Lichtenstein has a prince. Norway, Belgium, Holland, and Sweden have constitutional monarchies with a King and a parliament. Thailand. England. Spain. Jordan.
No, constitutional monarchies are parliamentary systems. The public elect parliament.
Pros Constitutional monarchs make better ceremonial heads of state They provide checks and balances Monarchs are well trained Cons They are undemocratic Only a member of the royal family can be the head of state The monarchies are a waste of money The existence of royalty encourages people to live in a fantasy land Monarchs are merely icons
Two countries India and SriLanka
This is passive. The active form would be 'The leaders of the two countries made an agreement.'
Jamaica
The Benelux countries: Belgium; Netherlands;Luxembourg, are all democratic, constitutional monarchies.
A [constitutional] monarchy can be both a unitary and a federal form of government. There are contemporary [federal] constitutional monarchies in some countries (Malaysia, Bhutan, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom), and unitary constitutional monarchies in others (Australia, Belize, Belgium, Solomon Islands). It is more of a technicality whether or not you can classify certain monarchies as unitary or federal in the modern day governmental system.
Yes, all three are parliamentary constitutional monarchies and are considered 'democratic'.
The underlying assumption of this question, which is that constitutional monarchies are considered democracies by dint of being constitutional monarchies, is false. "Constitutional Monarchy" simply means that the power of the monarch (king) is limited by a constitution. This constitution can be enforced by some kind of oligarchy, aristocracy, or the common gentry. If the constitution is enforced by an oligarchy or aristocracy, the resulting state is not a democracy, whereas if it is enforced by the common gentry, it is democratic.Now, since almost all current constitutional monarchies are of this latter variety (monarchies with a constitution enforced by common people), people generally drop the intermediate step of separating non-democratic constitutional monarchies from democratic constitutional monarchies and refer to constitutional monarchies as a form of democracy.
UK, Norway, Spain, Denmark, Sweden, Luxembourg,The Netherlands..and quite a few more!
Why are you asking dozens and dozens of questions about constitutional monarchies? And why ask a stupid question like this one? France and US both kicked their monarchies out and then wrote a constitution. There has not been a constitutional monarch in either country.
This depends of the country. Political power may belong entirely to the monarch, entirely to a parliament, or somewhere in between. Countries where there are no restrictions on the power of the monarch are called absolute monarchies, whereas countries where restrictions exist are called constitutional monarchies.
japan is a consitutional monarchy for shure but i dont know about the other two.
Well it depends on the time period. England is a constitutional monarchy, so is Spain and the Netherlands. Japan is an imperialistic constitutional monarchy. These are only a few of the long list of constitutional monarchies in the world today and in the past.
The following modern countries are constitutional monarchies:Antigua and BarbudaAndorraAustraliaThe BahamasBarbadosBahrainBelgiumBelizeBhutanBruneiCambodiaCanadaDenmarkGrenadaJamaicaJapanJordanKuwaitLesothoLiechtensteinLuxembourgMalaysiaMonacoMoroccoNetherlandsNorwayNew ZealandOmanPapua New GuineaQatarSamoaSaint Kitts and NevisSaint LuciaSaint Vincent and the GrenadinesSaudi ArabiaSolomon IslandsSpainSwazilandSwedenThailandTongaTuvaluUnited Arab EmiratesUnited Kingdom
There are different types of governments in Europe. Some are monarchies, constitutional monarchies, and republics.