Reference no: EM133716522
Question: As we understand it today, judicial review is a product of modern democratic systems. It is not directly comparable to the legal systems of ancient Athens or contemporary Eritrea. In ancient Athenian democracy, there was no formal concept of judicial review. The legal system was based on popular sovereignty, where citizens made and enforced laws. The jury, chosen by lot from the citizen population, had the final say in legal matters (Ober, 1989). There was no separate judicial branch to review and overturn laws as unconstitutional, as in modern democracies. In contrast, Eritrea, a one-party state, does not have a system of judicial review that aligns with the democratic ideal. The country's constitution, drafted in 1997, has never been fully implemented, and the judiciary lacks independence from the executive branch (Tronvoll, 2009). This means there is no effective mechanism for reviewing laws about the Constitution. In conclusion, the concept of judicial review, as it exists in modern democracies, does not apply to ancient Athenian democracy or contemporary Eritrea. Both systems lack a separate and independent judiciary with the power to review and overturn laws. The Athenian democracy and Eritrea's political system have different ways of constraining the power of public officials. In the Athenian democracy, power was constrained through a system of checks and balances. The Athenian democracy was a direct democracy where citizens could directly vote on laws and public policies. The Assembly, composed of all male citizens, had the power to make laws and decisions. The Council of 500, chosen by lot, prepared the agenda for the Assembly. The courts, also chosen by lot, could review laws and make judgments. This system ensured that no single group or individual could have too much power (Ober, 1996). In contrast, Eritrea, a one-party state, has a different approach. The People's Front for Democracy and Justice (PFDJ) is the ruling party, and there is no legal opposition. The power of public officials is constrained by the party itself rather than by a system of checks and balances. The National Assembly, composed of PFDJ members, has the power to make laws, but its role is mainly symbolic. The real power lies with the President and the PFDJ leadership. The judiciary is not independent and is subject to political influence (Connell, 2011). In conclusion, while the Athenian democracy constrained the power of public officials through a system of checks and balances and direct citizen participation, Eritrea constrains power through party control and a lack of political opposition.