion a president'southward constitutional term of five years would be terminated and an ballot called within 60 days of the vacancy occurring. During the catamenia of vacancy the presidential powers and duties would exist carried out by the speaker of the Croatian Parliament in his/her capacity as Interim President of the Republic.^[xix]

Czechia [edit]

In 2013, the constitution was changed. Since 2013, the procedure tin be started by at least 3-fifths of nowadays senators, and must be approved by at least three-fifths of all members of the Chamber of Deputies within three months. Also, the President can exist impeached for loftier treason (newly divers in the Constitution) or any serious infringement of the Constitution.^[20]

The process starts in the Senate of the Czechia which has the right to only impeach the president. After the approval by the Chamber of Deputies, the case is passed to the Constitutional Court of the Czech Democracy, which has to decide the verdict against the president. If the Court finds the President guilty, and then the President is removed from office and is permanently barred from beingness elected President of the Czech republic again.^[21]

No Czech president has ever been impeached, though members of the Senate sought to impeach President Václav Klaus in 2013.^[22] This case was dismissed by the court, which reasoned that his mandate had expired.^[23] The Senate also proposed to impeach president Miloš Zeman in 2019 ^[24] but the Chamber of Deputies did non vote on the effect in time and thus the instance did not even proceed to the Court.

Denmark [edit]

In Denmark the possibility for current and erstwhile ministers existence impeached was established with the Danish Constitution of 1849. Unlike many other countries Denmark does not have a Constitutional Courtroom who would normally handle these types of cases. Instead Denmark has a special Court of Impeachment (In Danish: Rigsretten) which is called upon every time a electric current and sometime minister have been impeached. The role of the Impeachment Court is to process and deliver judgments against current and quondam ministers who are accused of unlawful conduct in office. The legal content of ministerial responsibleness is laid downwards in the Ministerial Accountability Act which has its background in department thirteen of the Danish Constitution, according to which the ministers' accountability is determined in more item by law. In Kingdom of denmark the normal practice in terms of impeachment cases is that information technology needs to be brought up in the Danish Parliament (Folketing) get-go for fence between the dissimilar members and parties in the parliament. After the argue the members of the Danish Parliament vote on whether a current or former minister needs to be impeached. If there is a majority in the Danish Parliament for an impeachment case confronting a electric current or former government minister, an Impeachment Court is called into session. In Denmark the Impeachment Court consists of up to 15 Supreme Courtroom judges and 15 parliament members appointed by the Danish Parliament. The members of the Impeachment Court in Kingdom of denmark serve a six-year term in this position.^[25]

In 1995 the quondam Minister of Justice Erik Ninn-Hansen from the Conservative People's Party was impeached in connection with the Tamil Case. The case was centered around the illegal processing of family reunification applications. From September 1987 to January 1989 applications for family unit reunification of Tamil refugees from civil war-torn Sri Lanka were put on agree in violation of Danish and International law. On 22 June 1995, Ninn-Hansen was found guilty of violating paragraph 5 subsection one of the Danish Ministerial Responsibility Human activity which says: A minister is punished if he intentionally or through gross negligence neglects the duties incumbent on him under the constitution or legislation in general or according to the nature of his post. A majority of the judges in that impeachment example voted for former Minister of Justice Erik Ninn-Hansen to receive a suspended sentence of 4 months with 1 yr of probation. The reason why the judgement was made suspended was especially in relation to Ninn-Hansen'southward personal circumstances, in particular, his health and age - Ninn-Hansen was 73 years old when the sentence was handed down. After the verdict, Ninn-Hansen complained to the European Court of Human being Rights and complained, amidst other things, that the Court of Impeachment was not impartial. The European Courtroom of Human Rights dismissed the complaint on xviii May 1999. As a direct result and consequence of this instance, the Bourgeois-led government and Prime Minister at that fourth dimension Poul Schlüter was forced to footstep down from ability.^{[26] [27]}

In February 2021 the old Minister for Immigration and Integration Inger Støjberg at that time member of the Danish Liberal Party Venstre was impeached when it was discovered that she had possibly against both Danish and International law tried to separate couples in refugee centres in Denmark, as the wives of the couples were nether legal age. According to a commission written report Inger Støjberg had also lied in the Danish Parliament and failed to report relevant details to the Parliamentary Ombudsman^[28] The decision to initiate an impeachment case was adopted by the Danish Parliament with a 141–thirty vote and determination (In Denmark xc members of the parliament need to vote for impeachment earlier it tin can be implemented). On 13 Dec 2021 former Minister for Immigration and Integration Inger Støjberg was convicted by the special Courtroom of Impeachment of separating aviary seeker families illegally according to Danish and international law and sentenced to 60 days in prison house.^[29] The majority of the judges in the special Court of Impeachment (25 out of 26 judges) institute that it had been proven that Inger Støjberg on x February 2016 decided that an accommodation scheme should apply without the possibility of exceptions, and so that all asylum-seeking spouses and cohabiting couples where one was a minor aged 15–17, had to be separated and accommodated separately in separate asylum centers.^[30] On 21 Dec, a bulk in the Folketing voted that the judgement means that she is no longer worthy of sitting in the Folketing and she therefore immediately lost her seat.^[31]

France [edit]

In France the comparable process is called destitution. The president of France tin be impeached by the French Parliament for willfully violating the Constitution or the national laws. The process of impeachment is written in the 68th article of the French Constitution.^[32] A grouping of senators or a group of members of the National Associates can begin the process. Then, both the National Assembly and the Senate must acknowledge the impeachment. After the upper and lower houses' agreement, they unite to form the Loftier Court. Finally, the High Court must make up one's mind to declare the impeachment of the president of France—or non.

Germany [edit]

The federal president of Germany tin be impeached both past the Bundestag and by the Bundesrat for willfully violating federal law. Once the Bundestag or the Bundesrat impeaches the president, the Federal Constitutional Court decides whether the President is guilty equally charged and, if this is the example, whether to remove him or her from office. The Federal Ramble Court also has the ability to remove federal judges from office for willfully violating core principles of the federal constitution or a state constitution. The impeachment procedure is regulated in Commodity 61 of the Bones Law for the Federal Democracy of Frg.

In that location is no formal impeachment procedure for the chancellor of Germany, however the Bundestag can replace the chancellor at whatever fourth dimension past voting for a new chancellor (constructive vote of no conviction, Commodity 67 of the Bones Police).

There has never been an impeachment confronting the President so far. Constructive votes of no confidence against the chancellor occurred in 1972 and 1982, with only the second one being successful.

Hong Kong [edit]

The main executive of Hong Kong can be impeached past the Legislative Council. A movement for investigation, initiated jointly by at least one-fourth of all the legislators charging the Chief Executive with "serious alienation of police or dereliction of duty" and refusing to resign, shall beginning be passed by the council. An independent investigation committee, chaired past the chief justice of the Court of Final Appeal, will then carry out the investigation and study dorsum to the council. If the Council find the evidence sufficient to substantiate the charges, it may pass a motion of impeachment by a two-thirds bulk.^{[33] : Article 73(nine)}

However, the Legislative Council does non have the ability to actually remove the chief executive from office, as the chief executive is appointed by the Central People'due south Government (Country Quango of Cathay). The council tin can only report the outcome to the Central People'southward Government for its determination.^{[33] : Commodity 45}

Hungary [edit]

Article 13 of Hungary'due south Fundamental Law (constitution) provides for the process of impeaching and removing the president. The president enjoys immunity from criminal prosecution while in role, but may be charged with crimes committed during his term afterwards. Should the president violate the constitution while discharging his duties or commit a willful offense, he may exist removed from office. Removal proceedings may be proposed past the concurring recommendation of one-fifth of the 199 members of the country's unicameral Parliament. Parliament votes on the proposal past secret election, and if 2 thirds of all representatives concord, the president is impeached. Once impeached, the president's powers are suspended, and the Constitutional Courtroom decides whether or not the President should be removed from office.^{[34] [35]}

Republic of india [edit]

The president and judges, including the chief justice of the supreme court and high courts, can be impeached by the parliament before the expiry of the term for violation of the Constitution. Other than impeachment, no other penalty tin be given to a president in position for the violation of the Constitution under Article 361 of the constitution. Yet a president after his/her term/removal can be punished for his already proven unlawful activity under disrespecting the constitution, etc.^[36] No president has faced impeachment proceedings. Hence, the provisions for impeachment have never been tested. The sitting president cannot be charged and needs to step down in order for that to happen.

Ireland [edit]

In the Republic of Ireland formal impeachment applies only to the Irish president. Article 12 of the Irish gaelic Constitution provides that, unless judged to exist "permanently incapacitated" by the Supreme Courtroom, the president can be removed from part only by the houses of the Oireachtas (parliament) and merely for the committee of "stated misbehaviour". Either house of the Oireachtas may impeach the president, but merely past a resolution approved by a majority of at least two thirds of its total number of members; and a firm may non consider a proposal for impeachment unless requested to practise and then past at least thirty of its number.

Where 1 house impeaches the president, the remaining house either investigates the charge or commissions another torso or committee to practice so. The investigating house tin can remove the president if information technology decides, by at least a two-thirds majority of its members, both that the president is guilty of the charge and that the accuse is sufficiently serious as to warrant the president's removal. To date no impeachment of an Irish president has ever taken place. The president holds a largely formalism role, the dignity of which is considered important, so it is likely that a president would resign from office long earlier undergoing formal conviction or impeachment.

Italia [edit]

In Italy, co-ordinate to Article 90 of the Constitution, the President of Italy can be impeached through a majority vote of the Parliament in articulation session for high treason and for attempting to overthrow the Constitution. If impeached, the president of the Commonwealth is and then tried by the Constitutional Court integrated with sixteen citizens older than xl called by lot from a listing compiled by the Parliament every nine years.

Italian press and political forces made employ of the term "impeachment" for the attempt by some members of parliamentary opposition to initiate the process provided for in Article 90 against Presidents Francesco Cossiga (1991),^{[37] [ better source needed ]} Giorgio Napolitano (2014)^{[38] [ meliorate source needed ]} and Sergio Mattarella (2018).^{[39] [ better source needed ]}

Japan [edit]

By Article 78 of the Constitution of Japan, judges can exist impeached.^[twoscore] The voting method is specified by laws. The National Diet has 2 organs, namely 裁判官訴追委員会 ( Saibankan sotsui iinkai ) and 裁判官弾劾裁判所 ( Saibankan dangai saibansho ), which is established by Commodity 64 of the Constitution.^[41] The former has a role similar to prosecutor and the latter is analogous to Court. Vii judges were removed by them.

Liechtenstein [edit]

Members of the Liechtenstein Government can be impeached before the State Court for breaches of the Constitution or of other laws.^{[42] : Article 62} As a hereditary monarchy the Sovereign Prince cannot be impeached as he "is not subject to the jurisdiction of the courts and does not have legal responsibility".^{[42] : Article vii} The same is true of any fellow member of the Princely Firm who exercises the role of head of land should the Prince be temporarily prevented or in training for the Succession.^{[42] : Article 7}

Lithuania [edit]

In the Republic of lithuania, the president may be impeached by a three-fifths majority in the Seimas.^[43] President Rolandas Paksas was removed from office by impeachment on 6 April 2004 after the Constitutional Courtroom of Lithuania plant him guilty of having violated his adjuration and the constitution. He was the kickoff European head of state to take been impeached.^[44]

Kingdom of norway [edit]

Members of government, representatives of the national associates (Stortinget) and Supreme Court judges can exist impeached for criminal offenses tied to their duties and committed in part, according to the Constitution of 1814, §§ 86 and 87. The procedural rules were modeled afterwards the U.S. rules and are quite similar to them. Impeachment has been used viii times since 1814, last in 1927. Many argue that impeachment has fallen into desuetude. In cases of impeachment, an appointed court (Riksrett) takes effect.

Philippines [edit]

Impeachment in the Philippines follows procedures like to the United States. Under Sections2 and 3, Article Eleven, Constitution of the Philippines, the House of Representatives of the Philippines has the exclusive power to initiate all cases of impeachment against the president, vice president, members of the Supreme Court, members of the Ramble Commissions (Commission on Elections, Ceremonious Service Commission and the Commission on Inspect), and the ombudsman. When a third of its membership has endorsed the impeachment articles, information technology is and so transmitted to the Senate of the Philippines which tries and decide, as impeachment tribunal, the impeachment case.^[45]

A master difference from U.South. proceedings yet is that only 1 tertiary of Business firm members are required to corroborate the movement to impeach the president (as opposed to a simple majority of those present and voting in their U.S. counterpart). In the Senate, selected members of the House of Representatives act as the prosecutors and the senators act as judges with the Senate president presiding over the proceedings (the chief justice jointly presides with the Senate president if the president is on trial). Like the United States, to convict the official in question requires that a minimum of two thirds (i.e. xvi of 24 members) of all the members of the Senate vote in favor of conviction. If an impeachment attempt is unsuccessful or the official is acquitted, no new cases can be filed against that impeachable official for at least 1 full year.

Impeachment proceedings and attempts [edit]

President Joseph Estrada was the offset official impeached by the Business firm in 2000, but the trial ended prematurely due to outrage over a vote to open an envelope where that motion was narrowly defeated by his allies. Estrada was deposed days later during the 2001 EDSA Revolution.

In 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008, impeachment complaints were filed against President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, but none of the cases reached the required endorsement of i⁄3 of the members for transmittal to, and trial by, the Senate.

In March 2011, the House of Representatives impeached Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez, becoming the second person to be impeached. In Apr, Gutierrez resigned prior to the Senate'due south convening as an impeachment court.

In December 2011, in what was described equally "blitzkrieg fashion", 188 of the 285 members of the House of Representatives voted to transmit the 56-folio Articles of Impeachment confronting Supreme Court primary justice Renato Corona.

To engagement, three officials had been successfully impeached past the House of Representatives, and 2 were non convicted. The latter, Chief Justice Renato C. Corona, was convicted on 29 May 2012, by the Senate under Article II of the Manufactures of Impeachment (for betraying public trust), with 20–3 votes from the Senator Judges.

Peru [edit]

The beginning impeachment process confronting Pedro Pablo Kuczynski, then the incumbent President of Peru since 2016, was initiated by the Congress of Peru on 15 December 2017. According to Luis Galarreta, the President of the Congress, the whole process of impeachment could take taken as little as a week to complete.^[46] This outcome was role of the second stage of the political crisis generated by the confrontation betwixt the Government of Pedro Pablo Kuczynski and the Congress, in which the opposition Popular Force has an accented bulk. The impeachment request was rejected by the congress on 21 Dec 2017, for failing to obtain sufficient votes for the deposition.^[47]

Romania [edit]

The president can be impeached by Parliament and is and then suspended. A referendum so follows to determine whether the suspended President should be removed from function. President Traian Băsescu was impeached twice by the Parliament: in 2007 and then once more in July 2012. A referendum was held on 19 May 2007 and a big bulk of the electorate voted confronting removing the president from role. For the most recent suspension a plebiscite was held on July 29, 2012; the results were heavily against the president, but the referendum was invalidated due to low turnout.^{[48] [ circular reference ]}

Russia [edit]

Boris Yeltsin, as president of Russia, survived several impeachment attempts

In 1999, members of the Country Duma of Russian federation, led by the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, unsuccessfully attempted to impeach President Boris Yeltsin on charges relating to his role in the 1993 Russian ramble crisis and launching the First Chechen War (1995–96); efforts to launch impeachment proceedings failed.^{[49] [l] [51]}

Singapore [edit]

The Constitution of Singapore allows the impeachment of a sitting president on charges of treason, violation of the Constitution, corruption, or attempting to mislead the Presidential Elections Committee for the purpose of demonstrating eligibility to exist elected as president. The prime minister or at least one-quarter of all members of Parliament (MPs) tin pass an impeachment movement, which tin can succeed only if at least half of all MPs (excluding nominated members) vote in favor, whereupon the chief justice of the Supreme Court will engage a tribunal to investigate allegations against the president. If the tribunal finds the president guilty, or otherwise declares that the president is "permanently incapable of discharging the functions of his office by reason of mental or physical infirmity", Parliament volition hold a vote on a resolution to remove the president from office, which requires a three-quarters majority to succeed.^[52] No president has ever been removed from office in this fashion.

South Africa [edit]

When the Matrimony of South Africa was established in 1910, the only officials who could be impeached (though the term itself was not used) were the chief justice and judges of the Supreme Court of Due south Africa. The telescopic was broadened when the country became a commonwealth in 1961, to include the country president. It was further broadened in 1981 to include the new office of vice state president; and in 1994 to include the executive deputy presidents, the public protector and the Auditor-General. Since 1997, members of certain commissions established by the Constitution tin can also be impeached. The grounds for impeachment, and the procedures to be followed, take inverse several times over the years.

South korea [edit]

According to the Commodity 65 Clause i of Constitution of Republic of korea, if President, Prime Minister, or other land council members including Supreme Courtroom and Ramble court members, violate the Constitution or other laws of official duty, the National Assembly can impeach them. Clause2 states the impeachment bill may be proposed past one third or more than of the total members of the National Assembly, and shall require bulk voting and approved by 2 thirds or more of the total members of the National Assembly. This commodity also states that whatever person against whom a motion for impeachment has been passed shall be suspended from exercising his power until the impeachment has been adjudicated and shall not extend further than removal from public office, provided that it shall not exempt the person impeached from civil or criminal liability.

2 presidents take been impeached since the establishing of the Republic of Korea in 1948. Roh Moo-hyun in 2004 was impeached by the National Associates simply was overturned by the Ramble Court. Park Geun-hye in 2016 was impeached by the National Assembly, and the impeachment was confirmed by the Constitutional Court on March ten, 2017.^{[53] [54]}

In February 2021, Judge Lim Seong-geun of the Busan High Courtroom was impeached by the National Assembly for meddling in politically sensitive trials, the showtime ever impeachment of a judge in Korean history. Different presidential impeachments, but a unproblematic majority is required to impeach.^[55]

Turkey [edit]

In Turkey, according to the Constitution, the Grand National Associates may initiate an investigation of the president, the vice president or whatever member of the Chiffonier upon the proposal of simple majority of its total members, and within a flow less than a calendar month, the blessing of three-fifths of the total members.^[56] The investigation would exist carried out by a commission of fifteen members of the Assembly, each nominated by the political parties in proportion to their representation therein. The committee would submit its report indicating the issue of the investigation to the speaker within 2 months. If the investigation is not completed within this catamenia, the commission's time may be renewed for another month. Within x days of its submission to the speaker, the study would be distributed to all members of the Assembly, and ten days afterwards its distribution, the report would be discussed on the floor. Upon the approval of 2 thirds of the total number of the Assembly by secret vote, the person or persons, about whom the investigation was conducted, may be tried before the Constitutional Court. The trial would exist finalized within three months, and if non, a one-fourth dimension additional catamenia of three months shall exist granted. The president, nigh whom an investigation has been initiated, may not call for an election. The president, who is bedevilled by the Court, would be removed from office.

The provision of this article shall also apply to the offenses for which the president allegedly worked during his term of office.

Ukraine [edit]

During the crisis which started in Nov 2013, the increasing political stress of the face up-down between the protestors occupying Independence Square in Kyiv and the State Security forces under the control of President Yanukovych led to deadly armed force existence used on the protestors. Post-obit the negotiated return of Kyiv's City Hall on xvi Feb 2014, occupied by the protesters since November 2013, the security forces thought they could also retake "Maidan", Independence Square. The ensuing fighting from 17 through 21 February 2014 resulted in a considerable number of deaths and a more than generalised alienation of the population, and the withdrawal of President Yanukovych to his support surface area in the Eastward of Ukraine.

In the wake of the president'southward departure, Parliament convened on 22 Feb; it reinstated the 2004 Constitution, which reduced presidential authorisation, and voted impeachment of President Yanukovych as de facto recognition of his departure from office as President of an integrated Ukraine. The president riposted that Parliament's acts were illegal as they could pass into constabulary but by presidential signature.

United Kingdom [edit]

In the United Kingdom, in principle, anybody may be prosecuted and tried past the two Houses of Parliament for whatsoever crime.^[57] The first recorded impeachment is that of William Latimer, fourth Baron Latimer during the Good Parliament of 1376. The latest was that of Henry Dundas, 1st Viscount Melville which started in 1805 and which concluded with his acquittal in June 1806.^[58] Over the centuries, the procedure has been supplemented by other forms of oversight including select committees, confidence motions, and judicial review, while the privilege of peers to trial only in the House of Lords was abolished in 1948 (encounter Judicial functions of the House of Lords § Trials), and thus impeachment, which has not kept up with modern norms of democracy or procedural fairness, is generally considered obsolete.^[57]

Usa [edit]

United States president Donald Trump was impeached by the Firm of Representatives in 2019, and then again in 2021, with ane week left in function.

In the federal system, the Article Ane of the Usa Constitution provides that the Business firm of Representatives has the "sole Power of Impeachment" and the Senate has "the sole Ability to endeavour all Impeachments".^[59] Article Two provides that "The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the Us, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other loftier Crimes and Misdemeanors."^[threescore] In the United States, impeachment is the first of two stages; an official may be impeached past a majority vote of the House, just conviction and removal from role in the Senate requires "the concurrence of two thirds of the members present".^[61] Impeachment is analogous to an indictment.^[62]

According to the Business firm practice manual, "Impeachment is a constitutional remedy to address serious offenses against the arrangement of government. Information technology is the first step in a remedial process—that of removal from public part and possible disqualification from holding further office. The purpose of impeachment is non punishment; rather, its role is primarily to maintain ramble government."^[63] Impeachment may be understood as a unique process involving both political and legal elements.^{[3] [4] [5]} The Constitution provides that "Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend farther than to removal from Part, and disqualification to hold and relish any Part of honor, Trust or Turn a profit under the The states: but the Political party convicted shall yet be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Police force."^[64] Information technology is generally accepted that "a former President may exist prosecuted for crimes of which he was acquitted by the Senate".^[65]

The U.S. House of Representatives has impeached an official 21 times since 1789: four times for presidents, 15 times for federal judges, one time for a Cabinet secretary, and once for a senator.^[66] Of the 21, the Senate voted to remove viii (all federal judges) from part.^[66] The four impeachments of presidents were: Andrew Johnson in 1868, Nib Clinton in 1998, and Donald Trump twice: kickoff in 2019, and a 2nd time in 2021.^[67] All 4 impeachments were followed past acquittal in the Senate.^[66] An impeachment process was also commenced against Richard Nixon, but he resigned in 1974 to avoid likely removal from role.^[68]

Nigh all state constitutions set forth parallel impeachment procedures for state governments, allowing the land legislature to impeach officials of the land regime.^[69] From 1789 through 2008, 14 governors have been impeached (including two who were impeached twice), of whom seven governors were convicted.^[lxx]

Run across too [edit]

• Listing of impeachments of heads of country

References [edit]

1. ^ ^{a b} "impeachment | Definition, Process, History, & Facts". Encyclopedia Britannica . Retrieved fifteen November 2020.
2. ^ Landau, Sidney; Brantley, Sheila; Davis, Samuel; Koenigsberg, Ruth, eds. (1997). Funk & Wagnall's Standard Desk-bound Dictionary. Vol. 1 (1996 ed.). United States: Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc. p. 322. ISBN978-0-308-10353-5. ane. To charge (a high public official) before a legally constituted tribunal with crime or misdemeanor in office. 2. To bring discredit upon the honesty or validity of.
3. ^ ^{a b} Michael J. Gerhardt. "Impeachment is the law. Saying 'political procedure' but helps Trump's narrative". Washington Post. while it'due south true that politics are bound up in how impeachment plays out, it'south a myth that impeachment is just political. Rather, it'south the principal legal remedy that the Constitution expressly specifies to hold presidents accountable
4. ^ ^{a b c} Michael J. Gerhardt (2019). The Federal Impeachment Process: A Constitutional and Historical Analysis (3d ed.). University of Chicago Press. pp. 106–07. ISBN9780226554976. The ratification debates back up the conclusion that 'other high Crimes and Misdemeanors' were not limited to indictable offenses but rather included keen offenses against the federal regime. ... Justices James Wilson and Joseph Story expressed agreement with Hamilton's understanding of impeachment as a political proceeding and impeachable offenses equally political crimes.
5. ^ ^{a b} Gerhardt, Michael (2018). Impeachment: What Anybody Needs to Know. New York, N.Y.: Oxford University Press. p. 20. ISBN978-0190903657. LCCN 2018013560. Impeachment has elements of both legal and political proceedings. As a outcome, information technology is a unique process.
6. ^ ^{a b c} Davidson, Roger (2005). "Impeachment". Earth Volume Encyclopedia. Vol. I 10 (2005 ed.). Chicago. p. 92. ISBN0-7166-0105-2.
7. ^ "Impeachment". Britain Parliament Glossary . Retrieved v Feb 2021. Impeachment is when a peer or commoner is accused of 'high crimes and misdemeanours, beyond the accomplish of the law or which no other authority in the state will prosecute.'
8. ^ Lawler, David (19 December 2019). "What impeaching leaders looks like around the world". Axios . Retrieved 8 February 2021.
9. ^ Huq, Aziz; Ginsburg, Tom; Landau, David. "Designing Meliorate Impeachments: How other countries' constitutions protect against political gratuitous-for-alls". Boston Review . Retrieved eight February 2021. Constitutions in 9 democracies give a courtroom—often the state'southward constitutional court—the power to begin an impeachment; another 61 constitutions identify the courtroom at the end of the process.
10. ^ Ignacio Arana Araya, To Impeach or Not to Impeach: Lessons from Latin America, Georgetown Journal of International Affairs (December thirteen, 2019).
11. ^ Erskine, Daniel H. (2008). "The Trial of Queen Caroline and the Impeachment of President Clinton: Law As a Weapon for Political Reform". Washington University Global Studies Police Review. 7 (ane). ISSN 1546-6981.
12. ^ Peter Brandon Bayer (23 May 2019). "The Constitution dictates that impeachment must not exist partisan". The Conversation. Noted scholars Ronald Rotunda and John Nowak explain that the Framers wisely intended the phrase "or other loftier Crimes and Misdemeanors" to include undermining the Constitution and like, "great offenses confronting the federal authorities (similar corruption of power) even if they are not necessarily crimes.' For instance, Alexander Hamilton asserted that, while likely to be criminal acts, impeachable wrongdoings 'are those offenses which proceed from the misconduct of public men ... from the abuse or violation of some public trust.' James Madison urged that impeachment is advisable for 'loss of capacity, or corruption ... [that] might be fatal to the commonwealth.'
13. ^ ^{a b} "Impeachment". U.S. Constitution Annotated. Congressional Research Service – via Legal Information Establish, Cornell Police force School.
14. ^ ^{a b c} Cole, J. P.; Garvey, T. (29 October 2015). "Report No. R44260, Impeachment and Removal" (PDF). Congressional Research Service. pp. 15–16. Archived (PDF) from the original on 19 Dec 2019. Retrieved 22 September 2016.
15. ^ Hauss, Charles (29 December 2006). "Vote of confidence". Britannica . Retrieved 9 February 2021. {{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
16. ^ ^{a b} Obeng, J.Pashington (1996). Asante Catholicism; Religious and Cultural Reproduction amid the Akan of Ghana. Vol. 1. ISBN978-90-04-10631-iv.
17. ^ ^{a b} Maciel, Lourenço (8 February 2020). "Was information technology a coup? Democracy and Constitutionality in the 2016 Brazilian Impeachment Process". Dilma Rousseff's Impeachment. Archived from the original on 24 March 2021. Retrieved 5 March 2021.
18. ^ Andrew Jacobs (17 Apr 2016). "Brazil'south Lower House of Congress Votes for Impeachment of Dilma Rousseff". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 3 January 2022. Retrieved thirteen Nov 2016.
19. ^ "Constitution of Republic of croatia". § 105. Archived from the original (PDF) on 28 June 2018. Retrieved 12 March 2017.
20. ^ Ústava České republiky. Psp.cz. Retrieved on 2016-10-23.
21. ^ Ústava České republiky. Psp.cz. Retrieved 2013-07-12.
22. ^ "Czech President Vaclav Klaus faces treason charge". BBC News. four March 2013. Retrieved 23 October 2016.
23. ^ Rob Cameron (28 March 2013). "Constitutional Courtroom throws out treason charges against ex-president Klaus". Radio Praha.
24. ^ "Senát schválil ústavní žalobu na prezidenta republiky". 24 July 2019.
25. ^ "The Danish Constitution".
26. ^ "Tamilsagen 1986-1995". danmarkshistorien.dk.
27. ^ "HUDOC". European Court of Human Rights.
28. ^ "Kingdom of denmark'south ex-immigraton minister set to face impeachment trial". euronews. 14 January 2021.
29. ^ "Denmark's ex-immigration minister convicted over asylum seeker policy". euronews. thirteen December 2021.
30. ^ "Rigsretten - Rigsretten har afsagt dom i sagen modernistic fhv. minister Inger Støjberg". rigsretten.dk.
31. ^ "Folketinget har stemt: Inger Støjberg er ikke værdig til at sidde i Folketinget". www.mddk. 21 December 2021.
32. ^ "Le président de la République peut-il être destitué ? Et si oui, cascade quelles raisons ?". Libération.fr. 25 July 2018. Archived from the original on 27 May 2019. Retrieved 17 March 2019.
33. ^ ^{a b} "Bones Police of Hong Kong". basiclaw.gov.hk. Hong Kong Special Authoritative Region Authorities. Archived from the original on 27 January 2015. Retrieved 13 November 2016.
34. ^ "Magyarország Alaptörvénye—Hatályos Jogszabályok Gyűjteménye". net.jogtar.hu (in Hungarian). 25 April 2011. Retrieved 5 November 2019.
35. ^ "Fundamental Law of Hungary". world wide web.constituteproject.org . Retrieved 5 November 2019.
36. ^ "The Prevention of Insults to National Accolade (Subpoena) Human action of 1971" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 23 Jan 2017. Retrieved two July 2017.
37. ^ Cowell, Alan (13 December 1991). "President of Italia is Making Political Waves". The New York Times.
38. ^ "Italy parliament rejects bid to impeach President Napolitano". Reuters. 11 February 2014.
39. ^ Horowitz, Jason (28 May 2018). "Italian President's Loyalty to the Euro Creates Anarchy". The New York Times. Archived from the original on three January 2022.
40. ^ "The Constitution of Japan". Japanese Law Translation . Retrieved ten August 2020.
41. ^ "裁判官弾劾裁判所公式サイト / トップページ （音声ブラウザ対応）". www.dangai.go.jp.
42. ^ ^{a b c} "Constitution of the Principality of liechtenstein" (PDF). hrlibrary.umn.edu. Legal Service of the Government of the Principality of Liechtenstein. 2003. Retrieved 13 November 2016.
43. ^ "The Constitution of the Commonwealth of Lithuania". Retrieved 4 April 2016.
44. ^ "Lithuanian Parliament Removes Country'south President After Casting Votes on Three Charges". The New York Times. 7 April 2004. Retrieved 4 April 2016.
45. ^ Chan-Robles Virtual Law Library. "The 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines—Article Xi". Retrieved 25 July 2008.
46. ^ "Peru's leader faces impeachment". Bbc.com. 15 December 2017. Retrieved 28 December 2017.
47. ^ "Lawmakers who helped Peru president survive impeachment bid say commonwealth won". Efe.com. 22 Dec 2017. Retrieved 28 December 2017.
48. ^ ro:Referendumul pentru demiterea președintelui României, 2012
49. ^ "Yeltsin impeachment hearings begin", The Guardian (May xiii, 1999).
50. ^ David Hoffman, "Bid to Impeach Yeltsin Defeated", Washington Mail service (May 16, 1999).
51. ^ Michael Wines, "Drive to Impeach Russian President Dies in Parliament", New York Times (May xvi, 1999).
52. ^ "Constitution of the Republic of Singapore—Singapore Statutes Online". /sso.agc.gov.sg. 2019.
53. ^ Kim, Da-sol (viii Dec 2016). "Revisiting Roh Moo-hyun impeachment". The Korea Herald . Retrieved nine February 2021.
54. ^ "Park Geun-hye fired as court upholds impeachment". Al Jazzera. ten March 2017.
55. ^ "Legislature impeaches judge for political meddling". Korea JoongAng Daily. 4 February 2021.
56. ^ "Grand National Assembly of Turkey" (PDF). tbmmgov.tr. 2018.
57. ^ ^{a b} Simson Caird, Jack (vi June 2016). "Commons Briefing papers CBP-7612" (PDF). House of Commons Library. Retrieved 14 May 2019.
58. ^ Hutchison, Gary D (2017). "'The Manager in Distress': Reaction to the Impeachment of Henry Dundas, 1805–seven" (PDF). Parliamentary History. 36 (2): 198–217. doi:ten.1111/1750-0206.12295.
59. ^ Firm Exercise: A Guide to the Rules, Precedents and Procedures of the Firm, chap. 27 (Impeachment). U.S. Regime Publishing Office, p. 594 (quoting U.S. Const. fine art. I, Sec. ii, cl. 5; Sec. three, cl. 6.).
60. ^ ArtII.S4.1.two.one Offices Eligible for Impeachment, Constitution Annotated, Congress.gov.
61. ^ U.S. Constitution. Commodity I, § 3, clause 6. 12 Nov 2009.
62. ^ House Do: A Guide to the Rules, Precedents and Procedures of the Firm, chap. 27 (Impeachment). U.South. Government Publishing Office, p. 594: "An impeachment is instituted by a written accusation, called an 'Article of Impeachment,' which states the law-breaking charged. The articles serve a purpose like to that of an indictment in an ordinary criminal proceeding. Manual Sec. 609."
63. ^ Firm Practise: A Guide to the Rules, Precedents and Procedures of the Firm, chap. 27 (Impeachment). U.S. Government Publishing Part, p. 591.
64. ^ Art I.S3.C7.1.1 Judgment in Cases of Impeachment: Overview, Constitution Annotated.
65. ^ "Memorandum: Whether a Former President May Be Indicted and Tried for the Same Offenses for Which He was Impeached by the House and Acquitted past the Senate", U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Legal Counsel (August 18, 2000).
66. ^ ^{a b c} "U.S. Senate: Impeachment". www.senate.gov . Retrieved 19 September 2018.
67. ^ Maggie Astor (13 January 2021). "The Impeachment Proceedings That Came Before". The New York Times.
68. ^ Gerhardt, Michael J. (2000). The Federal Impeachment Process: A Ramble and Historical Assay . University of Chicago Printing. p. 27. ISBN9780226289571. attempted Impeachment of William O. Douglas.
69. ^ "Impeachment and the states: A look at the history, provisions in identify". knowledgecenter.csg.org. ^{[ permanent expressionless link ]}
70. ^ "Research Response: Governors' Impeachments in U.S. History", Illinois Full general Assembly Legislative Research Unit (July 8, 2008).

External links [edit]

fromancaushre.blogspot.com

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment

Share this post