By doing good deeds.
They do good deeds for the people so the people will want as president
Some of the leaders and in case ordinary people collaborated with the colonizers. Leaders did it to stay in power. General mass to have an opportunity for earning for survival. In general its a betrayal
because it helps us
Some sentences that include the word "constitutional government" include:1. We need constitutional government. 2. Constitutional government will help us (Americans) stay together.3. Some countries don't have a constitutional government and that's why they live in an autocratic government which is a government in which someone has as much power as they want, kind of like Hitler.
A Republic is a system of where the people have the right to elect their head of states and head of states usually stay on for a short term and can only be elected twice in every election until they retire or they have been voted out. Also the identity of the nation is tied up into the constitution (eg the US constitution and the French and German Constitution). And the president is to uphold the values in the nation for a short term until the next president is voted in. In a Constitutional Monarchy, the Head of State is of Monarchical background and they are simply born into it but are bounded by the constitutional laws of a parliament (eg the english bill of rights). Constitutional monarchy is a combination between ritual traditions of a monarch and parliamentary democracy of where the the Monarch is only a ceremonial head of state and only has nominal powers to uphold and protect the constitutional laws as well as the common laws. The parliament has the real power of governance. It is proven that constitutional monarchy has better stability because it balance the powers between a reigning monarch and the parliamentarians so that neither monarch or parliamentarian is being above the law and above the constitution. Both of them can remove each other and be replaced with another if a constitutional crises occurs. The Identity of the nation is tied up in a human being that is of hereditary heritage to be entrusted to uphold the values of the nation for life. In conclusion Both systems are democratic but they have different approaches to democracy, both systems cherish the same belief of democracy, freedom and civil rights. Although republics can become corrupt and it is a known fact that they usually are.
Because it was the only way that they felt they could stay in power
The leaders change at midnight each day though sometimes some of the leaders will stay.
Chinese leaders, such as the President, get to stay in office for a five year term and isærenewable once consecutively.æ The current President of China is Xi Jinping.
It is important because governments must stay within their constitutional jurisdiction. Legislation represents the people, and thus they must vote on bills.
Monarchy has sometimes worked badly as a system, because people become a monarch simply because they are descended from the previous monarch, which does not in any way guarantee that they will do a good job or can be trusted with the power of the monarchy. However, in a system such as the one England currently has, the monarch serves a purely ceremonial function and has little opportunity to cause any serious trouble (although it would still be possible to cause serious embarrassment) so the risk is much less.
An absolute monarch has an army that is loyal to him or her. The members of the army get paid by the monarch, they have sworn their loyalty to the monarch, the monarch takes care of them, and they take care of the monarch. So if someone doesn't like the absolute monarchy, such people are condemned as traitors to the crown, and executed. Of course, if there is a sufficient amount of public disapproval of the monarchy, it may be able to overcome the loyal monarchists. We have something like that happening now (April 2013) in the nation of Syria. Bashar al Assad rules as an absolute monarch, but he is facing a huge revolt, which is expected eventually to succeed in removing him from power. Several other middle eastern despots have been removed from power in recent years. It is very difficult to do, but with sufficient determination it can be done.
Because some of their leaders did not approve of secession.