Discussion On No Real Seperation Of Executive, Legislature, and Judiciary Powers In The UK ConstitutionPolitics
There Is No Real Seperation Of Powers In The UK Constitution Nor Does There Need To Be.'Discuss What are the separated powers? Executive = the administrative branch of government; it makes laws by way of delegated legislation and drafts bills. Legislature = the law making branch of government Judiciary = the law enforcing branch of government What can you say about the separation of powers? The overlap of powers allows Parliament to make any change it wishes by Act of Parliament and helps to insure against arbitrary exercise of power. There is almost complete separation of powers in the USA where governmental intransigence in controversial matters is a much bigger problem than it is here (here the judges can indulge in greater law making activities if necessary). There is little executive-legislature separation in the UK but much legislative-executive/judiciary separation. The concept of the separation of powers was first discussed by Charles Montesquieu (after observing the British system). -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To what extent do we have imperfect separation of powers? The executive controls, and makes the legislature by creating peers(subject to the approval of the Queen), whips, dissolution (subject to the approval of the Queen, but note that permanent prorogation possible without her permission), prorogation (in theory this is under the Royal Prerogative but the Queen's permission is not necessary), controlling the timetable. Part of the legislature (the government ministers) form the executive. The legislature controls the judiciary by removing senior judges (in the name of the Lord Chancellor). The executive (the Lord Chancellor) controls the judiciary by removing (or perhaps worse not removing) junior judges. The judiciary do not have their salary voted on by Parliament The judiciary reviews the activities of the executive. Paid judges cannot be in the Commons. The executive (the Lord Chancellor (with the Prime Minister in appointing law lords)) appoints judges. The executive makes treaties, which have a degree of legislative influence (though not true legislative...
pages: 4 (words: 1027)
A significant aspect of the American Political System, and one I consider the most important, is the system of checks and balances. This concept is rooted in the classical theory of separation of powers, by which the legislative, executive, and judicial powers of government were vested in three different units. The purpose of this, and of the later development of checks and balances, was to ensure that governmental power would not be used in an abusive manner. Classical political philosophers from Aristotle onward favored a "mixed" government combining the elements of monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy. The English theorist James Harrington in his "Oceana" (1656) derived a theory akin to separation of powers from the old idea of mixed government. Later, John Locke, in his second treatise "Of Civil Government" (1690), urged that the best way to avoid a perverted government was to provide constitutionally for separation of the legislative and executive powers. Montesquieu, in his "Spirit of the Laws" (1748), added the third power of the judiciary to this concept, and the modern expression of separation of powers came into being. The framers of the U.S. Constitution were strongly influenced by the advantages of separation of powers and of checks and balances. These theories had been in practice in the governments of the American colonies, and they underlie the fundamental laws of the United States. The Constitution distinctly separates the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government. The federal system adds to the checking because power is divided constitutionally between the central government and the states. Further, the constitutional provisions for direct election of members of both houses of Congress and virtually direct election of the president puts two branches of the government under check of the electorate. However, procedural requirements in the Constitution ensure that even measures popular with...
pages: 9 (words: 2324)
The Articles of Confederation failed to provide a substantial enough defense for the protection of states against the interest of foreign powers, and from the confliction of interests in and between states. This failure led to the conception of a national or federalized state. The question of how to correct the problem of a coherently unified defense against foreign power was easily answered with the creation of a national army; but how could this new government protect states' interests from themselves within the confines of a democratic governmental system? I contend that through the bureaucratization of a federalized system the early American government was able to use the same state based interest that hindered the survival of the confederacy to sustain the feasibility of the newly formed state. The blueprint for this bureaucratization can be traced to the Madisonian model of government. In The Federalist Papers, James Madison comes to the realization that " the latent causes of faction are sown in the nature of man" (Fed 10, 73), the nature to act in favor of his own self-interest. This interest is what caused faction within the confederation and he uses this self interest to serve as the basis for his model of government. The Madisonian model consists of three components: the separation of powers, a system of checks and balances, and auxiliary precautions. Madison's model diffuses power into three branches of government: executive, legislative, and judicial. However, in separating these branches of government Madison does not endow each with equal power. According to Lowi and Schepsle, " the framers provided for legislative supremacy by making Congress the preeminent branch." (99) Madison justifies this uneven theoretical weighting of power by citing the necessary predominance of the legislature in a republican government (Fed 51, 319). The creation of a bicameral congressional system with...
pages: 4 (words: 1029)
WHY THE PRESIDENTIAL SYSTEM IS BETTER FOR OUR DEMOCRACY A proper definition for democracy is a form of government organized in accordance with the principles of popular soverngnity, political equality, popular consultation, and majority rule. There are two modern liberal democracies in the world in every country, parliamentary systems and the presidential system. In most parts of the Western world, in such countries as Great Britain and the Neverthalands use the parliamentary system. In the Eastern parts of the world, in such countries as the United States, use the presidential system. The most well organized system that is better for democracy is the presidential system, because of its advantages, especially the separation of powers along with how well it works in the different parts of the world. It will be shown how the presidential system works in the parts of the world, how the parliamentary systems works in the parts of the world, the disadvantages and advantages of each, and why the presidential system is better for democracy. The book defines the parliamentary system as the government worked with the fusion of powers principles, which is the "concentration of all policy-making power in the legislative." This statement just means that all of law making bodies work together to make the laws of the land. In the parliamentary system, the legislative does more than just make the laws, but they choose among its members in the cabinet to express and exercise the executive powers is by a cabinet and its members are mostly legislative and are chosen by and are responsible for the legislature. Also in this system there are indeterminate terms of office meaning that the members in the executive cabinet have no set limit to serve a term in the legislative. For example, a member of the parliament can serve in the...
pages: 5 (words: 1134)
Is the doctrine of the separation of powers a useful doctrine in the context of the British Constitution? How has this doctrine fared in recent years? The doctrine of the separation of powers ensures that the liberty of the individual is secure only if the three primary functions of the state (legislative, executive, and judicial) are exercised by distinct and independent organs. The doctrine was propounded by Montesquieu (De l'Esprit des Lois, 1748), who regarded it as a feature of the British constitution. It is a concept which has a superficial simplicity, but at the same times a rather deep complexity. It contains both a descriptive and prescriptive element; the concept has a long history in political thought, right back to the time of Aristotle. The conscious adaptation of the "separation of powers" principles by the framers of the American constitution in the late 18th century ensured its importance in subsequent constitution making. It is based on the idea that there are three classes of governmental function, each carried out by a distinctive organ of government. In descriptive terms these are; 1.) Executive function, carried out by the executive (government), 2.) Legislative function, carried out by the legislature (parliament, assembly), and 3.) Judicial function, carried out by the judiciary (courts). The prescriptive or normative element has two parts in it; 1.) the three functions should be operated by three organs of government, and 2.) to allow some (or, on some views, any) mixing of the three functions and, in particular, the three organs is a threat to liberty. There are wide ranges of ways in which the doctrine can be applied, or indeed not applied as the case may be in the context of the constitution. At one extreme there could be a complete mixing of all of the functions in one organ, or indeed one person such as...
pages: 5 (words: 1274)
At the beginning of induction week I was slightly nervous when it came to communicating with other students, but I have now been able to build up my confidence which has allowed me to communicate with fellow students and take part in the workshop groups when matters need to be discussed. I now feel as if I have adjusted to life at university as I was able to address any problems I had regarding settling in independently with no assistance from any of the law faculty. I think that I have been able to cope with many difficulties which I have faced from the beginning of university, such as commuting to university. This is because the distance is extremely far and takes approximately two-hours to travel to university. Being able to cope with difficult situations such as this would show my strengths, this is because it shows that I am committed to my education and am therefore willing to travel long distances. Although, I sometimes find it difficult to get to university on time when I have lectures in the morning, as this is peak time when the traffic is very poor which means I have to leave one-hour earlier to reach my lectures on time. 2. ATTENDANCE: Reflect on your attendance record. If it has been less than excellent, consider the reasons for this and what you might do to improve matters. If you have had to miss classes, consider how you have or will compensate for this absence. I believe that my attendance has been less than excellent, this is because I have missed a few workshop groups due to being unwell. In order to improve my attendance I would try to contact my personal tutor to explain the situation, and to discuss the best method to use in order...
pages: 3 (words: 656)
The national government is divided into three branches all containing the same power. The executive, legislative and judicial branches of government abide by a system called checks and balances that prevents one branch from becoming to powerful over either of the other two. Checks and balances are used for many different situations in the government. According to Document 1 the legislative branch is responsible for the impeachment process. This is an example of the Legislative branch checking the Executive branch by having the power to impeach. The House of Representatives will have the power to suspect a crime and the Senate will convict the impeachment. In the past years of government former presidents Johnson, and Clinton were impeached and also President Nixon resigned before actually being impeached. As stated in Document 2, the President has the power with the approval of the Senate to make treaties, appoint ambassadors, public ministers, and judges of the Supreme Court. For the treaties to be passed two thirds of the Senate must approve of the treaty. The Treaty of Versailles was not passed at first because two-thirds of the Senate didn't approve the treaty. The Senate must also approve the nominations of people in the government. If the decision was left up to the president he would make the decision to keep his party in higher power. In doing this process of checks and balances the Legislative is checking the power of the Executive branch. In this system it also allows for the Executive branch to check the power of the Legislative branch. On the chart in Document 3, it lists the presidential vetoes that have occurred. After Congress proposes a bill the president can veto that bill and force two-thirds of the congress to vote for it and then the president's veto will be overridden. Also...
pages: 3 (words: 574)
Separation of Church and State is a very imperative and principle part of our political, legal, and historical heritage. A "wall of separation" between Church and State was established in the first amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America. This amendment guarantees religious freedom for all. Church and State, should, unquestionably, remain as two separate institutions that are in no way intertwined with the other. As early as the reign of Constantine, the Emperor of the Roman Empire, the issue of Church and State was very prevalent. However, during this time, as well as previously, Church and State were connected. The emperors before Constantine were pagans and made paganism the official religion of the Roman Empire. However, Constantine prayed to the Christian God for help in a battle and ended up winning. As a result of this life-altering event, or change of heart, Constantine became the first Christian Emperor and allowed Christians to practice freely in his Empire through the Edict of Milan in 313 C.E. This precedent angered and astonished many people; however the Christians could now worship freely without having to worry about persecution. Throughout Constantine's rule, he became involved in church matters and tried to run the church. This is because he, just like those before him, saw religion as a way of unifying all of the people under his rule. Constantine, through his reign as Emperor, had one of the biggest effects ever on Christianity. Christianity was once powerless and poor, but at that time it became amalgamated with the biggest force known to man. As head of the Empire, Constantine was admired and looked up to by many. His role as ruler, more than likely, opened people's eyes to a religion that was once illegal and frowned upon by past emperors. As a result of...
pages: 3 (words: 679)
In 1789, the First Amendment established that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion…" (D) This meant the Federal and State Governments could not be partial or show support for any certain denomination or religious organization. One example being the nation's early attachment to the Church of England. Three years after this amendment was written, it was ratified by the states of the union. (D) James Madison, also referred to as the "Father of the Constitution", was greatly worried about the church's influence on the Federal Government. He once voiced his concern in 1785 when Patrick Henry proposed a bill requiring all citizens in the state of Virginia to pay a tax that would support religion with each taxpayer being able to choose which church they would like to support. Those non-religious individuals would pay a tax that helped fund secular education. (E) To show his disapproval concerning this bill, Madison wrote and published "Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments" and used several logical, realistic, and even clever analogies and comparisons in his essay to support his views. This essay, which gave sound arguments to maintain the separation of church and state proved to be a good weapon against Patrick Henry's persuasive oration and prevented any advances from being made concerning the union of church and state. (E) The few constitutional religious references concerning the federal government such as "In God We Trust" and "…one nation, under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all." are considered constitutional because they were accepted by our founding fathers and written into the constitution. Also, the public is not required or forced to know, recite, or respect these phrases. Even though the separation of church and state is understood and respected in the United States; infringements on this amendment are still taking place today....
pages: 4 (words: 1083)
I moved down here to Louisiana from Utah almost four years ago and was shocked with disbelief to discover that racism was still so prevalent. Some of the racial issues that still exist in the south today like the white supremacy group, Ku Klux Klan, and the school segregation problems were all racial occurrences that I read in my history class in high school. We all need to change our attitude toward racism because we are setting an example for the next generation, and our children are our future. Therefore, we need to recognize and eliminate animosity, which is the underlying problem with racism. For the last few decades, there have been continual feelings of animosity between the Caucasian and African-American race, which led to segregation problems in Louisiana's schools. In fact, the nation's longest school integration lawsuit happened right here in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. The Washington Times website recently reported that in 1956, a plea by a representative of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) requested for black children to be able to "enroll, enter, attend classes and receive instruction in the public schools on a non-segregated and non discriminatory basis." This lawsuit was put aside for the first two decades by the presiding judge who was an advocate for segregation. Then a new judge took over about twenty-five years later, and he was horrified that so little progress was made. Therefore, he ordered busing; however, this order came too late because the middle-class white families already started to remove their children from the city's public school system. In addition, The Washington Times website stated, "White students made up 60 percent of the system in 1980 and immediately began draining out. The number of whites in city schools dropped from 42,000 then to only about 12,000...
pages: 3 (words: 819)