The Questioning in the Parliamentary System, A Comparing Study Palestine and Egypt

The parliamentary system is considered the right image, and the model expressing the principle of the separation between the authorities, hence the basis of this system is the balance between the legislative and executive authorities. As a general origin, all of the authorities stand in this system equally without one following or controlling the other. The parliamentary system did not arise as a single upturn, but its rules have consisted due to a long historic development, and the tradition has contributed to a big share in this development until the bases of this system crystallized and its origins settled gradually, where that it did not consist and arises on a specific ideological basis but its emergence came related to specific historic developments, especially in England which considered the cradle of the parliamentary system. The parliamentary system passed by several stages from the development until its basic elements crystallized and its pillars appeared, and the success that the parliamentary system achieved in its original homeland England had a great effect at many of the world countries that quoted its parliamentary system from there. The outwards of the parliamentary system have appeared in the constitutions of many countries and their main laws, from these countries are the Arab Republic of Egypt and Palestine. There is no escape from stating the pillars that the parliamentary system depends on. The first pillar is the presence of an elected parliamentary council, which fulfills all of its basic elements, one of these most important conditions is exercising the actual authority of the parliament, a second condition is that the parliament has to be elected for a specific a renewable period, a third condition is the parliament being independent from its voters during the legislative separation, and that the parliament member represents all of the nation. And the second pillar that the parliamentary system depends on is the duality of the executive authority, where that the parliamentary system depends on the basis of the separation between the presidency of country and prime ministry, so that the president is not responsible, assuming that the complete political responsibility falls upon the ministry in a joint way between the ministries and their organs, namely that the parliamentary system based on the duality of the executive system. The third pillar that the parliamentary system depends on is the cooperation and the supervision between the legislative authority and the executive authority where that the cooperation depends in its nature on the intervention of the executive authority in some legislative authority works. The most prominent aspect of this relation is the participation of parliament with the government in some of their specializations, such as: the choice of president, the choice of Prime Minister, the exercise of the president tasks temporarily, the approval on the treaties that the president holds, the president's performance of the oath that is held in front of the parliament, and the approval of the general budget and the final accounts. The second aspect of the cooperation between the executive and the legislative authorities appears in the participation of the government with the parliament in some of its specializations, such as: starting the parliament sessions, works related to the legislation and the inclusion of the membership in the parliament and the ministry. The second part of this feature is the supervision between the legislative and executive authorities, where that the appearances of the supervision of the executive authority to the legislative authority are: the call of parliament for the holding the session, refusing the holding of the session and postponing the parliament meeting. As for the appearances of the supervision of the legislative authority to the executive authority including: the questioning, the right of holding an investigation, and the political ministerial responsibility. The most important tool of the supervision granted to the legislative authority for watching the works of the executive authority is the interrogation right. Most of the parliamentary countries constitutions stated the right of a member or a group of members in the parliament of the interrogation of a specific minister or the interrogation of the government about the internal matters in their specialization, among the countries that use the interrogation right Egypt and Palestine. The parliamentary interrogation whether in Egypt or in Palestine has elements which are: offering the interrogation to the parliament, answering the interrogation that the minister or the government carries out, and finally the vote of confidence in government or one of the ministers in case of their carelessness in their work was proved or if some of the parliament members requested the withdrawal of confidence. The interrogation being a kind of discussion is divided into two parts, the first is the discussion that targets the political responsibility, and second is the discussion that targets taking suggestions not the political responsibility. The interrogation whether it is in Egypt or Palestine has three results. The first one is that the discussion shows that the government or the minister has carried out their duty perfectly, or the discussion shows that the government didn’t make mistakes or its mistake was very simple that we can pass over. The last expected result of the interrogation is issuing a decision with the condemnation of government or with the condemnation of some of its members.