|
Uruguay The Legislature
The bicameral General Assembly enacted laws and
regulated the
administration of justice. The General Assembly consisted
of the
thirty-member Senate--thirty senators and the vice
president of
the republic, who presided over it as well as the General
Assembly and had both a voice and a vote in Senate
deliberations-
-and the ninety-nine-member Chamber of Representatives. If
the
vice president ever assumed the presidency, the senator
heading
the list of the party that received the most votes in the
last
election would succeed to the presidency of the Senate.
Members of both legislative bodies were directly
elected
every five years by a system of proportional
representation. The
Chamber of Representatives represented the nineteen
administrative subdivisions of the country, with each
department
(intendencia) having at least two representatives.
The
members of the Senate were also elected by the people, but
with
the entire nation representing a single electoral
district.
Members of the General Assembly had to be natural citizens
or
legal citizens with seven years' exercise of their rights.
Senators had to be at least thirty years of age, and
representatives had to be at least twenty-five years of
age.
Uruguay did not have a residency requirement for election
to the
Senate or the Chamber of Representatives. Consequently,
almost
all of the country's politicians have lived and worked in
Montevideo. Military and civil service personnel or public
officials could not be candidates for either chamber of
the
General Assembly unless they resigned their positions at
least
three months before the election. In 1988 there were no
female
members of the General Assembly, but several served as
alternates.
The Chamber of Representatives could impeach any member
of
either chamber, the president, the vice president, cabinet
ministers, judges of the Supreme Court of Justice, and
other
judges. The Senate was responsible for trying these
impeachment
cases and could deprive a person of a post by a two-thirds
vote
of its membership. In addition, the Senate, in session
from midMarch to mid-December, spent much time considering
nominations
for, appointments to, and removals from office submitted
by the
executive. In other respects, the Senate and the Chamber
of
Representatives had equal powers and duties. Members of
either of
the two chambers could initiate a bill. Both chambers had
to
approve a proposed bill before it could be sent to the
executive
power to be published. The latter branch, however, had ten
days
to make objections to or observations on the bill. If the
president objected only to part of a bill, the General
Assembly
could enact the other part.
Among the most important duties of the Chamber of
Representatives--in joint session with the Senate--were
the
election of the members of the Supreme Court of Justice
and three
quasi-judicial autonomous entities: the Accounts Tribunal,
the
Contentious-Administrative Tribunal, and the Electoral
Court.
These ordinary administrative courts heard cases involving
the
functioning of state administration. In addition, the
Chamber of
Representatives was empowered to grant pardons and settle
disputes concerning legislation on which the two chambers
disagreed. The Chamber of Representatives also had the
exclusive
right to impeach members of both chambers, the president
and vice
president of the republic, the cabinet ministers, and
members of
the courts for violations of the constitution or other
serious
offenses. Impeachment proceedings had to be tried before
the
Senate.
The Accounts Tribunal, which was a functionally
autonomous
appendage of the General Assembly, was responsible for
determining taxes and reporting on the accounts and
budgets of
all the state organs. It was authorized to intervene in
all
matters relating to the financial activities of the state
organs,
departmental governments, and autonomous agencies, and it
was
authorized to report to the appropriate authority all
irregularities in the management of public funds or
infractions
of budgetary and accounting laws. It was authorized to
certify
the legality of expenditures and payments and append
pertinent
objections whenever necessary. In the departmental
governments
and autonomous agencies, officials acting under the
supervision
of the tribunal performed the same duties. The tribunal's
opinions covered all the organs of the state, including
departmental governments. An annual report had to be
submitted to
the General Assembly. The Accounts Tribunal consisted of
seven
members appointed by a two-thirds vote of the full
membership of
the General Assembly. Their elective qualifications were
the same
as those of a senator. Their term of office ended when the
succeeding General Assembly made new appointments, but
they could
be reelected.
The Contentious-Administrative Tribunal heard pleas for
the
nullification of final administrative acts that were
considered
contrary to law or an abuse of authority made by the
administration, state organs, departmental governments,
autonomous entities, and decentralized services. It also
had
jurisdiction over the final administrative acts of the
governments of the departments and of the autonomous
entities.
Its functions were only to appraise the act itself and to
confirm
or annul it, without alteration. Its decisions had effect
only in
the cases before it. The Contentious-Administrative
Tribunal
could act in cases of conflict of jurisdiction based on
legislation and on differences that arose among the
executive,
the departmental governments, and the autonomous entities.
The qualifications necessary for election to the
ContentiousAdministrative Tribunal, the manner of appointment, the
remuneration, and the term of office were the same as
those
established for the members of the Supreme Court of
Justice. The
tribunal was composed of five judges appointed by the
General
Assembly for ten-year terms. It also had an "attorney
general for
administrative claims" (appointed by the president), whose
qualifications, remuneration, and term of office were
decided by
the tribunal. The attorney general was heard at the final
hearing
of all matters within the jurisdiction of the tribunal.
The Electoral Court, a quasi-judicial autonomous
entity,
supervised national, departmental, and municipal elections
and
had competence over all electoral acts and procedures. It
ruled
in the last instance on appeals and complaints; it also
judged
the election of all the elective posts and the holding of
a
plebiscite (on constitutional issues) or referendum (on
political
issues). Of the Electoral Court's nine members, the
General
Assembly appointed five and their alternates by a
two-thirds vote
in joint session and elected the other four members and
their
alternates equally from the two political parties having
the
highest number of votes. The court had eighteen alternates
in
addition to the nine full members. Members served four
years
until the succeeding legislature selected their
replacements
(see The Electoral Process
, this ch.).
Data as of December 1990
|
