Both presidentialism and parliamentarism are unequivocally democratic, but each of these regimes leads to different political consequences.
The great difference is that in parliamentarism the executive branch is composed of a president or a monarch, head of state, with limited powers, and a government appointed by Parliament, which at any time can censor. In presidentialism, however, the head of state and government coincide in the same person, are not subject to parliamentary censure and the Legislative Branch is limited to the area of law making.
Therefore, in presidentialism, voters elect the head of government (who in turn is head of state); instead, in parliamentarism, the head of government is appointed by the head of state, who is voted by the people.
The settlers were raided during the year 1609
The correct answer is the principle of <em>Habeas Corpus</em>. Indeed, the Magna Carta charter declared that:
“No Freeman shall be taken or imprisoned, or be disseized of his Freehold, or Liberties, or free Customs, or be outlawed, or exiled, or any other wise destroyed; nor will We not pass upon him, nor condemn him, but by lawful judgment of his Peers, or by the Law of the land.”
And the United States Constitution very explicitly declares in its Article one, Suspension Clause number 2 that:
"The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it".
This was especially important since during the Revolutionary War, the British arrested lots of people arbitrarily and also abused them and denied them legal representation.
<span>Assuming that this is referring to the same list of options that was posted before with this question, the correct answer is the one having to do with "forced industrialization". </span>
Pharaohs held the most power in Egypt. They were gods chosen to lead the people and maintain order, and provided a link between the people and their gods
