Political Influence
Sejms, including their senate (the upper chamber), and sejmiks severely limited the king's powers. The king could not pass laws himself without the approval of the sejm, this being forbidden by szlachta privilege laws like nihil novi from 1505. According to the nihil novi constitution, a law passed by the sejm had to be agreed by the three estates (stany sejmujące; the king, the senate and deputies from the sejm proper - the lower chamber). There were only few areas in which the king could pass legislation without consulting the sejm: on royal cities, peasants in royal lands, Jews, fiefs and on mining. The three estates of the sejm had the final decision in legislation on taxation, budget and treasury matters (including military funding), foreign affairs (including hearing foreign envoys and sending diplomatic missions) and ennoblement. The sejm received fiscal reports from deputy treasurers, and debated on most important court cases (the sejm court), with the right of amnesty. The sejm could also legislate in the absence of the king, although such legislation would have to be accepted by the king ex post.
Following the Constitution of May 3, 1791, the senate's competences were altered; in most cases the senators could only vote together with the sejm, and the senate's veto powers were limited. Legislative power was limited to the deputies of the sejm (not senators voting separately, except on the senate's privilege of veto, a suspension of a given legislation until the sejm votes on it again during the next session). The king, who nominated senators, ministers and other officials, presided over the senate, and could propose new laws together with the executive government, over which he also presided (the newly created Straż Praw or the Guardianship of Laws). The sejm also had the supervisory role, as government ministers and other officials were to be responsible to it.
Read more about this topic: General Sejm
Famous quotes containing the words political and/or influence:
“Both the Moral Majority, who are recycling medieval language to explain AIDS, and those ultra-leftists who attribute AIDS to some sort of conspiracy, have a clearly political analysis of the epidemic. But even if one attributes its cause to a microorganism rather than the wrath of God, or the workings of the CIA, it is clear that the way in which AIDS has been perceived, conceptualized, imagined, researched and financed makes this the most political of diseases.”
—Dennis Altman (b. 1943)
“For character too is a process and an unfolding ... among our valued friends is there not someone or other who is a little too self confident and disdainful; whose distinguished mind is a little spotted with commonness; who is a little pinched here and protruberent there with native prejudices; or whose better energies are liable to lapse down the wrong channel under the influence of transient solicitations?”
—George Eliot [Mary Ann (or Marian)