Venice Commission - Report on Bicameralism

Disclaimer: this information was gathered by the Secretariat of the Venice Commission on the basis of contributions by the members of the Venice Commission, and complemented with information available from various open sources (academic articles, legal blogs, official information web-sites etc.).

Every effort was made to provide accurate and up-to-date information. For further details please visit our site : https://www.venice.coe.int/

Iceland

1.Has the country ever had a bicameral parliamentary (or congressional) system in the past? If so, in which period? Why was it decided to change into a unicameral system? Is there a public debate about changing to a bicameral system? What are the terms of the debate?

Iceland had a bicameral parliamentary system until 1991. Constitutional amendments with Act No. 56/1991 [1] to merge the two chambers into a single one were adopted by the Althing on 31st May 1991 and subsequently confirmed by the President and published in the Official Gazette. The change marked the restoration of the unicameral system which was brought about when a re-established Althing convened in 1845 (a royal decree had been handed down in 1843 to establish a new Althing) with 26 members sitting in a single chamber, acting as a consultative body to the Crown of Denmark [2]. The unicameral system was kept until 1874 when a new Constitution for Iceland was adopted on the millennial anniversary of the settlement of Iceland with a bicameral system. This Constitution granted Iceland legislative powers in its domestic affairs while the King had veto power, carried out by the Danish Minister of Justice who became a Special Minister for Iceland (the executive power was not in the hands of Icelanders until 1904 with a constitutional amendment in 1903 granting Icelanders home rule and the first Icelandic minister. With the Act of the Union on 1 December 1918, an agreement with Denmark recognized Iceland as a fully sovereign state, only in personal union with Denmark through a common Monarch). The Althing in 1874 was now divided into an upper chamber, known as Efri deild and a lower chamber, known as Neðri deild. Half of the upper chamber consisted of the Danish King’s nominated representatives while the lower chamber consisted of elected representatives. Simultaneously, a plenary session of a united Althing was held when the Althing convened and at the end of each parliamentary session and also to rule on disputes between the two chambers when they were in dispute on amendments to draft laws.
Early in the 20th century a plenary session (a united Althing) took over tasks from the chambers and gradually became a special chamber, the third chamber, with its own structure and committees. This division was affirmed in 1934 when the passage of the fiscal budget was taken over by the plenary session of united Althing with an amendment of the Constitution.
During the latter part of the 20th century most of the Althing’s tasks were handled by the plenary session of the united Althing, the discussions on the fiscal budget, parliamentary resolutions, questions to government ministers, transactions and discussions outside the formal agenda. The quest for abolishing the bicameral system started in the early 1950s and various proposals brought up in the 1970s and 1980s with f. ex. a draft law amending the Constitution in1983 which was not adopted. Finally, during the session of the Althing in 1990-1991 there was a broad political consensus to abolish the bicameral system and move all the tasks to the plenary session. In this respect notice was taken of the Danish abolishment of the bicameral system in 1953 and the amendment of the Swedish system in 1971 – both examples regarded as improving the legislature. [1] Article 32 of the Constitution amended with Act No. 56/1991, Article 7. https://www.althingi.is/altext/stjt/1991.056.html / [2] The 1849 Constitution in Denmark repealed the absolute monarchy and established a constitutional monarchy in which power of most important issues was handed over to parliament elected by the people. This change was not well received with Icelanders as in reality it meant reduced autonomy for Icelanders who had officially ruled themselves in domestic matters. / [3] Constitutional amendments in 1934 confirmed the division of constituencies; increased the number of MPs and that the fiscal budget had to be adopted by a plenary session of a united Althing.

2.What is the population of the country? What is its size?

The population of Iceland as of 1 January 2023 is 387.759, a remarkable 3.1% increase from the previous year. The size of Iceland is 103.000 square kilometers, which makes it the second largest island in Europe after Great Britain (which is 209.331 square kilometers).

3.What form of state and form of government has the country? Please provide details with reference to relevant constitutional provisions. a) Unitarian or federal/regional/other form of decentralization; b) Parliamentary, presidential, semi-presidential or mixed

Section I of the Constitution of the Republic of Iceland states that Iceland is a Republic with a parliamentary government, and the Althing and the president jointly exercise legislative power and judges have judicial power. Iceland is a parliamentary representative democratic republic, whereby the powers of the President are mainly formal as the head of state, while the prime minister serves as the head of a coalition government in a multi-party system. Executive power is exercised by the government.

4.How many members are in the lower house?

As stipulated in Article 31 of the Constitution of the Republic of Iceland from 1944 with subsequent amendments, Althingi shall be composed of 63 members elected by the people by secret ballot on the basis of proportional representation for a term of four years.