There exist different types of legislatures. In
liberal democratic systems, there exist two:
parliaments and congress legislatures. Unlike parliament, there are no commonly agreed-upon terms for legislatures in non-parliamentary liberal democracies. Parliaments exist in states that practice the
fusion of powers, while congresses exist in states that practice the
separation of powers. There also exist other types of legislatures, such as the
supreme state organs of power (SSOP) in
communist states, which function within the bounds of
unified power. Types of legislatures are defined by, as shown, the political power system they operate in. These power principles say something about the relationship between the legislature and other state institutions. For example, that the
United Kingdom has a Parliament means that it practices fusion of powers, while Mexico's
Congress of the Union informs that
Mexico practices the separation of powers. According to scholar Amie Kreppel, the most important distinguishing feature between a type of legislature is the relationship between the legislature and the
executive.
Parliament In liberal democratic states that practice
parliamentary democracy, the government in the form of the prime minister and the cabinet is elected by the legislature. The members of the government are elected from within the membership of parliament. Additionally, although an institutionally distinct organ, the government is accountable to parliament. Meaning that, theoretically, the legislature can remove the government as it sees fit, regardless of electoral outcomes. However, the removal of a government by the legislature can lead to early elections and result in both losing power in the coming election. Therefore, the relationship between the legislature and government in a parliamentary democracy is characterised by mutual dependence.
Congress The boundaries between
government branches are clearly demarcated in separation of powers systems. In contrast to parliamentary systems, in separation of powers systems, the
head of state and
head of government are merged into an executive branch in the office of
president. Also, to clarify the institutional boundary even further, the president and the congressional legislature are elected in separate elections. For these reasons, the ability of congress to remove the executive is limited. It can instigate, as in the
United States, an
impeachment of the executive, but that is considered to be a move only taken in the utmost extreme circumstances.
Supreme state organ of power Communist states established SSOPs, and formally speaking, these organs are the most powerful state institutions in the respective country. Since it's a holder of the unified powers of the state, the SSOP is constrained only by the limits it has itself set by constitutional and legal documents it has adopted. For example, in China, according to Chinese legal scholar Zhou Fang, "[t]he powers of the
National People's Congress as the [SSOP] are boundless, its authority extends to the entire territory of the country, and, if necessary, it can intervene in any matter which it finds it requisite to do so." More specifically, according to Chinese legal scholars
Xu Chongde and Niu Wenzhan, "[t]he other central State organs are created by [China's SSOP] and execute the laws and resolutions made by [China's SSOP]." According to scholar Georg Brunner, this indicates that communist constitutions codify the state's unlimited political powers, and indirectly, those of the ruling
communist party. He believes this is proof that the liberal democratic conception of the
rule of law is irreconcilable with
communist state constitutions because they rest on opposing relationships between law and politics. Under the liberal democratic rule of law conception, political processes are constrained by legal norms supervised by an independent
judiciary and are viewed as universal and non-ideological. That means that holders of political power are bound by law, and that law takes precedence over politics. By contrast, communist constitutions codify the primacy of politics over judicial authority, as judicial power is also considered a form of political power. That means that communist states formally subjugate judicial power to the political power of the SSOP (the
supreme judicial organ is inferior and accountable to the SSOP).
Marxist–Leninists hold that
legislation, not judicial rulings, is the sole source of valid law. As a result,
Marxism–Leninism rejects the separation of powers, but supports the demarcation of state responsibilities in accordance with the principle of the
division of labour. Other state organs derive their powers from, and are subordinated to, the SSOP. == Terminology ==