A carregar...
Publicação
Semipresidencialismo em Portugal: Poderes presidenciais e interação com o governo (1982-2016)
| Nome: | Descrição: | Tamanho: | Formato: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7.67 MB | Adobe PDF | |||
| 4.2 MB | Adobe PDF |
Autores
Orientador(es)
Resumo(s)
O interesse pela investigação sobre o funcionamento dos sistemas de governo de tipo semipresidencial tem crescido em paralelo com o aumento do número de países que escolhem o semipresidencialismo. Muitos estudos centram-se na comparação das normas constitucionais e na observação da prática política que delas decorre diretamente, sem prestar a mesma atenção a outros aspetos igualmente relevantes, nomeadamente na esfera dos poderes do Presidente da República. A investigação desenvolvida na tese parece confirmar, empiricamente, a perceção que alguns autores já tinham expressado quanto à importância dos poderes
informais, sugerindo que tal vertente deve merecer tanta atenção como a dos poderes formais, qualitativa e quantitativamente. Começando por comparar o sistema português com outros, mostra-se que, no contexto dos dezoito Estados europeus que escolheram o semipresidencialismo, Portugal se situa entre aqueles cuja lei fundamental consagra os poderes presidenciais mais relevantes. Partindo dessa constatação, procurou-se aprofundar o conhecimento sobre o exercício efetivo de tais poderes, formais e informais, na interação dos presidentes com os governos, tendo por base as decisões que tomaram, as declarações que proferiram e as iniciativas que promoveram. Essa análise é feita com o enquadramento dos diferentes atos em quatro categorias de poderes, em alternativa à divisão mais usada, entre “poderes legislativos” e “não legislativos”, que se afigurou insuficiente para um estudo de caso com a amplitude pretendida. “Poderes de refrescamento sistémico”, “poderes de intervenção no processo legislativo”, “outros poderes com relevância sistémica” e
“poderes informais”, são as novas categorias que permitem diferenciar melhor aquelas decisões, declarações e iniciativas relevantes, atendendo à respetiva natureza. Importante para o desfecho da investigação foi o modelo analítico desenvolvido para o efeito, que permite a aplicação prática de dois conceitos que já estavam
anteriormente implícitos em algumas obras, mas ignorados noutras: “sentido” e “intensidade” da interação. Para compreender o funcionamento do sistema é vital distinguir as ações do Presidente que vão ao encontro dos interesses do Governo daquelas que são contrárias a esses interesses e ponderar, de forma diferenciada, o impacto relativo que cada uma delas pode ter. O estudo não encontrou relação entre a intensidade da intervenção do Presidente e a maior ou menor diferença entre a sua popularidade e a do Primeiro Ministro, nem entre aquela e os melhores ou piores ciclos económicos, mas confirma a tendência para que os titulares do cargo tenham uma interação com os governos globalmente mais intensa nos segundos mandatos do que nos primeiros. Por outro lado, concluindo que o sentido da interação não depende da relação do Presidente com o partido do Primeiro-Ministro nem da tipologia do Governo, sugere que a intensidade de sentido conflitual pode ser mais elevada nos períodos de coabitação e quando os executivos dispõem de apoio parlamentar maioritário.
The interest in the research of the functioning of semi-presidential government systems has grown in parallel with the increase in the number of countries choosing semi-presidentialism. A lot of studies focus on the comparison of constitutional norms and on the observation of the political practice that directly comes from them, without paying as much attention to other aspects equally relevant, namely in the President of the Republic’s sphere of powers. The investigation conducted in the theses seems to empirically confirm the perception that some authors have already expressed about the importance of informal powers, suggesting that this aspect should get as much attention as formal powers do, qualitatively and quantitatively. Beginning by comparing the Portuguese system with others it’s shown that, in the context of the eighteen European States that have chosen semi-presidentialism, Portugal situates itself between those whose fundamental law consecrates the most relevant presidential powers. Taking into consideration this finding, it was sought to deepen the knowledge of the effective exercise of such powers, formal and informal, in the interaction between the presidents and the governments, based on the decisions that were taken, the statements that were uttered and the initiatives that were promoted. This analysis is made with the framing of the different acts in four categories of powers, instead of the most used division, between “legislative powers” and “nonlegislative powers”, that has proven to be insufficient for a case study with the intended range. “Powers of systemic refreshment”, “powers of intervention in the legislative process”, “other powers with systemic relevancy” and “informal powers” are the new categories that allow to better differentiate those decisions, statements, and relevant initiatives, taking into consideration their respective nature. Important for the investigation's outcome was the analytical model developed for the purpose, which allows the practical application of two concepts that were already implicit in some works, but ignored in others: “direction” and “intensity” of the interaction. To understand the system's functioning it is vital to distinguish the actions of the President that meet the Government’s interests from the ones that are contrary to those interests and to ponder, in a different way, the relative impact that each one of them can have. The study didn’t find a relationship between the intensity of the President’s intervention and the greater or lesser gap between his popularity and the Prime-Minister’s, nor between that and the better or worse economic cycles. However, it confirms the tendency that officeholders have an overall more intense interaction with the governments in the second term than in the first. On the other hand, concluding that the direction of the interaction doesn’t depend on the relationship between the President and the Prime Minister’s party, or on the type of government, it is suggested that the intensity of conflicting actions can be higher in the cohabitation periods and when the executives have majority parliamentary support.
The interest in the research of the functioning of semi-presidential government systems has grown in parallel with the increase in the number of countries choosing semi-presidentialism. A lot of studies focus on the comparison of constitutional norms and on the observation of the political practice that directly comes from them, without paying as much attention to other aspects equally relevant, namely in the President of the Republic’s sphere of powers. The investigation conducted in the theses seems to empirically confirm the perception that some authors have already expressed about the importance of informal powers, suggesting that this aspect should get as much attention as formal powers do, qualitatively and quantitatively. Beginning by comparing the Portuguese system with others it’s shown that, in the context of the eighteen European States that have chosen semi-presidentialism, Portugal situates itself between those whose fundamental law consecrates the most relevant presidential powers. Taking into consideration this finding, it was sought to deepen the knowledge of the effective exercise of such powers, formal and informal, in the interaction between the presidents and the governments, based on the decisions that were taken, the statements that were uttered and the initiatives that were promoted. This analysis is made with the framing of the different acts in four categories of powers, instead of the most used division, between “legislative powers” and “nonlegislative powers”, that has proven to be insufficient for a case study with the intended range. “Powers of systemic refreshment”, “powers of intervention in the legislative process”, “other powers with systemic relevancy” and “informal powers” are the new categories that allow to better differentiate those decisions, statements, and relevant initiatives, taking into consideration their respective nature. Important for the investigation's outcome was the analytical model developed for the purpose, which allows the practical application of two concepts that were already implicit in some works, but ignored in others: “direction” and “intensity” of the interaction. To understand the system's functioning it is vital to distinguish the actions of the President that meet the Government’s interests from the ones that are contrary to those interests and to ponder, in a different way, the relative impact that each one of them can have. The study didn’t find a relationship between the intensity of the President’s intervention and the greater or lesser gap between his popularity and the Prime-Minister’s, nor between that and the better or worse economic cycles. However, it confirms the tendency that officeholders have an overall more intense interaction with the governments in the second term than in the first. On the other hand, concluding that the direction of the interaction doesn’t depend on the relationship between the President and the Prime Minister’s party, or on the type of government, it is suggested that the intensity of conflicting actions can be higher in the cohabitation periods and when the executives have majority parliamentary support.
Descrição
Palavras-chave
Sistemas de governo Semipresidencialismo Presidente da República Poderes presidenciais Systems of government semi-presidentialism President of the Republic Presidential powers