Category: Political Science Notes

Read this article to learn about the Clash between Philip the Fair and Pope Boniface!

Dante was an outspoken thinker of anti-papalism but he failed to appreciate the importance of the nascent nation-state which was engulfing the political scene of Western Europe.

The rise of the nation-state and people’s increasing sympathy towards it ultimately made possible the enhancement in the power of the emperor and cornered the papacy. This was particularly discernible in France—towards the fag end of the 13th century. The most remarkable event of this period (end of 13th century and beginning of the 14th century) was the conflict between Pope Boniface VIII (1294-1303) and Philip the Fair, king of France. The conflict was both interesting and complicated and had far-reaching repercussions. Let us now see the nature of the conflict.

The main cause of the controversy was the power to impose taxation. As a result of the disintegration of feudalism, the administrative responsibility of both the English and French emperors increased considerably, and this needed a large amount of money.

Since the church was the owner of fabulous amount of property and was not paying any tax, the French king proceeded to impose new taxes upon the property of the church. This infuriated the Pope.

On the other hand, the ambitious church wanted to get more and more money by adopting various means. Pope Boniface declared that the mundane authority had no right to levy taxes upon the church and, if at all levied, he was not bound to pay it. He also directed the clergy not to pay any taxes.

On the opposite side stood the king of France—Philip the Fair. He said that the church had no power to collect any revenue or money in any form from the public without his permission.

His argument was that the French king was the undisputed authority over all temporal matters. He could not recognize a financial state within a state. He further said that political sovereignty was meaningless without tax sovereignty.

In 1302, Pope Boniface issued the Bull Unam Sanctum. In this, Pope Boniface admitted the existence of two swords—one would remain at the hands of the king and the other at the hands of the Pope. But both would be fully controlled by the Pope. That is, the temporal authority would not be allowed to use the sword according to its necessity.

He further declared that the temporal authority, because of its errors, would be judged by the spiritual authority. But in case of any mistake on the part of the spiritual authority, the temporal power had no right to judge. The declaration of Boniface raised the conflict to the apex point. The French king Philip the Fair accepted the challenge and proceeded to take action.

Philip the Fair brought twenty-nine charges against Boniface and he received overwhelming support from all sections of French society. This encouraged him and he launched a coup against Boniface. The Pope suffered the severest humiliation at the hands of the king and after a few weeks he died.

The victory of Philip the Fair over Boniface undoubtedly established the supremacy of the monarch over his own domain and the Pope had nothing to do. Again, the church’s unlimited lust for money was halted by the king and this was not temporary. The controversy made the moral position of the French monarch stronger.

The death of Boniface, however, failed to satisfy Philip the Fair and other anti-papalists. They moved to condemn his post mortem. This move embarrassed Pope Clement, who succeeded Boniface.

In order to appease the anti-papalist sentiment and to save the church from scandal, Pope Clement instituted a commission for investigation and simultaneously annulled all the announcements of Boniface.

Philip the Fair was highly praised by Pope Clement for his bold stand against Boniface. A very long chapter of controversy between the church and the state came to an end.

Upload and Share Your Article:

After reading this article you will learn about the controversy regarding contribution of Romans to political thought.

There is a controversy about the contribution of Romans to political theory. Most of the scholars on this field generally agree that the Romans cannot be credited with any spectacular contribution to political thought. For example, Dunning says—the contribution of Rome to the literature of political theory was very slight.

Other thinkers say that the Romans were so much busy with building up a strong and powerful empire and with its administration that they got little time for building up theoretical analysis. But this is not the view of all thinkers.

Ebenstein is of opinion that it is wrong to say that Roman political thought does not exist at all. It is true that the professional thinkers and publicists have not systematically analysed various aspects of political theory and expressed them in formal treatises as Plato and Aristotle had done.

It is true that we do not find a single philosopher in Rome in the rank of Plato or Aristotle. Naturally Rome cannot boast of any clear and systematic political theory. But the absence of any systematic political theory does not imply the absence of political thought, and it is not surprising that Rome was really fortunate in having very rich sources of political thought. Legal, administrative and governmental system of Rome can be regarded as fertile sources of political thought.

Romans cannot be singularly blamed for their failure to contribute liberally and scholarly to the development of political thought. Only Britain and France can claim substantial credit in this field.

The American political thought has been enriched not by philosophers or first grade theoreticians, but by renowned judges of the Supreme Court. Besides Plato and Aristotle, only Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, Hegel and Marx have built up independent theoretical works.

Even Rousseau and Hegel are to a considerable extent indebted to Plato for their idealism and dialectic. Marx ex­presses his indebtedness to Hegel and his other predecessors including Utopian socialists. This does not imply that the intellectual world of the West during the last twenty centuries was quite barren.

Political thought of each country keeps conform­ity with the socio-economic-political milieu. This individualist progress sometimes has made slight aberrations from the main stream, but this does not mean an absence of contribution.

In the light of above analysis we can state some salient features of Roman political thought. Plato and Aristotle thought of an ideal state which was far away from real world. Polybius and Cicero, two Roman thinkers, although thought of the world- state, analysed the nature of state in the light of the extant Roman state. They did not try to idealize the state. The Romans had no intention to deify the state.

State, to them, was a political organization and its purpose was to fulfill certain definite purpose. The state to them was not an object of heaven, but an institution of the mortal world. This idea of Romans about the state is unique. In fact the Romans completely changed the Greek conception of state and introduced a new one which is modern.

The credit of completing the separation between ethics and politics should definitely to go the Roman thinkers. The Greek philosophers had put a garb of ethics and morality upon politics and made it an abstract concept. To them, the state was the highest manifestation of ethics and its purpose was to enrich the ethical and moral values of individuals.

As a result of this, politics, in the hands of the Greek philosophers, failed to establish its separate identity. On ethical and moral consid­eration the Greek philosophers demanded unconditional allegiance from the citi­zens. Roman thinkers supported the allegiance to the universality of law of nature and this was based on practical ground.

Law and legal system to them were of primary importance. Wisdom and goodness were private affairs. This is no doubt a realistic approach to politics.

Greek philosophy made no attempt to draw a distinction between individual and the state. This has been reversed by the Roman thinkers. The Romans have separated the individuals from the state and have also expounded the eternal democratic principle that they have certain rights and duties.

The state is a legal institution and the individuals are its legal units. Their rights are to be protected from illegal encroachments.

The citizens also discharge their duties towards the state. Romans have enacted laws to implement this idea. Once the rights are recognized the powers of the state automatically come to be limited. Insertion of duties along with rights is a clear indication of the fact that rights are not absolute.

So far as the exercise of rights and enjoyment or privileges are concerned. Romans have made spectacular advance over their predecessors. For two centuries Rome was divided into two great classes—Patricians and Plebians—and there was continuous conflict between these two classes. Ultimately, these two classes com­bined together and they made a composite body of citizens. The Plebians began to enjoy civil rights.

Theory of checks and balances is another contribution of Roman political thought. The consul, the senate and the popular assemblies were placed against each other, and there was no scope for any organ to go the autocratic way.

Polybius thought that in every form of government there was the germ of disintegration and corruption. Roman thinkers were very much obsessed with the expansion and retention of their empire and that is why the question of stability occupied their mind.

Law and administration are the two great contributions of Rome to the concep­tions and practices of government and politics of the western world. The Roman law constantly adapting itself to changing environments is still the law of a goodly portion of the globe. For the administration of a vast empire a clear and well defined legal system was necessary and they devised that.

Again, they did not neglect the implementation of law. The building up of the legal system and the attempt to make it responsive to the needs of the empire reveal the Roman people’s love for realism.

Roman political thought is characterized by the conglomerate of absolutism, divine right theory and people’s authority. Sometimes kings declared themselves as the representatives of God and resorted to absolute power.

But because of the predominance and universality of the land of nature the divinity of the kingship could not get any opportunity to last long. Moreover, people had also power to exercise checks upon the authority.

The state to the Romans was a corporate body and affairs of the people. Emperors were said to receive their authority from the citizens and were considered to be responsible to them.

The Romans did not believe in the contract as an instrument of establishing civil society. But they accepted another form of contract. Ulpian was a famous jurist of Rome. He said—the will of the emperor has the force of law, because by the passage of the lex regia the people transfers to him and vests in him all its own power and authority.

This is a beautiful mixture of people’s power and king’s power. Carlyle observes “few phrases are more remarkable than this almost paradoxical description of an unlimited personal authority founded upon a purely democratic basis. The emperor’s will is law, but only because people choose to have it so.” This transfer of power was in the form of contract. Romans delegated their power to the officials and the latter had full freedom to exercise power within the legal system. This was nothing but a contract with the government.

Not only in the delegation of power, but also in other fields, Romans followed the principle of contract. Contract in Rome was a potential source of law. Ne
w laws were the result of contract between the magistrates and the popular assemblies.

Law was never the command of sovereign power upon his subjects. Religious functions and faiths were also the results of agreement.

The worshipper agreed to perform certain ceremonial duties to gods in exchange of certain expected benefits from them. In Rome there were various private laws dealing with the private affairs. The Romans entered into understanding among themselves as regards their own private affairs.

We have already noted that the Romans were practical-minded people. Roman citizens were bound to obey the law not because of its ethical or moral content, but because of the fact that was the command of the supreme political authority.

Similarly, Roman theory of rights had a practical basis. Rights were not the Gifts of God or not based on religion and ethics. Every aspect of Roman political idea had a practical foundation.

Hence secularisation and practicalisation of politics may be regarded as chief feature of Roman political thought.

Although in many respects Roman political thought differs from the Greek political thought, yet the influence of the latter upon the former does escape our attention. Polybius’s classification of government and his formula of mixed form of government as an instrument of stability are drawn from Plato and Aristotle. Cicero’s two works—Republic and Laws—are the obvious references to Plato’s works.

Neither Greek philosophers nor Roman thinkers had any preference for revolution. Common good and attainment of general welfare had important bearing upon Roman political thought.

Needless to say that these are important aspects of Greek political thought. There is a fine continuity between the political thought of Greek city-state and Roman political ideas.

Upload and Share Your Article:

After reading this article you will learn about the translation of justice into law.

Justitia must become jus: the idea of a right ordering of human relations, a due ‘joining’ of the positions of persons and of the principles on which such positions are assigned, must be translated into the fact of recognized and enforced law. Logically—but not chronologically—we may distinguish three stages in that translation.

First, there is the idea and ideal of a system of justice for the right ordering of the relations of per­sons who are brought into contact with one another by the facts of neighbourhood and social intercourse. Next, there is the creation, by a constituent act, of a legal association, within which the ideal can be realized, and which is the prior condition of its realization. Finally, there is the formulation, in and by that association, of concrete rules of law intended to make the ideal, so far as is possible, a fact.

In connexion with the last of these stages we naturally speak of an act of law-making. We easily go even farther. We begin to think and to speak as if law-making created, and brought into existence, something which never existed before; and we con­tinue what we have thus begun by thinking and speaking as if law-making were the same as commanding, and as if law pro­ceeded, in the form of an act of commanding, from the will of a person or body of persons entitled to issue commands which are simply and solely commands. But these prima facie notions are open to a double challenge.

The first challenge is that law does not emerge from a vacuum by an act of sudden creation. The second challenge is that, when it emerges from its previous background, it does not emerge as a command or indeterminate act of legislative will which can be this or that at pleasure.

In support of the first challenge it may be argued that the idea and ideal of a proper order of human relations were already present in social thought, as the inevitable result of men’s thinking about the problems of social intercourse, and that what we call law-making is therefore only the declaration or manifestation of the result of that thought.

We may thus say that law emerges from social thought about justice, and not from a vacuum, and that when it emerges it does so as a manifestation, and not as a creation. In support of the second challenge it may be argued that a conviction of the imperative character of the idea and ideal of justice, and of their implications, is an attribute and property of the whole association and all its members (other­wise the association would not exist), and is not confined to any particular person or body of persons; and therefore law-making, even if it is immediately the act of a particular person or body of persons, is ultimately, and in the last resort, the general expres­sion of a general conviction made through that person or body.

If these arguments—and especially the latter—are accepted, it follows that law-making is not a matter of commands, ad­dressed by a superior having power to inferiors who are under power, and ordering that this or that rule shall be henceforth obligatory upon them: it is a matter of declarations, issued by some agent or organ acting on behalf of a legal association of free and equal members, and stating that, in the general opinion of that association, this or that rule is now regarded as obligatory on all and will continue to be so regarded.

We may even add that there is a form of law—the form termed ‘customary’— which need not be declared at all by an agent or organ, because it is already apparent in common usage and is thus declared, immediately and directly, by the association itself.

In this way we reach the definition of law suggested by Gierke: ‘Law is the conviction of a human community—either manifested directly by usage or declared by a common organ appointed for that pur­pose—that there exist in that community external standards of will: in other words, limitations of liberty which are externally obligatory, and therefore, by their very nature, enforceable.’

When, on this basis, We turn to consider the agents and organs of the declaration of common conviction. Both in the past, and still today, the judges first spring to the mind as the agents declaring, from day to day, the rules of law which ultimately proceed from common conviction.

They not only declare them in the sense that they re-enunciate old rules in deciding upon new cases: they also declare them in the sense that from time to time they enunciate new rules, to meet new cases of peculiar novelty, by giving decisions upon such cases which afterwards come to be accepted as not merely decisions for the case in question, but as general rules for all similar cases.

It is such enunciation which is judicial declaration par excellence. Here there is obviously no question of will: the action of the judge is rather that of collecting and distilling opinion—im­mediately, we may allow, that of the legal profession; but ulti­mately that of the public at large, whose sense of justice is always there, if it is only there in the background.

But if the judges first spring to the mind as the agents declaring the rules of law, there is also the great and massive organ which is called the legislature. This, by its very name, may seem to be not only a declarer, but also a maker, of law, and indeed of the great bulk of law. What, then, is to be said of the function and power of the legislature in regard to the issue of law?

There is one thing to be said of its history, or at any rate of its history in England. The English legislature, or Parliament, would seem to have been in its origins, as the style of ‘High Court of Parliament’ still indicates, a judicial body which de­clared the law, in the last resort, in particular cases.

In a word it was a part, if a very high part, of the judiciary, rather than a legislature separate from it. But at an early date it added to this original function, by a natural and easy development, the further function of declaring the law not by a particular de­cision in a particular case before it, but by a general decision applicable to all cases that might afterwards come before any tribunal.

For a long time, however, such general decisions, couched in the form of statutes, were comparatively infrequent; and indeed the conception and practice of a specifically legisla­tive organ, regularly and annually producing a crop of statutes, is little more than a century old, and may be dated from the era of reform after the passage of the ‘Reform Bill’ in 1832.

Today we are familiar with the action of a sovereign legislature, exer­cising its power of sovereignty (or final decision in the last resort) by a continual process of legislation which seems, prima facie, to proceed from its own original will.

But even the modern legisla­ture is a common organ appointed for the purpose of declaring common conviction: and it confesses its nature when, as is generally the case with a new declaration on a matter of more than ordinary importance, it uses the argument that the matter has been considered by the community, in and during a general election, and that the declaration now made is based on the conviction then expressed by the community.

If, therefore, the legislature is sovereign, it is sovereign only in the sense that it possesses the final power of declaring common conviction, and that, possessing such power, it can amend or abrogate such declarations as are issued by the judges (otherwise its colleagues) when they too use their declaratory power in the enunciation of ‘case law’.

The action of the legislature is not creation, but declaration; and its essential function is to declare the impli­cations of the idea and ideal of justice, or the right ordering of human relations in an organized society, and to declare them as they are generally felt by the members of that society and as they are expre
ssed in the form of its common conviction.

It has been said that the State is both the child and the parent of law; at once its creature and its creator. It is the child and creature of law in so far as it is begotten by an idea of justice; is brought to birth by the primary law which constitutes it as a legal association and gives it a constitution; and is hence­forth bound by its nature to act in accordance with that primary law.

It is the parent and creator of law in the sense that, acting through the agents and organs commissioned for that purpose under the primary law of the constitution, it declares the rules of ordinary or secondary law which ultimately spring from the common conviction of all its members, and stamps and seals them, by such declaration, with a validity which they would not otherwise possess.

This secondary law is not valid law unless and until it is declared by the State through its legislative and judicial organs; but when once it is so declared it is valid, and continues to be valid, even if it conflicts with the ideal of justice and the common conviction about the implications of that ideal.

On the other hand, a rule of law which is in such a state of con­flict, though still retaining validity, loses the value which de­pends on conformity with the ideal of justice and the consequent support of common conviction; and a valid law which has lost that value gradually loses also validity, because citizens cease to obey it, juries cease to give verdicts in accordance with it, and the courts are thus unable to enforce it. This was the case with many of the provisions of English criminal law at the turn of the eighteenth century.

Upload and Share Your Article:

This article throws light upon the seven salient features of the Swiss federal legislature. Some of the features are: 1. Supremacy of the Federal Parliament 2. Supremacy of Parliament Subject to Popular Will 3. Defined Powers 4. Equal Power of the Two Houses 5. Freedom of Speech in any Language and Others.

Feature # 1. Supremacy of the Federal Parliament:

The Swiss Constitution, in the strictly legal sense, makes the Federal Parliament supreme.

It can be inferred from three features:

(a) The laws passed by the Federal Parliament are not subject to any veto power of the executive.

(b) The laws of the Federal Parliament are not subject to judicial review. The Swiss Federal Court (The Federal Supreme Court) has no power of judicial review over federal laws.

(c) The Swiss Federal Parliament elects the members of the Federal Government as well as the judges of the Federal Court. The Federal Councilors/Ministers are not the members of the legislature. They, however, participate in the deliberations of the two houses, but without the right to vote.

The members of the Federal Government are responsible before the Federal Parliament and obey the directions issued, and enforce the laws made by it. The Federal Parliament has the power to disapprove or approve all the proposals made by the Federal government.

Feature # 2. Supremacy of Parliament Subject to Popular Will:

However, supremacy of the Federal Parliament is limited by the popular will. The Swiss people have the power to demand a referendum on the laws made by it. They can reject any law of the Federal Parliament in such a referendum.

The constitutional amendments passed by the parliament are subject to compulsory referendum and these get incorporated in the constitution only when these are approved by a majority of voters as well as of the Cantons.

As such, the law-making and constituent powers of the Federal Parliament are subject to the rights reserved to the people and the Cantons (Article 148). D. E. Rappard has rightly observed that “the Swiss Federal Parliament enjoys supremacy “as long as it retains the confidence and performs the will of the electorate.”

Feature # 3. Defined Powers:

Federal Parliament can legislate only on the federal and the concurrent subjects. Being the national legislature of a federation, it has a specified and not an unlimited, sphere of powers.

Feature # 4. Equal Power of the Two Houses:

The two Houses of the Swiss Federal Parliament, the House of Representatives and the Senate (The Council of State) have equal powers. The Constitution gives equal and co­ordinate powers to these Article [148(2)] specifically lays down this feature.

In the words of C.F. Strong, “The Swiss Legislature, like the Swiss executive, is unique. It is the only legislature in the world in which the functions of whose Upper House are in no way different from those of the Lower House.”

Feature # 5. Freedom of Speech in any Language:

Every member of the Swiss Federal Parliament can speak in his mother tongue. All parliamentary reports, resolutions and decisions are published in German as well as in French and in some cases in Italian also. Most of the members use either German or French in their discussions.

Feature # 6. Business-like Attitude:

Lord Bryce has described the Swiss Federal Parliament as “the most business-like body in the world.” The legislators do not follow strict partisan spirit. They sit Canton wise irrespective of their political affiliations. All the main parties which together hold nearly 3/4th of seats of the legislature are coalition partners and these run the Federal Government.

Thus, there is absence of a solid opposition in the legislature. Its business is transacted in a professional business-like manner “Federal Parliament is a business-like body, a dignified, decent and disciplined legislature devoid of aggressive party politics and melodramas which characterize other legislatures, like the Indian Parliament.”

Feature # 7. Relatively Less Powerful Role of the Federal Parliament:

The Swiss Federal Parliament, has suffered a decline in its role because of an increase in the role and authority of the Swiss Federal Government. “In-spite of all the constitutional prerogatives of the Federal Parliament, the lead has clearly passed on to the hands of the Federal Government.”

The system of proportional representation, the operation of Referendum, and lack of opposition, have all combined to dilute the position of the Federal Parliament in the Swiss Political System.

Upload and Share Your Article:

After reading this article you will learn about:- 1. Unicameral Legislature of NPC 2. Method of Election of Deputies of NPC 3. Tenure 4. Sessions 5. Privileges and Duties of the Deputies 6. Position of the National People’s Congress in China.

Unicameral Legislature of the NPC:

The National People Congress (the NPC) is a unicameral legislature of a unitary state. It consists of nearly 3000 deputies who are elected by the provinces, autonomous regions, municipalities directly under the Central Government and the armed forces of China (In 1998, 2974 deputies constituted the NPC).

All citizens of 18 years or above of age have the right to vote. Any voter can seek election regardless of nationality, race, sex, occupation, family background, religious belief, education, property, status or length of residence.

Only persons who have been specifically denied the political right to vote cannot become its members or participate in its elections (Article 34). Under Article 59, all the minority nationalities are entitled to appropriate representation in the NPC. The number of the deputies and the manner of their election are prescribed by law.

Method of Election of Deputies of NPC:

There is nothing like an election commission in China for conducting elections. The responsibility of conducting the elections belongs to the Standing Committee of the NPC. The Constitution requires the Standing Committee to ensure the election of the deputies of the new NPC two months before the expiry of the term of the existing NPC.

If in case of ‘exceptional circumstances’ (emergency), elections cannot be held, the Standing Committee can postpone these by taking a decision with a 2/3rd majority.

In such an eventuality the existing NPC continues to remain in office and its term gets extended. However, elections to the new NPC have to be completed within one year of the end of such ‘exceptional circumstances’. As such, the Standing Committee has the discretion to decide the ‘existence of exceptional circumstances’ warranting a postponement of elections for NPC.

Tenure of the NPC:

The tenure of the NPC is five years. There is no provision for its mid-term dissolution. But in exceptional circumstances, when the Standing Committee decides to postpone elections, its term gets extended till the election of a new NPC.

Sessions of the NPC:

The NPC meets at least once in a year. Its sessions are convened by its Standing Committee. The power to convene the sessions does not belong to the President of the People’s Republic of China. Further, its session can be convened at any time when the Standing Committee deems it necessary, or when more than 1/5th of the deputies so propose.

The Constitution does not provide for the advancement or postponement of a session.

Privileges and Duties of the Deputies:

The deputies of the NPC enjoy certain privileges. No deputy can be arrested or put on criminal trial without the consent of the Presidium of the current session of the NPC or when the NPC is not in session, without the consent of the Standing Committee of the NPC. Further, no deputy can be called to legal account for his speeches or vote in the meetings of the NPC.

Regarding the duties of the Deputies, the Constitution under its Article 76 provides that “they must play an exemplary role in abiding by the Constitution and the law and keeping states secrets and, in production and other work and their public activities, assist in the enforcement of the constitution and the law.”

They are required to maintain close contacts with their electors, listen to their views and convey to the appropriate organs their opinions and demands. They have the foremost duty to serve the people. Further, the deputies are under the supervision of the units which elect them. The electoral units can, through the procedures established by law, recall their deputies.

Position of the National People’s Congress in China:

The powers and functions of the National People’s Congress clearly reflects the high place that the 1982 Constitution of China gives to it as the ‘Highest organ of State Power’. There is no such thing as separation of powers or functions in China and the NPC enjoys powers in all spheres of governmental activity.

It is the supreme law-making agency, supreme electoral agency, and the supreme decision-approving body of the constitutional system. Above all, the NPC has the responsibility to supervise the implementation of the constitution. It alone can amend the constitution.

However, in reality the National People’s Congress is not a strong and active organ of the constitutional system of China. There are several practical limitations on its working, which make it a weak legislature.

(i) Like every other part of the Chinese political system, the National People’s Congress is also dominated by the Communist Party of China, particularly by its top leadership.

(ii) The Standing Committee really exercises the powers of the NPC.

(iii) The unicameral character, the unwieldy size and short and infrequent sessions make it a weak legislature.

(iv) Lack of opposition makes the meetings of the NPC a dull affair. It merely acts as a body giving formal approval to the acts and decisions of its Standing Committee.

Thus, the NPC is a powerful body and the highest organ of State power only in theory. In reality, it is a weak legislature responsible for legalizing the orders and commands of the Communist Party or to be more true and realistic, the commands of the top leaders if not ‘the leader’ of the Communist Party.

Upload and Share Your Article:

Here is an essay on the ‘League of Nations’ for class 11 and 12. Find paragraphs, long and short essays on the ‘League of Nations’ especially written for school and college students.

Essay on the League of Nations

---

Essay Contents:

1. Essay on Origin of the League of Nations
2. Essay on Membership of the League
3. Essay on Structure of the League
4. Essay on Objects of the League
5. Essay on Functions and Achievements of the League

---

Essay # 1. Origin of the League of Nations:

Man is a peace-loving animal. What is anger in a man’s life is war in the life of a state. After the dust of the war settles down there is a search for peace. After the Thirty Years’ War was over a peace formula was evolved to maintain the peace in Europe.

At the close of the Napoleonic War there came into being a peace machinery called the Concert of Europe. Both the efforts could not perpetuate peace in Europe or the world.

So took place the First World War which had a record of human casualty and destruction of national property. So there was an increased discussion on the need of peace which could be possible only by goodwill and tolerance. So, during the explosive days of the war there was an ever-growing talk on how to enforce peace in the world.

The League of Nations was born close on the heels of the First World War. As a matter of fact, the conditions of the global war like the reactions 21 to the horrors of the war and the desire to keep the balance of power for the safeguard of the nations were the immediate factors responsible for this world body.

The reaction of heavy bloodshed and death of ten millions of population and devastation of property worth Rs. 386.000,000,000 made every country harbour the idea of keeping away from the war, which brought in its wake famine, pestilence and economic ruination.

The coming of a war could be checked if there was a balance of power in Europe, which alone can guarantee against aggression. Thus the creation of the League of Nations had a holy purpose.

In the USA there emerged a public opinion called a “League to Enforce Peace” in June 1915 with a four point programme. The Republican leader William Howard Taft took a leading role in it. This was backed by wide public support.

The League called for the submission of all international disputes to arbitration, called the Council of Conciliation. It also suggested the use of economic and military force by all states against the warring state. It also recommended for periodical congresses to codify international law.

In 1916, President Woodrow Wilson of the USA expressed the desire to participate in any association of nations. This was a period when the USA remained neutral in the First World War. After the USA joined the war club, she insisted that peace in future can be maintained only by a partnership of all democratic countries on a world basis.

One of President Wilson’s Fourteen Points carried a proposal for an Association of Nations to ensure mutual guarantee of political independence and territorial integrity of all states. A draft entitled “Proposals for Avoidance of War” was published in 1915, which contained a preface written by Lord James Bryce.

This was quickly followed by the establishment of “The League of Nations Society” in 1915 and “The League of Free Nations Associations” in 1918. These two bodies were amalgamated into the “League of Nations Union.”

A draft convention was drawn up by the British Foreign Office in March 1918. Wilson’s first draft was done in July 1918. It was General Smuts’ plan in December 1918 that outlined the Council and the Mandate System. Wilson prepared the second draft on 10 January 1919 and the third one ten days hence.

These three drafts were revised and sent to the League of Nations Commission of the Peace Conference for its consideration under the chairmanship of Wilson. On 28 April 1919 the draft was unanimously adopted and the Covenant of the League of Nations was incorporated into the Treaty of Versailles, which was signed by the German Delegation on 28 June 1919. The League of Nations was formally inaugurated in 19 January 1920 with its headquarters at Geneva in Switzerland.

---

Essay # 2. Membership of the League:

The members of the league were of two categories – original members and non-original members. Those countries that signed the Versailles Peace Treaty and accepted the Covenant of the League before 20 March 1920 were the original members. The non-original members could be included in the League by a resolution adopted by two-thirds votes in the assembly of the League.

The withdrawal or removal of a member was done in three ways:

(i) By giving a notice for such withdrawal two years in advance;

(ii) The League could expel any member on the ground that it violated any norm of the covenant; and

(iii) Any member not accepting or ratifying any amendment would automatically cease to be a member.

---

Essay # 3. The Structure of the League:

The structure of the league consisted of five organs, namely the Assembly, the Council the Secretariat, the Permanent Court of International Justice and the International Labour Organisation. These are taken up one after another:

i. The Assembly:

The Assembly was the principal organ of the League. It consisted of the representatives of the various states which were members of the League. All the decisions of the League were to be unanimous. One member state had only one vote. The Assembly would discuss on the political and economic issues which had a bearing on the peace or danger for the world.

The Assembly would render advice to the member states to reconsider the questions of amendment of the treaties that fell through by lapse of time. In addition to the supervision of the work of the Council, it would revise the budget presented by the Secretariat.

ii. The Council:

The executive organ of the League was called the Council. It was comprised of the permanent members, the non-permanent members and the ad hoc members. Its original permanent members were England, France, Italy, Japan and the USA. Germany and Russia were given permanent seats on their entry in 1926 and 1934, respectively. The non-permanent members were elected by the Assembly for a tenure of three years.

There were eleven non-permanent members. The council stet to meet at least once a year. Its jurisdiction of action was any issue that involved the general peace of the world. It was to evolve ways and means to reduce armament by the member states. It was also required to plug the making of munitions and implements of war by private bodies. Its main function was to safeguard the territorial integrity of each member states.

If a dispute would run riot, the Council would institute an enquiry into it which should be completed within six months. Whenever any member stale would adopt belligerency, it was enjoined upon the Council to ask the other member states to contribute their military, naval and air potentialities to protect the interest of the aggrieved country. Any conflict between the member and non-member states was also taken up by the Council, which would diffuse the crisis by an acceptable settlement.

iii. The Secretariat:

The Secretariat was the administrative organ of the League. Its headquarters was located at Geneva in Switzerland. The Secretary-Genera
l was the head of this establishment. The employees of the Secretariat were appointed by the Secretary-General in consultation with the Council.

The staff of the Secretariat had certain privileges and immunities in their official capacities. The member states had to contribute towards the expenditure of the Secretariat. Unlike the Assembly and the Council which functioned from time to time, the Secretariat had to work round the year without any break.

iv. The Permanent Court of International Justice:

This body was commonly known as the World Court. Its judges were appointed by the Assembly and the Council. The permanent seat of the court was at the Hague. The court had fifteen judges whose tenure was for nine years. The judges could be re-elected. Every member state referring a dispute to the court could appoint one judge of its nationality, if it had no such judge in the court. Its budget was prepared by the Assembly.

The main function of the court is to interpret any dispute in international law and determine when any treaty obligation was violated. It had the authority to give advice to the Assembly and the Council whenever such opinion was sought for. By 1937 as many as forty-one states agreed to submit before the World Court all disputes, to which they were a party in regard to international law and international treaty. No appeal would lie against the order of the court. But the court could review and change its decision on the basis of new facts and circumstances.

v. International Labour Organisation:

Since labour was a new factor in the national life of all countries after the Industrial and Technological Revolution, the League considered it prudent to have an organ on this new field. The organisation aimed at improving the conditions of labour in all corners of the globe. Its governing council was comprised of the representatives of the governments, employers and workers.

In its annual meeting the organisations would take major decisions on labour. Several international organisations and unions were subjected to the control and advice of the organisation. The most important of them were International Commission for Air Navigation, International Institute of Intellectual Cooperation, International Bureau for Information and Enquiries Regarding Relief to Foreigners, International Institute for the Unification of Private Law, Central International Office for the Control of Liquor Traffic in Africa, etc.

---

Essay # 4. Objects of the League:

The aim of the League was to remove the war conditions from all corners of the globe. The belligerent temperature of the globe and war hysteria which had transformed the world into a power magazine might explode into conflagrations any moment. There was talk and strong feeling that if mankind was to be saved from the catastrophe which awaited it, it should replace international anarchy by international order.

The doctrine of international solidarity must take the place of the doctrine of national sovereignty. What is the doctrine of internationalism? It stands for a family of self-respecting and self-governing nations unified to each other by ties of equality and living at peace and concerned with each other.

There must be an end of throttling the throat of a neighbour. Internationalism tells us that peace can only come, from our having confidence and trust in each other. It is based on the goodwill and tolerance between all the nations of the world.

The basic objective of the League was to promote international cooperation and to achieve international peace and security. The members of the League agreed that in the case of a dispute likely to disturb the peace they would submit the matter for orders by the Council or a judicial decision by the World Court In case any member state resorted to war, that member would be considered as the committer of an act of war against all other members of the League. Thus the League of Nations was the first major endeavour as an international organisation to maintain peace and international cooperation in the globe.

---

Essay # 5. Functions and Achievements of the League:

The league started functioning with a note of promise. It achieved some remarkable triumphs in ending some international disputes.

It has also success in social and economic fields:

(i) The affair of the Aaland islands was a record achievement of the League. Sweden and Finland were claimants of the island which was the entrance to the Gulf of Bothnia. In 1921 the League permitted Finland to retain sovereignty over the island and the inhabitants who were Swedish were granted local self-government. This was a great step forward in the peaceful settlement of international problems.

(ii) The league had a hard task over the Corfu incident involving Italy and Greece in 1923. The crisis arose over the murder of four Italian members of a commission in Greek territory. The Italian dictator Benito Mussolini seized the opportunity and sent an ultimatum to Greece, who appealed to the League for help. The League asked Greece to pay a huge sum as compensation to Italy. On receipt of the amount, Italy withdrew from Corfu. In this way the League succeeded in averting a war.

(iii) The international boundary between Poland and Germany and between Yugoslavia and Albania was laid down by the League. A menacing quarrel between Turkey and England over rich oil deposits in Iraq was also amicably solved by the League in 1924.

(iv) The League made some praiseworthy progress in the exchange and repatriation of nearly 500,000 prisoners of war. It saved from certain starvation 1,000,000 persons in the Greco-Turkish War of 1921-1922. The League also lent the desperately needed financial aid to Austria, Bulgaria, Hungary and the Free City of Danzig.

(v) The League introduced a system called the “mandate”, under which the territories captured from the central powers and Turkey were to be kept under the supervision of various countries. The League exercised its supervision over the working of the mandates, which were devised to promote the welfare of the backward sections under the guidance of the major powers like England, France, Belgium, South Africa, New Zealand, Australia and Japan. This not only put an end to the annexation of the dependent states by the victorious or big powers, but kept these under the supervision and welfare programmes of the advanced countries.

(vi) The League had more success in non-political issues like health, humanitarianism and intellectual activities. It underlined the importance of hygienic techniques to lessen epidemics in various nations. It made an investigation into the question of slavery in certain quarters of the world. It also undertook the publication of books and periodicals about national and international problems of all kinds and relayed important information, especially in the field of health from its own radio stations.

(vii) The League immensely succeeded in bringing a coordination among the economic, social and cultural spheres. It conducted a supervision over the safe return of the war prisoners. It looked after several hundred refugees who had left Turkey. It also instituted a medical service to check traffic in women, exploitation of children and sale of opium.

(viii) The most lasting gifts of the League were the International Labour Organisation and the Permanent Court of International Justice that rendered useful services between 1919 and 1939. The former mainly aimed at establishing social justice on the principle that labour is not a commodity but a right of the workers to have free associations and collective bargaining. Keeping close to the ground, many membe
r states took up several liberal legislations for the welfare of labour.

---

Essay # 6. Failure of the League:

The League had a long catalogue of failures. The major failure of the League was on the issue of disarmament which, though one of the main aims of it, could not be pressed into successful implementation. As a matter of fact, there was little or no progress in this frontier.

There grew intense military and naval preparedness among England, the USA and Japan. This arms race was a direct challenge to the League. It was over this question of disarmament that Germany and France fell out. And this vexed question led to the withdrawal of Germany from the League, which cast the die for the doom of the League.

The League failed to take any positive stand in diffusing the tension between England and Egypt. Nor could it successfully mediate over the dispute between China and the European powers in connection with the right of the foreigners in China. Its most grievous blunder was to remain a silent spectator when Japan attacked China, Italy attacked Abyssinia and Germany attacked Czechoslovakia.

Causes of the Failure of the League of Nations:

Although the League of Nations was the first bold step in easing world tension, it was doomed to failure for the following causes:

In the first place, the League was badly timed. Although there were high-sounding words associated with the aims and objects of the League, it was outwardly a world organisation but inwardly and really an instrument for the domination by the Allies over the defeated countries inasmuch as since its inception there had been a chain of treaties and counter-treaties among the Allies.

The Post-First World War period was not a good time for the world to have such an organisation, because it was a time of imperialism, territorial expansion and grabbing the neighbours’ lands. Europe was fluid and nothing permanent was possible.

In the second place, the League was inherently weak in the absence of some big powers like the USA, Germany and Russia who stayed away from it. No doubt Russia and Germany joined the League later on, but it was too late and they did not stay there long because of their respective national interest. Thus nationalism was the be-all and end-all of every country, though they wore the mask of internationalism.

In the third place, with the exclusion of the USA, Russia and Germany, the League became the plaything of two close neighbours, namely England and France who were known for aggressive imperial designs. Thus the League became the imperial instrument of the Anglo-French nationalism.

They gave lip-service to the League. The British Prime Minister Lloyd George sincerely disliked the League. As for the French Prime Minister George Clemenceau, he did not fight shy to tell Woodrow Wilson- “I like your League of Nations, I like it very much, but I do not believe in it.” This type of hypocrisy impeded the prospect of the League from its very inception.

Fourthly, the League had double standards inasmuch as it favoured the capitalist bloc of powers and adopted a biased and prejudiced attitude towards the communist bloc of powers. It is, therefore, small wonder that the League time and again condoned all the lapses of Italy and Germany and did not adopt a tough line against them. But a single lapse of Russia with regard to Finland goaded the League to take such a drastic step as expelling Russia from the League.

Fifthly, the unanimity in decision which was the procedure in the League enabled a very small state to upset the scheme of the League. When Fascist Italy attacked Spain, the League could not go through with the condemnation of Italy because of the veto of a small state like Portugal. As a matter of fact, behind every small member there was a big power to back from behind. Thus the League was a virtual puppet show of the string-holders from behind.

Lastly, the League was a teeth-less tiger in the sense that it had no arms of its own to deploy against a rebel nation. How could a belligerent nation be brought to its knees if there is no adequate weaponry to use against it? Thus in the absence of an army of its own, the League could not implement or execute its decisions. Thus its decisions and works remained rather on papers only. This was a very serious handicap of the League.

---

Upload and Share Your Article: