What is usurpation?"This is when someone appropriates something that does not belong to him," legal and political science dictionaries tell us in one voice. The concept comes from the word "grab", "take away". Most often, when using this term, we mean the usurpation of power. But during the aggravation of various political conflicts this word is often used incorrectly, with both sides of the confrontation. Let's try to consider what exactly is meant by the word "usurpation". This is very important.
Most often called capture of domination incountry by the so-called illegitimate path. This can be called a military coup, an illegal appropriation of power by one person or a group of people. It happens that usurpation can mean even democratic, seemingly, processes. For example, when elections are held in the state, but they are unfair, non-transparent, with numerous violations and forgery. Sometimes this is the situation when a person or people who have only powers illegally take on others, big ones, and in fact it turns out that they have seized power that they did not have. Thus, usurpation is a rather complex and ambiguous term. However, like everything in politics.
This term came to us from the Latin language,because such a form of coming to power was characteristic of Roman and Byzantine emperors. Local historians have tried to divide the rulers into those who became the leader of the state legally, and usurpers. But in fact, we often find people who have become emperors after all kinds of upheavals, in a list of absolutely legitimate. The same is observed in the case of the Roman Popes. In theory, the one who killed his predecessor should be considered a usurper. But this is not always the case.
When we consider the phenomenon of usurpation inhistorical context, we inevitably understand that everything depends on the political situation at the moment. Quite often it happens that the seizure of power takes place illegitimate, violent way. But then the usurper changes the Constitution or other laws, bringing legal grounds under his rule. And after a while he is actually considered an ordinary lawful monarch, the founder of the dynasty, the President or other head of state. As the ironic poem says, "a rebellion can not end in luck, otherwise it is called differently." What is the criterion of legitimacy of such power? Usurpation is not always coming to power through a coup. The same can be observed after the elections. But if the popular opinion agrees with such a leader or a group of people who seized power, then sooner or later it legitimizes them. If not, on one bayonet, as they say, you will not stay long.