Table Of Contents
- The Theory Of Separation Of Powers
- Reasons For And Advantages Of Separation Of Powers
- Disadvantages And Criticism Of Separation Of Powers
- Separation Of Powers In The Cabinet System
- Separation Of Powers In The Presidential System
The Theory Of Separation Of Powers
Separation Of powers may be defined as the division of governmental political powers that exist in any given state into the three organs of government. This principle says that all political powers in a given state should not be rested or consolidated in one person or one organ of government. This principle says that all political powers in a given state should not be rested or consolidated in one person or one organ of government. If these powers are divided into the three organs of government- the legislature, executive, and judiciary- the chances of dictatorship or tyranny will be reduced to the barest minimum.
It was a French political thinker and jurist Baron de Montesquieu who developed and popularised the principle of separation of powers in his book entitled “Espirit des Lois,” which means- The spirit of laws- published in 1748. Political scientists like Locke, Jefferson, Rousseau, Bodin, Plato, and Aristotle had earlier expressed their views on the principle of separation of powers. Montesquieu arged inter alia. The rights, liberty, and freedom of citizens are to be maintained and guaranteed, then the three organs of government must be separated and entrusted to different people to administer. There will be chaos, violence, dictatorship, tyranny, and oppression if there is no separation of powers that different organs of government should handle the functions of government of law-making, execution, and adjudication without interference.
Reasons For And Advantages Of Separation Of Powers
1. Separation of powers guarantees and maintains the citizens’ citizens’ rights, liberty, and freedom.
2. Powers are separated among the organs of government to avoid chaos, violence, dictatorship, tyranny, and oppression in a country.
3. Separation of powers leads to the division of labor and specialization in governance.
4. Another advantage of the separation of powers is that it results in one organ checking the activities of other organs, known as checks and balances.
5. Separation of powers without unnecessary interference makes for the smooth running of government.
6. The checks and balances in the separation of powers make government officials cautious and meticulous in their functions, making government very efficient and orderly.
7. Separation Of powers maintains law and order, ensuring rapid progress and economic and political development.
8. The rule of law, one of the ingredients of democracy, is guaranteed if powers are separated among the three organs of government.
9. The principle of separation of powers ensures a stable political system in a country.
10. The principle prevents excesses and recklessness on the part of the organs of government.
11. It brings about efficiency and orderliness in the administration of a country.
Disadvantages And Criticism Of Separation Of Powers
1. It is argued that the separation of powers into three organs of government tends to lower the quality of decisions and policies made by these organs.
2. Strict application of the separation of powers principles slows down the government’s smooth running.
3. Separation of powers without interference from other organs may make these organs to be inefficient.
4. The institution of checks and balances that apply to the separation of powers can lead to political instability in the country.
5. Applying the principle of checks and balances may lead to unhealthy rivalry among the organs of government.
6. separation of powers and the checks and balances that may go with it have also been criticized for being incapable of checking the abuse of power by officials of different organs of government.
7. It is also argued that the rights, liberty, and freedom of the citizens are violated due to the powers allocated to these different organs of government.
8. Finally, due to the overlapping nature of the functions and authorities of government, complete separation of powers is near impossible.
Separation Of Powers In The Cabinet System
1. There is fusion rather than separation of power between the executive and the legislature in the parliamentary system.
2. Ministers in this system belong to the executive and legislative organs of government.
3. The executive organ of government tends to have full control of the legislative organ and even the judiciary.
4. The head of the judicial organ in Britain that practices the cabinet system is also a member of the other two organs-the executive and the legislature.
5. The executive is collectively responsible to the parliament for its actions.
6. The parliament can dismiss the entire executive, also known as a cabinet, with a confidence vote.
7. Almost all bills initiated by the executive are passed in the legislature because its members are also parliamentarians who pass these bills.
8. In Britain, one chamber of the legislature-the House of lords, is the highest Court of Appeal.
9. Te executive appoints the head of the judiciary, who does not check the activities of those appointed to him.
9. The executive appoints the head of the judiciary, who does not check the activities of those who appointed him.
10. Finally, there seems to be no act of separation of powers among the different organs because their functions tend to overlap.
Separation Of Powers In The Presidential System
1. There is no fusion between the executive and the legislature in the presidential system of government. The two organs are separated both in functions and membership.
2. Ministers do not belong to both organs-any legislator appointed a minister must resign as a member of the legislature in which he was elected.
3. The executive does not control the legislature, and the judiciary President is elected, not appointed by the parliament, and, therefore, not controlled by the parliament.
5. The chief justice, the head of the judiciary, is not a member of the other two organs of government.
6. The executive is not collectively responsible to the parliament for its action.
7. The legislature cannot dismiss the entire cabinet but can remove the President through impeachment because of abuse of constitutional power.
8. The legislature’s upper chamber, the Senate, does not act as the highest Court of Appeal.
9. Not all bills initiated by the executive are passed in the parliament as in the cabinet system.
10. The act of judicial review is more visible in the presidential system of government.
11. The acts of separation of powers among different organs of government seem to be more visible in the presidential system for more than cabinet system because the functions of these organs do not overlap as in the cabinet system.