Publication Search

This study examines the constitutional systems of Denmark and Sweden as two of the most stable and advanced models of modern constitutional monarchy in the world. While maintaining the institution of monarchy, both countries have successfully integrated the principles of parliamentary democracy, parliamentary supremacy, and strict limitations on executive power, so that the monarch plays a purely symbolic role in the state. Using a normative-comparative legal research method that focuses on the 1953 Danish Constitution and the 1974 Swedish Instrument of Government, this study traces the historical evolution, constitutional structure, mechanisms of government formation, legislative oversight, and the role of the judiciary in both countries. The results of the study show that Denmark has retained a number of historical formulations regarding the power of the king in the text of the constitution, but all of these powers are symbolic in nature because they are controlled by parliamentary convention. Sweden, through its 1974 reforms, opted for a more decisive model by explicitly removing all political roles of the monarchy. Despite differences in constitutional design, both countries share fundamental similarities in their egalitarian political culture, bureaucratic professionalism, political consensus, and parliamentary rule mechanisms that create governmental stability.Further analysis shows that the continuity of the monarchy in both countries is inseparable from peaceful historical transformation, the monarchy's ability to adapt to democratization, and its role as

Government institutions have an important role in maintaining state stability, but often separatist conflicts arise due to dissatisfaction with a government system that is considered unfair. This research aims to examine the structure and dynamics of the government systems of Indonesia and Malaysia, which adhere to a presidential system, and Malaysia, which adhere to a constitutional monarchy system, so as to provide a comprehensive understanding of political dynamics in Southeast Asia. The research method uses a qualitative descriptive approach with literature study to understand the structure and dynamics of the Indonesian and Malaysian government systems. The research results show that Indonesia has a presidential system of government with strong executive power, while Malaysia has a constitutional-monarchical system with a complex division of power between the prime minister and the states. Although both share historical and cultural similarities, differences in their governmental structures lead to different strengths and weaknesses in the exercise of executive power and the relationship between heads of state and heads of government. In conclusion, although Indonesia and Malaysia have historical and cultural similarities, differences in their government systems result in different dynamics in the exercise of executive power and the relationship between the head of state and head of government. Understanding these differences helps clarify the challenges and opportunities faced by both countries in building and strengthening their governance systems in accordance with the needs and dynamics of their societies. Through this research, it is hoped that it can provide a deeper understanding of the structure and dynamics of the government systems of the two countries, as well as their implications.