Compare and Contrast the Political Culture of Australia and Saudi Arabia Compare & Contrast Essay

Political culture represents the multidimensional model of orientation to political activities in a certain community. ¹The concept of political culture is essential in explaining political actions and behavior in different nations. This study compares and contrasts the political culture of Saudi Arabia and Australia. Saudi Arabia is the largest state in the Arabian Peninsula, and most residents are Arabs.

The country hosts Medina and Mecca, which are the holiest cities according to the Islāmic faith. ²On the other hand, Australia is the smallest mainland continent that lies in the southern hemisphere, and it makes up several islands in the Pacific and Indian Ocean as well as the Tasmania islands. Australia has six protectorates.

Differences between the Political Culture of Australia and Saudi Arabia

The Australian political culture has roots in classical liberal values and British cultural traditions. Australians value the idea of rights since liberal persons believe in equality and the related aspect of limited government authority. These rights are clear in the voting process. According to the Australian political culture, voting is compulsory. The law requires all Australians to vote.

The process of voter registration and turnout at polling stations is also mandatory. Australians vote by way of secret ballot and women have a right to vote. Australians have a tendency of voting for diverse political groups into authority at federal and state ranks. ³ The current leader of Australia’s federal government is John Howard.

On the other hand, the political culture of Saudi Arabia has its foundations in the Islāmic law. This is because the modern kingdom of Saudi Arabia becomes governed by the ideals of Abdul-Aziz bin Saud. In 1902, Abdul-Aziz began efforts to capture Al-Saud and, in 1932, he succeeded. ⁴This led to the declaration and recognition of Saudi Arabian kingdom as an independent state.

The king heads the nation and is the commander-in-chief of the armed forces. Besides, the king acts as the highest court of appeal because he is at the top of the legal system. The king elects a crown prince who assists him in his daily tasks.

The crown must come from the royal family, and he is second to the king (Al-Rasheed, 2009). As a result, women get undermined, even in the electoral process. The electoral system of Saudi Arabia came into effect, during the 2005 election. Only men aged above 21 took part in this election, for selecting half of the municipal council members.

Australia has a constitutional monarchy while the Saudi Arabian monarchy is absolute. The six Australian protectorates formed a commonwealth in 1901 and became a federation. From that time, Australia has remained a commonwealth monarchy and its political structures have liberal democratic systems. Countries with constitutional monarchies usually have a queen or king as well as a constitution that limits their powers.

Queen Elizabeth II acts as the head of state in Australia. Despite that the Queen also heads the United Kingdom she has different responsibilities in each case, both in constitutional processes and law. Practically, the Queen does not have any role in the Australian political system. Rather, she acts as a figurehead and she appoints a governor-general, who represents her, under the prime minister.

The queen does not interfere with daily activities of the governor-general. In other words, the governor-general represents the Queen of the British administration, although, the Queen does not supervise his activities. According to the constitution the governor-general has the power to dissolve parliament, give assent to bills, appoint ministers and judges, as well as conduct summons.

Nevertheless, the rule requires the governor-general to act according to the instructions of ministers in most matters. On the other hand, the Saudi Arabian monarchy has no constitution, unions, or political parties. Also, Saudi Arabia does not have power distribution among various bodies such as the legislature, executive and judiciary.

This is because the Al Saud, which is the royal family, controls the government. The totalitarian regime upholds powerful public security equipment and outlaws all unions that lack official authorization. Nevertheless the 2005 elections represented a basic step away from Saudi Arabia’s supreme monarchy.

There is also a difference in Australia’s legal and judicial systems and that of Saudi Arabia. The judicial branch of government in Australia creates room for the founding of law courts in the nation as well as the appointment and dismissal of judges. Australian courts interpret all laws, together with the Constitution, and this makes the rule of law absolute. The general governor appoints the chief justice and judges who serve in these courts.

The High Court acts as the supreme authority on matters relating with constitutional review, and it has supreme authority on issues to do with interpretation of the constitution. Besides, the High Court handles international and interstate issues. Cases that occur for the first time get tried in local courts, children’s courts or magistrates’ courts, while main crimes get tried in state supreme courts.

The federal and state courts are sovereign. The High Court requires the state to cater for the expenses involved in guiding defendants. Besides, defendants remain innocent until when they get proven guilty. Defendants who get found guilty have a right to appeal. The law requires that every person should have a fair trial. Magistrates work alone in local courts while the judge and jury conduct trials in high courts.

The law forbids random interference with relatives, privacy or home. On the other hand, legal and judicial systems in Saudi Arabia follow the Sharia or Islāmic law. ⁵Since Muslims believe in the Sharia they only appoint judges who are familiar with the Sharia law, the Quran and Muslims traditions such as prophet Mohammed practices and judgments.

Traditionally, qadis decisions had to undergo verification, by the ruler, who ensured that the entire Islāmic community followed the Sharia. In other words, the judiciary was not a sovereign body but a wing of the political regime. This conventional association between the king and Qadis prevails up to date. All Sharia courts fall under the ministry of justice.

These courts include deal with appeals together with other cases that occur for the first time. Petty criminals and civil cases become settled in summary courts. A sole qadi decides on all hearings in the summary court. Some cases, which surpass the ruling of summary courts, get heard in general courts.

A single judge decides all cases in general courts, although three Qadis get involved in these cases when handling serious crimes like rape, and murder. Judgments made by general and summary courts get appealed in Sharia courts. The court of appeal has three branches including personal suits, penal suits, as well as other suits.

The court of appeal could be found in Mecca and Riyadh. Several Qadis accompanied by the chief justice direct all cases. The king leads the judicial system as he acts as a source of pardon in the last court of appeal.

Saudi Arabia’s policies allow for the founding of local courts by royal decree in cases where some aspects do not get covered in the Sharia. Kings have made several tribunals handle violations of government regulations that do not get covered in the Sharia court system.

Government systems between Australia and Saudi Arabia vary. The Australian Constitution, which became established during the founding of the federation, has the outline for the system of government in Australia. The constitution carries out two main tasks. First, it forms main bodies like the Parliament, the high court, the senate and the House of Representatives.

The Constitution gives power to all these bodies and defines their roles and structures. Another notable feature in the Australian constitution is that there are some powers that get vested to the commonwealth government while other powers remain among the six Australian states. States and federal governments also share some powers. The nature of the Australian federation represents another noteworthy element of the Constitution.

The constitution has parliamentary elements borrowed from both the American and British systems. Since Australia belongs to the Commonwealth of Nations, it recognizes the British as its monarch and ruler. However, Australian has a prime minister who leads the parliament. The governor-general holds the executive power in the Commonwealth federation.

Besides, the governor-general acts as the representative of the British sovereign as well as the congress, which the prime minister leads. The cabinet represents the coalition or union in control of the parliament’s assembly. Entity states appoint all other authorities that get left out in the federal government. State governments also collaborate with the common wealth in several areas where territories and states have responsibility.

Some of these areas include transport, education health and implementation of the law. Levying of income tax gets conducted by the federal state, and this creates the problem of access to revenue among different levels of government. On the other hand, the government systems of Saudi Arabia become centered on religion.

Particularly, Saudi Arabian government executes the Islāmic law called Sharia and all residents in the country follow this law. While religion in Australia only influences faith and church, Islāmic religion in Saudi Arabia influences other aspects such as the administration, law, taxation rules and business.

All Saudi citizens and visitors can behave the way they want when they are alone, but in public, they have to adhere to several religious laws. For instance, all men and women must dress conservatively and conduct daily prayers, with exceptions of some cases in women. Also, all people must follow the law on gender segregation.

The Saudi government has an agency that seeks to prevent immorality and support virtue, to see that all these laws become followed. The formal enforcers of this committee become referred to as the Mutawwa’in. Mutawwa’in have the right to question and bring into law any men and women who they find socializing.

These law enforcers also have the power to outlaw Western music, television shows and consumer media. In efforts to reinforce these regulations, the agency has a website that creates a platform for people to report any activities that differ from Islāmic standards. Those who infringe this law experience cruel reprimands such as whipping and public beating.

Saudi Arabia prohibits political parties although some political segmentation exists. The royal family occupies most significant political places in the kingdom, although, the Al Saud and the King should rule by consensus. A strong group of religious leaders called the Ulama, makes sure that the king follows Islāmic law.

The Al Saud concentrates on interests presented by religious leaders in trying to pacify the strong religious mass of Saudi public. The Saudi Arabian community gets shaped by alliances between top religious leaders and significant members of the Al Saud family. The culture of tribal organization in Saudi Arabia also plays a role in political inclinations. Heads of the main ethnic groups usually have lots of powers.

Previously, tribal leaders have demonstrated their ability to mobilize martial units from among their cohorts. Merchant families also have political influence in the kingdom. Revenues from merchants act as a stable source of income for the government and the royal family occasionally asks for financial help from these merchants.

Saudi Arabia does not have a legislative body while Australia has a bicameral parliament. Saudi Arabia mainly depends on decisions by the King and seeks opinions of religious leaders and does not encourage public participation through parliament. On the other hand, Australia’s parliament is bicameral because it has two chambers including the lower house and the upper house.

The house of representatives represents the people, and it gets chosen from almost identical electorates. The house of Senate, however, has twelve designated senators from each one of the six states and two senators from the two federal regions. These chambers oversee national laws such as law in industrial relations, foreign affairs, trade, citizenship, immigration and taxation.

Any bills get approved by the two chambers before becoming law. The lower house starts most legislation. Presently, this house has 148 members and each member represents about 80,000 voters. Also, every house has a distinct role in state politics.

The government gets formed by the political party with the most seats in parliament. Currently, the Howard regime most seats in both the lower house and upper house. The senate reviews all proposed laws and makes sure that all laws are fair to the state. Each state elects 12 senators together with 2 senators from the 2 Australian provinces.

Australia has fair distribution of power, which lacks in the Saudi Arabian government. In Australia, the state and territory governments address issues that the commonwealth fails to address. Each territory and state government owns a constitution Act and parliament. However, both governments must conform to the national constitution.

Common wealth law takes precedence over state laws when the law is within the constitutional authority of the common wealth. Some issues that get addressed by the state and territory governments include fire outbreaks, roads, education, land, public health, as well as ambulance services within their individual territories and states.

Similarities between the Political Culture of Australia and Saudi Arabia

Both Australia and Saudi Arabia have a governor-general. Australia has six provinces, and each province gets represented by the governor-general. The governor-general represents the Queen of the British administration, although, the Queen does not supervise his activities.

According to the Australian constitution, the governor-general has the power to dissolve parliament, give assent to bills, appoint ministers and judges, as well as conduct summons. Nevertheless, the rule requires the governor-general to act according to the instructions of ministers in most matters. ⁶Similarly, Saudi Arabia adopted a system of the provincial government in 2005. The Kingdom has 13 provinces, and each province gets headed by a governor, who is normally a prince, or a member of the royal family.

Every governor meets with his provincial council four times per year to check development in the province and guide the Council of Ministers about any needs in the province. 178 municipal councils became created in 2003, to guide the provincial governors.

Half of the municipal council members became elected by collective suffrage while the central government elected the other half. The first structured election occurred in 2005. At this time, over 1,800 candidates vied for 592 posts amid the 178 municipal councils. More than 600 candidates vied for the 7 positions in Riyadh.

Some laws in the Australia do not get described in the constitution, similar to laws in Saudi Arabia. The Constitution gives power to most government bodies and defines their roles and structures. However, the constitution does not define the makeup of the cabinet and the Prime Minister, but they get assumed in the practices and conventions of the government.

Thus, there are some crucial bodies of the Australian political system that do not get described in writing. Similarly, the kingdom of Saudi Arabia does not have a written constitution. This gets attributed to several reasons. First, the Saudi Arabian political culture identifies the Sunnah and the Quran as sources of law. ⁷The Quran is the holy book in Islam while Sunnah is the sayings and actions of Prophet Mohammed.

Up to today, Saudi Arabia uses the Sunnah and Quran as the kingdom’s constitution. ⁸ Second, the Saudi royal family knows that a written constitution may limit its power and thus, does not advocate for one. The royal family desires to have the last authority although the Islāmic culture encourages public discussions and involvement in running the government.

The Islāmic system gives the public power to select its leaders and only recognizes the absolute power of God. However, the political system of Saudi Arabia neglects this condition.

Also, the Sunnah supports public participation in electing leaders and government administration. Again, Saudi rulers take advantage of the conservative public. These rulers make religious leaders influence the public opinion through informal agreements. Such agreements assure the royal family of power and supremacy over the kingdom.

Saudi rulers assert that accepting the Quran as the source of law and warranting the support of religious leaders in a conservative society contradicts the need for public participation, or a written constitution. Moreover, the rulers guarantee high standards of living to the public, and this makes Saudi Arabians lose concern in political participation.

Saudi rulers use oil revenues and the wealth of the kingdom to give the public high living standards. In other words, Saudi rulers silence the public through giving them high standards of living so that they can switch their focus from demanding political involvement.⁹

Some citizens in both Australia and Saudi Arabia do not support the idea of the constitution and Islāmic laws that the King applies. Several, Australians usually have divergent views about the constitution. Some people despise it while others support it partially. They say that the Constitution neither symbolizes the nation nor the popular culture.

Compared to neighboring countries, Australians do not respect the constitution. In fact, most Australians do not know the provisions in the constitution. Nevertheless, Australia has enjoyed democracy for a long time, and most visitors admire the country. On the other hand, some Saudi Arabians oppose how the King applies the Sharia and Sunnah laws as he disallows public participation.

Lastly, both Saudi Arabians and Australians do not take part in selecting some of their top leaders. In Saudi Arabia, the King rules with the help of a council of ministers. This king selects 29 government ministers who make up the council. ¹⁰Most of these ministers come from the royal family. Other ministers in main departments like defense and foreign affairs also come from the royal family.

The Council of Ministers acts as the highest law making and administrative authority where all actions and roles get harmonized. The council of ministers formulates policies in the areas of finance, education, education, defense as well as foreign and domestic policy.

The council oversees execution of all government and public affairs. Saudi Arabia has 13 provinces and the king appoints a governor and a deputy governor in each province. All the present governors belong to the royal family. The king also appoints a council of ministers in each province. ¹¹Therefore, the Saudi Arabian central government formulates laws according to Sharia while provincial governments carry out these laws.

On the other hand, the Queen appoints governors in Australia. The Queen appoints a governor-general, who represents her, under the instruction the prime minister. The governor-general carries out his daily activities with no interruptions from the Queen.

How and why these Political Cultures have contributed to the Peculiar Characteristics in these Two Political Systems

The Saudi Arabian political culture has roots in the Islāmic faith. As a result, the Muslim faith characterizes all political systems in the country. First, Islāmic political culture affects the judicial and legal systems in the country. Judges who serve in courts must prove that they are fully aware of the Sharia law and Sunnah.

The basis of these laws is in the Quran, which is the Holy book for Muslims. Occasionally, decisions made by Qadi get evaluated to make sure the entire Islāmic community followed the Sharia.

Second, Islāmic faith believes that the Quran has all laws and thus, there is no need for a written constitution. As a result, the political system of Saudi Arabia does not write law but follow Islāmic laws.

Particularly, the Saudi Arabian government executes the Islāmic law called Sharia and all residents in the country follow this law. Islāmic religion in Saudi Arabia influences other aspects such as the administration, law, taxation rules and business.

Third, the Islāmic culture, does not value women since they get considered inferior human beings. As a result, the political system of Saudi Arabia does not include women in the electoral process. Since the beginning of the electoral process in 2005, only men take part in elections that seek to choose half of the municipal council members.

Fourth, the Islāmic culture promotes inheritance of power and existence of Kings. As a result, the Al Saud, which is the royal family, rules the Kingdom with no opposition. The king appoints all top government leaders from his family. Al Saud concentrates on interests presented by religious leaders in trying to pacify the strong religious mass of Saudi public.

The Saudi Arabian community gets shaped by alliances between top religious leaders and significant members of the Al Saud family. This protects the King against any public opposition. The totalitarian regime also upholds powerful public security equipment and outlaws all unions that may cause opposition.

On the other hand, the Australian political culture has roots in classical liberal values and British cultural traditions. Since liberal people believe in equality and the related aspect of limited government authority, these aspects characterize the Australian political system.

First, Australia upholds a commonwealth monarchy, and its political structure has liberal democratic systems that are similar to Britain. Since Australia has a commonwealth monarchy, Queen Elizabeth II acts as the head of state. This is because countries that uphold the commonwealth monarchy culture have either a queen or a king as the head.

Practically, the Queen does not have any role in the Australian political system. Rather, she acts as a figurehead and she appoints a governor-general, who represents her, under the prime minister. The appointed governor-general acts independently without direction from the Queen. The rule requires the governor-general to act according to the instructions of ministers in most matters.

Second, Saudi Arabia has a governor-general who is independent as well as ministers who give counsel to the governor. This demonstrates that the Australian political structure reveres in power distribution.

Besides, powers that get left out in the common wealth government get addressed in the state and territory government. Each territory and state government owns a constitution Act and parliament. These aspects of power distribution relate to the political culture of liberalism and equality.

Third, Australian political system makes voting mandatory for everyone. Australia gives women a chance to vote unlike the situation in Saudi Arabia. This demonstrates the culture of equal entitlement and participation among all citizens as any elected person can lead the nation.

Fourth, Australia has a judicial system, which creates room for the founding of law courts in the nation as well as the appointment and dismissal of judges. This demonstrates the liberal culture of Australian politics.

Also, the liberal culture of Australians makes the High Court act as the supreme authority on matters relating with the constitution. This is because a country like Saudi Arabia assumes that Al Saudi has supreme power over almost all institutions.

In conclusion, political culture of a country has substantial influence on political systems that a country adopts. This implies that different political systems occur due to the existence of different political cultures. The political culture of Saudi Arabia has its foundations in the Islāmic law while the Australian political culture has roots in classical liberal values, as well as British cultural traditions.

These two distinct political cultures create differences in the political systems of the two countries. While the political system of Australia uses a written constitution as a source of law , Saudi Arabia uses the Sharia law together with actions and speeches of Prophet Mohammed as sources of law.

Besides, the king of Saudi Arabia acts as the last court of appeal because he is at the top of the legal system while neither the Queen nor the governor-general has such powers in the Australian political system. Rather, the High Court acts as the last court in Australia. Another difference among the two political systems gets seen in power distribution.

Australia distributes powers across different arms of the government including the judiciary, the executive and legislature. Conversely, the Saudi Arabian political system vests all powers in the king. This is so because the country does not have a parliamentary system or a written constitution to guide the activities of the King.

Although Saudi Arabia identifies the Quran as an adequate source of law, there are some issues that this book leaves out, and the king has absolute authority over such issues. Although similarities may occur in different political systems that have different political cultures, they seem insignificant as compared to differences.

This is clear in this study as most similarities show people’s ideals about the system and not the real political systems. Lastly, political cultures affect political processes such as appointment of judges in Saudi Arabia.

Bibliography

Abdul, Alrashid. “Modern Judicial System,” Alsharq Alawsat. Web.

Abdullah, Bassam. “Political Reform in Saudi Arabia Necessity or Luxury,” Journal of Middle East Studies 3, no.2 (2011): 175-196.

Al-Rasheed, Mohammed. Kingdom without Borders: Saudi Arabia’s Political, Religious, and Media Frontiers. West Sussex, England: Columbia University Press, 2009.

Bruce, Russett. World Politics: The Menu for Choice. Boston: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning, 2010.

Champion, Dominic. The Paradoxical Kingdom: Saudi Arabia and the Momentum of Reform. New York, NY: Columbia University Press, 1998.

Galligan, Bruno and Ravenhill Justin. New Developments in Australian Politics. South Melbourne: Macmillan Education Australia Pty Ltd, 1997.

Long, David. Culture and Customs of Saudi Arabia. Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press, 2005.

Nehme, Morris. “Political Development in Saudi Arabia: Empty Reforms From Above, “International Sociology 10, no.2 (1998): 619-645.

Saha, Justin. “Prosocial Behaviour and Political Culture among Australian Secondary School Students,” International Education Journal 5, no.2 (2004):9.

Whitaker, Brian. “Hello, Democracy – and Goodbye,” The Guardian. Web.

Footnotes

1. Justin Saha, “Prosocial Behaviour and Political Culture among Australian Secondary School Students,” International Education Journal 5, no.2 (2004):9.
2. Russett Bruce, World Politics: The Menu for Choice (Boston: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning, 2010), 10.
3. Bruno Galligan and Ravenhill Justin, New Developments in Australian Politics (South Melbourne: Macmillan Education Australia Pty Ltd, 1997), 3.
4. David Long, Culture and Customs of Saudi Arabia (Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press, 2005), 5.
5. Morris Nehme, “Political Development in Saudi Arabia: Empty Reforms From Above, “International Sociology 10, no.2 (1998): 619.
6. Bassam Abdullah, “Political Reform in Saudi Arabia Necessity or Luxury,” Journal of Middle East Studies 3, no.2 (2011): 176.
7. Ibid.
8. Alrashid, Abdul, “Modern Judicial System,” Alsharq Alawsat.
9. Brian Whitaker, “Hello, Democracy – and Goodbye,” The Guardian, 2009.
10. Dominic Champion, The Paradoxical Kingdom: Saudi Arabia and the Momentum of Reform (New York, NY: Columbia University Press, 1998), 45.
11. Mohammed, Al-Rasheed, Kingdom without Borders: Saudi Arabia’s Political, Religious, and Media Frontiers (West Sussex, England: Columbia University Press, 2009), 17.