%%% Beyond Expectation %%%

The entering to the local university, National University of Malaysia(UKM) was an anticipative matter for me before. The eagerness to enter the Faculty of Law in this university has caused me to fight tooth and nails during my Pre-U programme. It was an absolutely awesome satisfication for me when my dream came true notwithstanding there was a lot of entertainment had became a sacrificial lamb that time.

The Faculty of Law is extremely exotic for me, it is not only physically attractive, however, the beauty of the faculty is intrinsic wheresoever. Somehow, there are some seniors even describe it as a "cute" faculty in the sense of the building's colour and the isolated location in UKM. Initially, I was so puzzling about the lessons and also the skills in making all decisions for myself especially on how to decide between the PTPTN or JPA options. Hence, I had met up with seniors, Professor and my mentor to get some sincere advices from them. And, finally, the annoying problem has been resolved. I adhere to show my appreciation to those who has given me a helping hand.

The only resentful matter during my new university life is the terrible bus service in the campus. The "3U" and "U" buses are the only alternative for the students in Faculty of Law to reach there for their studies. The authorities had made an annoucement during the orientation week, which sounded the buses are specially appointed for the law students' use. However, there are still many students from other faculties persist in taking "3U" and "U" buses to their own faculty until it has became an usual practise for them. The people who should not be in the bus sit comfortably in the bus, whereas the people should be, have no opportunity to get into the bus. It is my longing that the authorities will represent all of the law students to fight against our right in order to prevent us from getting bothered in the bus matter.

Wish all the friends in the class pass the LLB with flying colours.

Best wishes from Edwin / Ong

Malaysians oh, Malaysians

“Oh sister, they have KFC here!” exclaimed my brother when he saw the KFC banner at the Za’ba cafeteria. For all we knew, it was a whopper! So, my daily menu switched from Chinese hawker food to Malay food. And my life from all grandeur and pomposity to a humble beginning of taking public transportations. Travelling by monorails and KTMs gave me a cultural shock (though I am still in Malaysia). Often, the passengers trying to board, stood at the door upon the trains’ arrival, leaving no gap for cutting cues. So, I was among those sandwiched during my first experience on KTM.

NOTE: I thought this was a hundred-word assignment? haha... some seem lengthy...

+UKM oh UKM+

Hello "world"....

(^^)

Today is Friday and im feel very very tired and wanna stay in the hostel for the whole day.. but unfortunately I got lots of things to do.... I think for the first entry, most of my friends will tell about their campus life and now it is my turn to tell you all about what I feel since the first day I'm in UKM until now ( 31 July 2009). Im very happy when I've been accepted to futher my studies here because it is my first choice. Honestly, i still miss my UITM's life. After 2 weeks in UKM, i felt that i have no life here, no friends (actually I have lots of friends but iI don't know why, I always think that nobody want to be my friend) , no spirit to study law and i keep telling my self that i wanna going back to UITM, Shah Alam or going back home. I miss my family so much (homesick) and will call my dad everytime when Im bored and he never complain anything but will always hear what I'm going to say and complain about what had happened in my life everyday. That's makes me miss my family so much. But after been here for a month, everything is different and I've already fall in love with UKM. (^^,) There's lots of works, activities and also friends!! UKM had taught me how to be a good person where I did not learnt in UITM before this. UKM show me the real life of being the universities student and make me feel that i love UKM more than UITM.hehe. Here, my life is different than before. I do many things on my own and I've gain lots of experinces here. UKM teach me how to manage my time well, makes me to be more open-minded person, be a positive person, know how to socialize with other people and be a good girl to others. For me, study and friends are the most important things here. I'm here to study and without friends I will not be able to do it. So, to all the first year law students in UKM especially English for Law set 4, good luck and hope that one day, all of us will be the best lawyer and will achieve our goals. to Madam Raja Hanani ( sorry if there is an error in your name), I felt very sad when I know that i need to change my English for Law class and enter your class but now, Im glad to have you as my lecturer because you show me the value of life and I'm sorry if I do not give a full concentration in your class. hehe Thank you madam and all my friends!

Have a nice day everyone!

one and only,

Hawa Haziqah Halib

Emirul v. Journey To Success [2009] 1 FUU 89

I still remember the time when i'm in school,
It's was fun and really cool,
Teacher said that "you were wonderful",
All the time just sleep and playing fool,
Emirul wake up..!!!
There are no moon in afternoon...

I'm wake in frustrated,
There are three painful red line at my back,
Teacher please forgive me and don't be mad,
I promise it would not happen again,
Because the three red line totally make me change..
Haha..What ashamed..!!!

I got my STPM result in the middle of march,
It make me feel as staying in ice,
Because my pointer was very nice,
Haha..Thank you teacher..I love you so much..!!
Without you, i think i will getting crush...

Now I am in UKM,
The first campus in my aim,
The most peaceful and beautiful campus that I ever seen,
Improve my confidence and the way i'm think,
I am proud and feel very outstanding,
UKM, with you I hope I can reach my dream....

KBH is my residential,
The colonies are multiracial,
We live in happiness and cheer,
All energetic and really punctual,
Lots of talent especially in theater,
All said that KBH produce actors...

Contract, Consti and MLS..huh..
Law subject make me feel really stress,
All the lecturer never stop give advises,
They are very motherly and very nice,
I'm trying to motivate my self and do my best,
Thank god I can coop at last,
Hope it will be through my success,
"Faculty of Law, you will be the witness of this case".


my journey,
[EMIRUL SARIFUDIN BIN NOR AZMI]

Untitled

Wargghhh!!!!!What a tired day I had today.Look like i am the last student to post my perspecvtive about law,hehehe...Wake up at 6am every day show to me that life at campus is not like what I imagine.Rushing to take '3U' and 'U' buses make life so hard because we were force to share this buses with student from others faculty.And sometimes I always miss the bus but I stil in a high spirit to enter the class.But it always a happy life to come here as what Robert Frost said'struggle make you more happy'.Insya Allah one day I will become a lawyer that will fight for justice.

First time I enter this class,I know that this subject will make me migrain.But,I also realized that this is my good oppurtunity to improve my english.For me,this blog had its own good because its give me a chance to become a bloggers.It was something that never come up in my mind.So,I would like to thanked my lecturer because of her,now I can write up an article on internet.

Actually,become a law student is not my first choice.I never dream that I would stand my leg at this faculty.Sometimes I always tought to change my courses and I almost did it.But everything changed.My mind become more matured and I now realized that God always know what is good to me.I trust that is my destiny to continue my studies at Faculty of Law.Welcome all to law....and I am very happy.

Abuse

Hello, my fellow classmate, I am May.

Today, I would like to share with all of you about "abuse". First and foremost, I would like to define the words of "abuse". "Abuse" refer to the use or treatment of something that is harmful. There are various types of abuse that we can identify, for an example, child abuse, drug abuse, physical abuse, emotional abuse, animal abuse and so on.

What I would like to highlight here is about the child abuse. Child abuse is the physical, psychological and emotional mistreatment of children. Nowadays, we can see the escalating of the worldwide child abuse percentage although many steps have been taken to curb this negative phenomenon. In Malaysia, this situation is worsen years by years although the rules and legislation to protect children have been introduced and enforced through the introduction of the Child Act 2001 which is a Malaysian law to consolidate the Juvenile Courts Act 1947, the Women and Young Girls Protection Act 1973, and the Child Protection Act 1991.

One of the causes that lead to the child abuse are social stress. Stress brought on by the variety of the social condition like unemployment, illness, poor housing conditions and the death of a family member escalate the risk of the child abuse. According to the research done by the authorities, most of the child abuse cases are from a poverty family background where their parent are suffered from a serious social stress. The economic situation nowadays and the price hiking issues leads to the serious social stress especially among the poverty family and this raises the risk of the child abuse.

Next is the family structure itself. Refer to the research, most of the child abuse cases are from the single-parent families. Single-parent families usually earn less money than other families, so this may leads to the increased of the child abuse cases.

Thirdly, the family background. The children who are brought up in a violent environment will then learn violent behavior from their parents and then grow up to abuse their own children. Therefore, it is important to ensure that parents should be a good role model for their children.

Until now, people keeps questioning about how could they, the parents abuse their own children ? Most of us are come out with a general conclusion that parents who abuse their children are mental disorders, yet most of them are not suffered from any mental illnesses. According to the research done by the counselor, most of the parents who abuse children are tend to be socially isolated. This means that they are not mixed up very well with the people at surroundings and most of them only have little contact with friends or relatives. Thus, we can say that they had lead a stressful lifestyle where they shut themselves up and do not have their ways to unwind until they comes up with abuse their children. Therefore, what I would like to emphasize on is the importance to having a healthy and balance lifestyle where parents should manage their time properly so that they would have a balance between their careers and their children. In the same time, parents also should have a proper ways to unwind to ensure that they would not be too stressful or they can even try to share their problems with their friends or they can asking help from the counselor.

Last but not least, I hope that this child abuse phenomenon can be curbed completely by enforce the rules and legislation rigidly. In my point of view, it is useless that we have the rules but we are not practice it rigidly. Besides, everyone who alert about such child abuse cases, for an example, the neighbours, relatives and friends should inform the authorities immediately to prevent more and more children become the victims of violence. In the same time, government also should make sure that they would be able to response immediately to the child abuse cases after been informed.

Thank you.

Sincerely from,
Shoo May.

Dilemma of the Law....

Assalamualaikum and Hope All In A Good Condition..

Welcome to my world of view..This is me, Fairul Izwan.. What most of the communities think about law? Generally communities think law is a matter about lawyer. Why this matter happened? For me I did not agree as the law student we will surely be come a lawyer one day. In my deep heart, law is not my first preference... but how we interpret the law is the most important things. Actually I want to persue my studies in education but the UPU result after I completed my SPM had changed my vision through of my life. Eventhough I had received so many offer to persue my studies from JPA, Institusi Perguruan and Matriculation, I had decided to choose law as my priority field to pursue my studies.

Why I am choosing law rather than pursuing my studies overseas? I want to changed the perspective of the communities about law.. law is not about lawyer only BUT its about our awareness and conscious about the rules and regulation in this beautiful world. Law is something very unique that we need to 'treat' and 'care' about the maintenance of the law itself. Without law human being does not know how to control themselves from doing something that create 'sin' not only to the most merciful God only but throughout the communities.. Law is not a matter of glamourous! It is actually a necesscity in order to make our life more comfortable. In my own perception, many students enter into law because of the salary that we can earn and also the level of glamourous that we can achieves.. My advise for those who want to persue in law is one, PLEASE change your mentality about law.. Law is not the matter of popularity but it is the platform to uphold justice among the people.. How to achieves justice if we as a one of the generation who will be leading the country in the future only want to maintain the popularity without concerning deeply what is your role to the communities? For me it is a waste of time to study for 4 years only for achiving the level of gramourlous in your life... Again please change your mentality and perception when you decide to study in law. Here I do not want to deny any of the opportunities that you get to study in law but when we understand the essense of the law itself, studying law is not just come to class but it is like the "agreement" or the responsibity for us to the community.. Please remember, I am writing this things is not to critise the decision to enter into law but it is just like the advise from your parents to his daughter in order to ensure that his daughter will make something that is very sweet and bring the proudness to her parent. I just want to change the nature of law itself from the glamourous style to the responsibility style.. Insya-Allah, we will achives what we want in the future...

Thank You and Best Regards....
>> FAirul Izwan Bin Abd Rahman <<< :0)

View Regarding Studying Law

View Regarding Studying Law.
Hello, everyone. I am Zhao Lin. About studying law, my first thought is that studying law is very tough. So I feel quite worry to take law. My mum also keep drilling into my mind that law is extremely difficult. It is very stressful too. As the result, my mum is (as I think) considerable anxious. She does not want me to lead a stressful and hectic lifestyle. She keep asking former law students about the toughness of taking law. I remembered that my mum phoned an Indian girl who took law in UM but currently she is doing her chambering. She got 4.0 in STPM but end up 2.8 in law. This Indian girl told me that as long as I am keen in law, there is no problem. However, I wonder do I possess some interest in law. Despite this I still go for law. Well, when I study law in UKM, I find that studying law is not memerising laws. It is about how you perceive the legal concepts. Therefore I think as long as you willing to understand and master the concepts, doing law is not a hard task. Anyway, the most vital is that I find that I am keen in law.

regards,
Tan Zhao Lin

hostel life!

With the STPM results recently announced and also the diploma holder (especially for those like me...), I figured that many students are starting to get excited by the prospect of entering university life soon. And for a lot of us who have never ventured outside of our comfort zones, studying in a different place (state, country, your cup, your coffee) is probably something that's quite exciting and also at the same time, quite scary. Well, my 1st semester just started, and I would like to share with you about hostel life here.When I first got here, it was quite different to me compared to the previous place. To compound the problem, our hostel is located a good distance from the faculty of law. Despite what you may think, it is really a blessing, because most of the people are from the same faculty and from the same year, and we became instant friends, bonding in ways only strangers in new university life. I find it hard to imagine a more exciting life.Of course, not everybody has this luxury. Regardless, the first few weeks is probably the most stressful.Orientation is torture enough, then we had to start a whole new chapter of living with a roommate. You will encounter all sorts of people, some of which you will like and be your best friend on campus, some of which you will hate eternally. Fortunately hostel officials don't really care if you switch rooms.In my case, I was extremely lucky. My roommate is also quite sporting and most importantly, we can get along together. But seriously, roommates will be your next biggest challenge. Learn to pull out as soon as possible if you feel like the match is going to create problems in the future. The best roommate you can have is one who doesn't really care about what you do, not because she doesn't care about you but simply because she's not really particular about anything that occours around her. And having your best friend as your roommate is really a wise choice. At the beginning, i dont have any roommate and i think it should be fine with me. Its not that bad actually. I can spend my private time by my own. After quite sometime, its been such a boring life for me. Just imagine, when u get back there is nobody to talk with. Sounds boring to me. Normally, i'll travel back to my hometown, Perak most of the weekend. Monday Morning i'll be back and straight to the class. The same thing happened for couples of weeks until i finally got a new rommate and she's Nia. The best part is, she is also from Perak. In the meantime, congratulations for all diploma holder batch 2007 from Kolej Poly Tech Mara UITM, and good luck to all of u especially to our own gang "Mak Datin!". We had such a wonderful moment together and i m hoping our friendship still remain. If anybody is contemplating on coming to Kolej Poly Tech Mara, Bangi I'm your friendly senior to look for advice. Cheers, Azianti!!

A Step Forward Into University World

At 28 of June, I had registered in UKM. As entering the main gate, I became nervous and excited at the same time. Nervous because I couldn't imagine how the life here will be going on. Excited for at last I could pursue my study in one of the best university in Malaysia. I registered in Kolej Pendeta Za'ba which I think the best college here. The orientation week is of course the most unforgettable moment for me. Everybody had spirit to uphold the dignity and spirit of their college. Although our college had to face all the college that were strongly against us, we were not afraid but become more unite and strong. I'm wonder why they were so strongly against us. Some of the reasons were acceptable and some were not. Every college should uphold their college's identity along the week as it was the first and biggest gathering where everyone of us representing our college. But what happen was all of them unite to oppose us. Eleven of them opposing us. But in the end, I would like to thank all of them for giving me and my friends the sweetest memory ever. The moral here is, there will be more challenges for us in the future, however let the challenges make you become stronger and don't let them defeat us.Thank You....

-shila- (peace_no war)

Facts of The Day...

The Westminster system is a democratic parliamentary system ofgovernment modelled after the British government (the Parliament of the United Kingdom). The term comes from the Palace of Westminster, the seat of the UK Parliament.

The system is a series of procedures for operating a legislature. It is used, or was once used, in the national legislatures and subnational legislatures of most Commonwealth and ex-Commonwealth nations, beginning with the Canadian provinces in 1867 and Australian colonies in 1901. There are other parliamentary systems whose procedures differ considerably from the Westminster system.

Key characteristics

Important features of the Westminster system include the following, although not all of the following aspects have been preserved in every Westminster-derived system:

• a sovereign or head of state who is the nominal or theoretical holder of executive power, and holds numerous reserve powers, but whose daily duties mainly consist of performing the role of a ceremonial figurehead. Examples include the British monarch, the presidents of many countries and state/provincial governors in federal systems.
• a head of government (or head of the executive), known as the prime minister (PM), premier orfirst minister, who is officially appointed by the head of state. In practice, the head of government is almost always the leader of the largest elected party in parliament.
• a de facto executive branch usually made up of members of the legislature with the senior members of the executive in a cabinet led by the head of government; such members execute executive authority on behalf of the nominal or theoretical executive authority.
• parliamentary opposition (a multi-party system);
• an elected legislature, often bicameral, in which at least one house is elected, althoughunicameral systems also exist; legislative members are usually elected by district in first-past-the-post elections (as opposed to country-wide proportional representation. Exception to this are New Zealand that changed to proportional representation and Israel that always used country wide proportional representation.
• a lower house of parliament with an ability to dismiss a government by "withholding (or blocking) Supply" (rejecting a budget), passing a motion of no confidence, or defeating aconfidence motion. The Westminster system enables a government to be defeated, or forced into a general election, independently of a new government being chosen.
• a parliament which can be dissolved and elections called at any time.
• parliamentary privilege, which allows the Legislature to discuss any issue deemed by itself to be relevant, without fear of consequences stemming from defamatory statements or records thereof.
• minutes of meetings, often known as Hansard, including an ability for the legislature to strike discussion from these minutes.

Most of the procedures of the Westminster system have originated with the conventions, practices and precedents of the Parliament of the United Kingdom, which are a part of what is known as theConstitution of the United Kingdom. Unlike the unwritten British constitution, most countries that use the Westminster system have codified the system in a written constitution.

However, uncodified conventions, practices and precedents continue to play a significant role in most countries, as many constitutions do not specify important elements of procedure: for example, some older constitutions using the Westminster system do not mention the existence of the cabinet and/or the prime minister, because these offices were taken for granted by the authors of these constitutions.

Operation

The pattern of executive functions within a Westminster System is quite complex. In essence, thehead of state, usually a monarch or president, is a ceremonial figurehead who is the theoretical, nominal or de jure source of executive power within the system. In practice, such a figure does not actively exercise executive powers, even though executive authority may be exercised in his/her name.

The head of government, usually called the prime minister or premier, will ideally have the support of a majority in the responsible house, and must in any case be able to ensure the existence of noabsolute majority against the government. If the parliament passes a resolution of no confidence, or refuses to pass an important bill such as the budget, then the government must either resign so that a different government can be appointed or seek a parliamentary dissolution so that new general elections may be held in order to re-confirm or deny the government's mandate.

Executive authority within a Westminster System is essentially exercised by the Cabinet, along with more junior ministers, although the head of government usually has the dominant role within the ministry. In the United Kingdom, the sovereign theoretically holds executive authority, even though thePrime Minister of the United Kingdom and the Cabinet effectively implement executive powers. In aparliamentary republic like India, the President is the de jure executive, even though executive powers are essentially instituted by the Prime Minister of India and the Council of Ministers.

As an example, the Prime Minister and Cabinet (as the de facto executive body in the system) generally must seek the permission of the head of state when carrying out executive functions. If, for instance the British Prime Minister wished to dissolve parliament in order for a general election to take place, the Prime Minister is constitutionally bound to request permission from the sovereign in order to attain such a wish. This power (along with others such as appointing ministers in the government, appointing diplomats, declaring war, and signing treaties, for example) are known as the Royal Prerogative, which in modern times are exercised by the sovereign solely on the advice of the Prime Minister. Since the British sovereign is a constitutional monarch, he or she abides by the advice of his or her ministers, except when executing reserve powers in times of crisis.

This custom also occurs in other Westminster Systems in the world, in consequence from the influence of British colonial rule. In Commonwealth Realms such as Canada, New Zealand or Australia, the Prime Minister is obligated to seek permission from the Governor-General when implementing executive decisions, in a manner similar to the British practice. An analogous scenario also exists in Commonwealth Republics, such as India or Trinidad and Tobago.

The head of state will often hold meetings with the head of government and cabinet, as a means of keeping abreast of governmental policy and as a means of advising, consulting and warning ministers in their actions. Such a practice takes place in the United Kingdom and India. In the UK, the sovereign holds confidential weekly meetings with the Prime Minister to discuss governmental policy and to offer her opinions and advice on issues of the day. In India, the Prime Minister is constitutionally bound to hold regular sessions with the President, in a similar manner to the aforementioned British practice. In essence, the head of state, as the theoretical executive authority, "reigns but does not rule". This phrase means that the head of state's role in government is generally ceremonial and as a result does not directly institute executive powers. The reserve powers of the head of state are sufficient to ensure compliance with some of their wishes. However, the extent of such powers varies from one country to another and is often a matter of controversy.

Such an executive arrangement first emerged in the United Kingdom. Historically, the British sovereign held and directly exercised all executive authority. George I of Great Britain was the first British monarch to delegate some executive powers to a Prime Minister and a cabinet of the ministers, largely because he was also the monarch of Hanover in Germany and did not speak fluent English. Over time, arrangement continued to exercise executive authority on the sovereign's behalf. Such a concept was reinforced in The English Constitution (1876) by Walter Bagehot, who emphasised the "dignified" and "efficient" aspects of government. In this sense Bagehot was stating that the sovereign should be a focal point for the nation, while the PM and cabinet actually undertook executive decisions.

Role of the head of state

The head of state or his/her representative (such as a governor general), formally invites the head of government to form a government (that is, an administration). In the UK, this is known as kissing hands. There are notable exceptions to the above in the Republic of Ireland, where the President of Ireland has a mandate through direct election, and the Taoiseach (prime minister) prior to appointment by the President of Ireland is nominated by the democratically elected lower house, Dáil Éireann.

Because of the mandate and the potentially significant constitutional powers of the Irish president, some authorities believe the Irish constitution is as similar to semi-presidential systems as it is to Westminster. Similarly, under the constitutions of some Commonwealth countries, a president or Governor-General may possess clearly significant reserve powers. One example is the Australian constitutional crisis of 1975, in which the Governor-General dismissed the Prime Minister, who held a majority in the Australian House of Representatives. Because of differences in their written constitutions, the formal powers of presidents and Governors-General vary greatly from one country to another. However, as Governors-General are not directly elected, they lack the popular mandate held, for example, by an Irish president. Because of this, Governors-General rarely risk the public disapproval which could result from their making unilateral and/or controversial uses of their powers.

Although the dissolution of the legislature and the call for new elections is formally done by the head of state, by convention the head of state acts according to the wishes of the head of government.

In exceptional circumstances the head of state may either refuse a dissolution request, as in the Canadian King-Byng Affair, or dismiss the government, as in the Australian crisis of 1975. Either action is likely to bend or break existing conventions. The Lascelles Principles were an attempt to create a convention to cover similar situations, but have not been tested in practice.

Cabinet government

In The English Constitution, Bagehot emphasised the divide of the constitution into two components, the Dignified (that part which is symbolic) and the Efficient (the way things actually work and get done), and called the Efficient "Cabinet Government". Although there have been many works since emphasising different aspects of the "Efficient", no one has seriously questioned Bagehot's premise that the divide exists in the Westminster system.

Members of the Cabinet are collectively seen as responsible for government policy. All Cabinet decisions are made by consensus, a vote is never taken in a Cabinet meeting. All ministers, whether senior and in the Cabinet, or junior ministers, must support the policy of the government publicly regardless of any private reservations. When a Cabinet reshuffle is imminent, a lot of time is taken up in the conversations of politicians and in the news media, speculating on who will, or will not, be moved in and out of the Cabinet by the Prime Minister, because the appointment of ministers to the Cabinet, and threat of dismissal from the Cabinet, is the single most powerful constitutional power which a Prime Minister has in the political control of the Government in the Westminster system.

Linked to Cabinet government is the idea, at least in theory, that ministers are responsible for the actions of their departments. It is no longer considered to be an issue of resignation if the actions of members of their department, over whom the minister has no direct control, make mistakes or formulate procedures which are not in accordance with agreed policy decisions. One of the major powers of the Prime Minister under the Westminster system is to decide when a fellow minister is accountable for the actions of a department.

The Official Opposition and other major political parties not in the Government, will mirror the governmental organisation with their own Shadow Cabinet made up of Shadow Ministers.

Bicameral and unicameral parliaments

In a Westminster system, some members of parliament are elected by popular vote, while others are appointed. All Westminster-based parliaments have a lower house with powers based on those of theHouse of Commons (under various names), comprising local, elected representatives of the people. Most also have a smaller upper house, which is made up of members chosen by various methods:

• De facto appointees of the cabinet or premier (such as the Canadian Senate and most members of the British House of Lords)
• Direct election (such as the Australian Senate)
• Election by sub-national governments (such as the Indian Rajya Sabha)
• Membership determined only by heredity (some members of the House of Lords)

In Britain, the lower house is the de facto legislative body, while the upper house practices restraint in exercising its constitutional powers and serves as a consultative body. In other Westminster countries, however, the upper house can sometimes exercise considerable power.

Some Westminster-derived parliaments are unicameral for two reasons:

• some, such as the Parliament of New Zealand have abolished their upper houses
• others have never had them, such as the Parliament of Malta and the Papua New Guinea Parliament.

Australia is, in many respects, a unique hybrid with influences from the United States Constitution as well as from the traditions and conventions of the Westminster system. Australia is exceptional because the government faces a fully elected upper house, the Senate, which must be willing to pass its budgets. Although government is formed in the lower house, the House of Representatives, the support of the Senate is necessary in order to govern. The Senate maintains the ability similar to that held by the British House of Lords, prior to the enactment of the Parliament Act 1911, to block supply against the government of the day. A government that is unable to obtain supply can be dismissed by the Governor-General: however, this is generally considered a last resort and is a highly controversial decision to take, given the conflict between the traditional concept of confidence as derived from the lower house and the ability of the Senate to block supply. Many political scientists have held that the Australian system of government was consciously devised as a blend or hybrid of the Westminster and the United States systems of government, especially since the Australian Senate is a powerful upper house like the U.S. Senate; this notion is expressed in the nickname "the Washminster mutation" . The ability of upper houses to block supply also features in the parliaments of most Australian states.

Criticisms

The office of a Westminster prime minister is often criticised for being too powerful, as he or she effectively determines when "consensus" is reached in cabinet, cabinet members do not have much independence to actively disagree with government policy, even for productive reasons. A cabinet member may be forced to resign simply for opposing one aspect of a government's agenda, even though they agreed with the majority of other proposals. Westminster cabinets also have a tendency to be very large. As cabinet is the chief organ of power and influence in the government, members of parliament may actively lobby for a position in cabinet once their party is elected to power. The Prime Minister, who is also party leader, will have an active interest in promoting as many these members from his own party as possible.

Westminster governments usually do not have a very strong tradition of separation of powers, in practice. Though the head of state, be it governor-general, monarch, or president, will have nominal powers to "check" those of the prime minister, in practice these individuals are usually regarded as little more than figureheads who are not expected to actively intervene in day-to-day politics. This gives a Westminster prime minister ample freedom to appoint a large variety of individuals, such as judges, cabinet ministers, and other senior bureaucrats.

But it must also be remembered that prime ministers can usually do only as much as public opinion and the balance of party membership of parliament will let them do. And it is relatively rare that a prime minister will have a big enough majority to cancel opposition from smaller parties; in practice, government in most parliamentary systems is made up of coalitions, and prime ministers must keep the coalitions happy.

The threat posed by non-confidence votes is often used to justify extremely well-disciplined legislative parties in Westminster systems. In order to ensure the government always has the confidence of the majority of the house, the political culture of Westminster nations often makes it highly unusual for a legislator to vote against their party. Critics argue this in turn undermines the freedom and importance of Members of Parliament (MPs) in day-to-day legislating, making cabinet the only organ of government where individual legislators can aspire to influence the decisions of the government.

Most senior policy will be made at the cabinet level, regardless of what individual MPs may or may not decide in committee, thus reducing the strength of committees. Their greatest power is often the ability to force a government to reveal certain pieces of information.

Ceremonies

The Westminster system has a very distinct appearance when functioning, with many British customs incorporated into day-to-day government function. A Westminster-style parliament is usually a long, rectangular room, with two rows of seats and desks on either side. The chairs are positioned so that the two rows are facing each other. Traditionally, the opposition parties will sit in one row of seats, and the government party will sit in the other. Of course, sometimes a majority government is so large that it must use the "opposition" seats as well. In the lower house at Westminster (the House of Commons) there are lines on the floor in front of the government and opposition benches that members may cross only when exiting the chamber. It is often rumoured that the distance between the lines is that of the length of two swords although no documentary evidence exists to support this and in fact, weapons have never been allowed in the Palace of Westminster at any time.

At one end of the room sits a large chair, for the Speaker of the House. The speaker usually wears a black robe, and in many countries, a wig. Robed parliamentary clerks often sit at narrow tables between the two rows of seats, as well.

Other ceremonies sometimes associated with the Westminster system include an annual Speech from the Throne (or equivalent) in which the Head of State gives a special address (written by the government) to parliament about what kind of policies to expect in the coming year, and lengthy State Opening of Parliament ceremonies that often involve the presentation of a large ceremonial mace.

Current Countries and Territories

Countries that use variations on the theme of the Westminster system include the following:

• Antigua and Barbuda
• Australia
• Bahamas
• Bangladesh
• Barbados
• Belize
• Bermuda
• Canada
• Dominica
• Grenada
• Haiti
• India
• Ireland
• Israel
• Jamaica
• Japan
• Malaysia
• Malta
• Mauritius
• Nauru
• New Zealand
• Pakistan
• Papua New Guinea
• Saint Kitts and Nevis
• Saint Lucia
• Singapore
• Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
• Trinidad and Tobago
• Tuvalu
• United Kingdom
• Vanuatu

Former Countries

• The Union of South Africa between 1910 and 1961, and the Republic of South Africa between 1961 and 1984. The 1983 constitution abolished the Westminster system in South Africa.
• Rhodesia between 1965 and 1979, and Zimbabwe between 1980 and 1987. The 1987 constitution abolished the Westminster system.
• Nigeria following the end of British colonial rule in 1960, which resulted in the appointment of a Governor-General and then a President, Nnamdi Azikiwe. The system ended after Nigeria became a republic in 1963.
• Ceylon between 1948 and 1972, and Sri Lanka from 1972 until 1978 when the constitution was remodelled into a presidential system.
• Burma following independence in 1948 until the 1962 military coup d'état.
• Fiji between 1970 and 1987.
• Guyana between 1966 and 1970. Presidential system established in 1980.
• Kenya between 1963 and 1964.