Talk:Politics of Monaco

Is it appropriate to describe Monaco as a "constitutional monarchy" with no qualification. Obviously it's not an absolute monarchy, and is a constitutional monarchy in the 19th century sense, but normally when we say "constitutional monarchy" today what we mean is something on the English/Scandinavian/Low Countries model, where the monarch has been effectively removed from politics altogether and has become a figurehead. I would think this assumption would hold particularly true when discussing a monarchy in Europe. And yet, this is certainly not the case. Monaco seems comparable to Kuwait, which we describe as a constitutional monarchy, but with some immediate qualification. The phrasing with respect to Liechtenstein also seems better to me - it refers to it as a parliamentary democracy, but also says that "the prince retains strong powers." And, as I understand it, the Prince of Monaco is a lot more powerful than the Prince of Liechtenstein. I think some tweaking of the wording is in order. john k 01:17, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Important notice

The government section of the "Outline of Monaco" needs to be checked, corrected, and completed -- especially the subsections for the government branches.

When the country outlines were created, temporary data (that matched most of the countries but not all) was used to speed up the process. Those countries for which the temporary data does not match must be replaced with the correct information.

Please check that this country's outline is not in error.

If you have any questions or comments, please contact The Transhumanist .

Thank you.