de facto

Look up de facto in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

De facto (English pronunciation: /diː ˈfæktoʊ/, /deɪ/,^[1] Latin pronunciation: [deː ˈfaktoː]) is a Latin expression that means "concerning fact." In law, it often means "in practice but not necessarily ordained by law" or "in practice or actuality, but not officially established." It is commonly used in contrast to de jure (which means "concerning the law") when referring to matters of law, governance, or technique (such as standards) that are found in the common experience as created or developed without or contrary to a regulation. When discussing a legal situation, de jure designates what the law says, while de facto designates action of what happens in practice. It is analogous and similar to the expressions "for all intents and purposes" or "in fact". The term can also be used in the context of conducting activity as a "matter of course" e.g. copying an individual on an email de facto.

Examples

Segregation (during the Civil Rights Era in the United States)

'De facto' racial discrimination and segregation in the USA during the 1950s and 1960s was simply discrimination that was not segregation by law (de jure).

Jim Crow Laws, which were enacted in the 1870s, brought legal racial segregation against African Americans residing in the Southeastern USA. These laws were legally ended in 1964 by the Civil Rights Act of 1964.^[2][3][4]

Continued practices of expecting African Americans to ride in the back of buses or to step aside onto the street if not enough room was present for a Caucasian person and "separate but equal" facilities are instances of de facto segregation. The NAACP fought for the de jure law to be upheld and for de facto segregation practices to be abolished.

Public schools in any region of the USA may be de facto racially segregated (or nearly so) simply because they are in neighborhoods whose residents are all, or nearly all, of one race (such as urban ghettos or conversely, affluent suburbs).

This is opposed to de jure segregation, which prevailed in the American South and border states through the 1960s. Under de jure segregation, the law provided entirely separate schools for black and white students, which they legally had to attend, despite in many cases actually living closer to a school designated for the other race. In many cases, the schools for black students were older, had fewer resources of all kinds, and paid their teachers less than in white schools.

Standards

A de facto standard is a standard (formal or informal) that has achieved a dominant position, by tradition, enforcement, or market dominance. It has not necessarily received formal approval by way of a standardization process, and may not have an official standards document.

Technical standards are usually voluntary, like ISO 9000 requirements, but may be obligatory, enforced by government norms, like drinking water quality requirements. The term "de facto standard" is used for both: to contrast obligatory standards (also known as "de jure standards"); or to express a dominant standard, when there are more than one proposed standard for the same use.

In social sciences, a voluntary standard that is also a de facto standard, is a typical solution to a coordination problem.^[5]

National languages

Several de facto English-speaking countries have no de jure official national language, such as Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States. In addition, although the official languages of the Republic of Ireland are Irish and English,^[6] English is considered to be the de facto language.^{[citation needed]}

Russian was the de facto official language of the central government and, to a large extent, republican governments of the former Soviet Union, but was not declared de jure state language until 1990. A short-lived law effected April 24, 1990, installed Russian as the sole de jure official language of the Union.^[7] Japan is another example of a country with no language recognized de jure.

Lebanon and Morocco are two countries where the official language is Arabic, but an additional de facto language is French.

Politics

A de facto government is a government wherein all the attributes of sovereignty have, by usurpation, been transferred from those who had been legally invested with them to others, who, sustained by a power above the forms of law, claim to act and do really act in their stead.^[8]

In politics, a de facto leader of a country or region is one who has assumed authority, regardless of whether by lawful, constitutional, or legitimate means; very frequently, the term is reserved for those whose power is thought by some faction to be held by unlawful, unconstitutional, or otherwise illegitimate means, often by the fact that it had deposed a previous leader or undermined the rule of a current one. De facto leaders sometimes do not hold a constitutional office and may exercise power informally.

Not all dictators are de facto rulers. For example, Augusto Pinochet of Chile initially came to power as the chairperson of a military junta, which briefly made him de facto leader of Chile, but he later amended the nation's constitution and made himself president for life, making him the formal and legal ruler of Chile. Similarly, Saddam Hussein's formal rule of Iraq is often recorded as beginning in 1979, the year he assumed the Presidency of Iraq. However, his de facto rule of the nation began earlier: during his time as vice president, he exercised a great deal of power at the expense of the elderly Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr, the de jure president.

In Argentina, the successive military coups that overthrew constitutional governments installed de facto governments in 1930, 1943–1945, 1955–1958, 1966–1973 and 1976-1983, the last of which combined the powers of the presidential office to those of the National Congress. The subsequent legal analysis of the validity of their actions led to the formulation of a doctrine of the "de facto" governments.

That doctrine was nullified by the constitutional reform of 1994. Article 36 states:

1) This Constitution shall rule even when its observance is interrupted by acts of force against the institutional order and the democratic system. These acts shall be irreparably null. (2) Their authors shall be punished with the penalty foreseen in Section 29, disqualified in perpetuity from holding public offices and excluded from the benefits of pardon and commutation of sentences. (3) Those who, as a consequence of these acts, were to assume the powers foreseen for the authorities of this Constitution or for those of the provinces, shall be punished with the same penalties and shall be civil and criminally liable for their acts. The respective actions shall not be subject to prescription. (4) All citizens shall have the right to oppose resistance to those committing the acts of force stated in this section. (5) He who, procuring personal enrichment, incurs in serious fraudulent offense against the Nation shall also attempt against the democratic system, and shall be disqualified to hold public office for the term specified by law. (6) Congress shall enact a law on public ethics which shall rule the exercise of public office.[1]

Some notable true de facto leaders have been Deng Xiaoping of the People's Republic of China and General Manuel Noriega of Panama. Both of these men exercised nearly all control over their respective nations for many years despite not having either legal constitutional office or the legal authority to exercise power. These individuals are today commonly recorded as the "leaders" of their respective nations; recording their legal, correct title would not give an accurate assessment of their power. Terms like strongman or dictator are often used to refer to de facto rulers of this sort. In the Soviet Union, after Vladimir Lenin incapacitated from a stroke in 1923, Joseph Stalin—who, as General Secretary of the Communist Party had the power to appoint anyone he chose to top party positions—eventually emerged as leader of the Party and the legitimate government. Until the 1936 Soviet Constitution officially declared the Party "...the vanguard of the working people", thus legitimizing Stalin's leadership, Stalin ruled the USSR as the de facto dictator.

Another example of a de facto ruler is someone who is not the actual ruler but exerts great or total influence over the true ruler, which is quite common in monarchies. Some examples of these de facto rulers are Empress Dowager Cixi of China (for son Tongzhi and nephew Guangxu Emperors), Prince Alexander Menshikov (for his former lover Empress Catherine I of Russia), Grigori Rasputin through Tsarina Alexandra (for Tsar Nicholas II of Russia), Cardinal Richelieu of France (for Louis XIII), and Queen Marie Caroline of Naples and Sicily (for her husband King Ferdinand I of the Two Sicilies).

The term de facto head of state is sometimes used to describe the office of a governor general in the Commonwealth realms, since holders of that office has the same responsibilities in their country as the de jure head of state (the sovereign) does within the United Kingdom.

In the Westminster system of government, executive authority is often split between a de jure executive authority of a head of state and a de facto executive authority of a prime minister and cabinet who implement executive powers in the name of the de jure executive authority. In the United Kingdom, the Sovereign is the de jure executive authority, even though executive decisions are made by the elected Prime Minister and his Cabinet on the Sovereign's behalf, hence the term Her Majesty's Government.

The de facto boundaries of a country are defined by the area that its government is actually able to enforce its laws in, and to defend against encroachments by other countries that may also claim the same territory de jure. The line of control in Kashmir is an example of a de facto boundary. As well as cases of border disputes, de facto boundaries may also arise in relatively unpopulated areas in which the border was never formally established or in which the agreed border was never surveyed and its exact position is unclear. The same concepts may also apply to a boundary between provinces or other subdivisions of a federal state.

Similarly, a nation with de facto independence, like Somaliland, is one that is not recognized by other nations or by international bodies, even though it has its own government that exercises absolute control over its claimed territory.^{[9][10][11][12][13]}

Other uses

A de facto monopoly is a system where many suppliers of a product are allowed, but the market is so completely dominated by one that the others might as well not exist. The related terms oligopoly and monopsony are similar in meaning and this is the type of situation that antitrust laws are intended to eliminate.

De facto relationship

A domestic partner outside marriage is referred to as a de facto husband or wife by some authorities.^[14] In Australia and New Zealand, de facto has become a term for one's domestic partner. In Australian law, it is the legally recognized relationship of a couple living together (opposite-sex or same-sex).

The above sense of "de facto" is related to the relationship between common law traditions and formal (statutory, regulatory, civil) law, and common law marriages. Common law norms for settling disputes in practical situations, often worked out over many generations to establishing precedent, are a core element informing decisionmaking in legal systems around the world. Because its early forms originated in England in the Middle Ages, this is particularly true in Anglo-American legal traditions and in former colonies of the British Empire, while also playing a role in some countries that have mixed systems with significant admixtures of civil law.

De facto not covered outside of Australia

Due to the different source of Australian commonwealth power on de factos they can only be legally recognised whilst living within a state in Australia. This is because the power to legislate on de facto matters relies on referrals by States to the Commonwealth in accordance with Section 51(xxxvii) of the Australian Constitution, where it states the new federal law can only be applied back within a state ^[15][16] There must be a state nexis, between the de facto relationship itself and the Australian state. See sections 90RG,90SD and 90SK, section 90RA, of the Family Law Act.

If an Australian de facto couple moves out of a state, they do not take the state with them and the new federal law is tied to the territorial limits of a state. The legal status and rights and obligations of the de facto or unmarried couple would then be recognised by the countries laws of where they are ordinarily resident. See the section on Family Court of Australia for further explanation on jurisdiction on de facto relationships.

This is unlike marriage and ‘matrimonial causes’ which is recognised by sections 51(xxi) and (xxii) of the Australian Constitution and internationally by Marriage law and conventions, Hague Convention on Marriages (1978).^[17]

Common-law marriage

This is comparable to common-law marriage, which is used in most other English-speaking countries.

In finance the World Bank has a pertinent definition:

A "de facto government" comes into, or remains in, power by means not provided for in the country's constitution, such as a coup d'état, revolution, usurpation, abrogation or suspension of the constitution.^[18]

A de facto state of war is a situation where two nations are actively engaging, or are engaged, in aggressive military actions against the other without a formal Declaration of war.

See also

• List of Latin phrases

References