As most democratic nations in the world have a tripartite government, I would assume that to have a truly democratic state, there should be some separation of powers or checks-and-balances put in place. One system where checks-and-balances should be enacted is in the impeachment process. Each country has their own unique system for the procedure, with varying degrees of checks-and-balances.
To be clear, within the American system of government, "impeachment" simply means to bring up on charges, not to be removed from office, although removal from office might be the end result of an impeachment process. The constitution lays out the process for the removal of the President, The House of Representatives can vote to impeach the President, a federal judge, or other executive branch officials for what the Constitution calls "high crimes and misdemeanors." This Constitutional standard need not necessarily be for a violation of law, so at its roots the standard can be a political judgment. Traditionally, however,
…show more content…
Compared to the American and Swedish system, the Romanian system appears more democratic. The people have a direct vote on whether or not they believe their leader should stay in office; whereas within the other two systems, the people must rely on their elected officials to make the decision for them. As a citizen, I would rather have a direct voice for the future of my country; if the President has been put up for impeachment, they have obviously done something (while in office, after the election) that warrants evaluation and judgement, I believe citizens should have a part in that decision. In addition, I like how the Parliament is involved initially, the legislative branch must first bring up charges and vote, with a majority needed for conviction, then the rest is up to the