The correct answer is option 4: It often acts as a check on democratic rule, particularly when their members are non-elected or indirectly elected.

Option 1 states that second chambers check the first chambers and prevent majoritarian rule. This means that having a second chamber can help balance power and prevent one group from making all the decisions.

Option 2 states that bicameralism checks the powers of the executive. This means that having two chambers can provide a system of checks and balances, ensuring that no single branch of government has too much power.

Option 3 states that the second chambers can act as a constitutional safeguard. This means that having a second chamber can help protect the constitution and ensure that laws and decisions align with the principles set forth in the constitution.

Option 4, the correct answer, highlights an issue with bicameralism. It points out that when members of the second chamber are non-elected or indirectly elected, it can create a check on democratic rule. This means that in some cases, the second chamber may not fully represent the will of the people and can potentially hinder the functioning of a democratic system.

Overall, bicameralism has several strengths and chief benefits, such as balancing power, providing checks and balances, and acting as a constitutional safeguard.