Separation of Powers

seoSeparaton of Powers

• Three branches of government keep each other in check, ensuring there is never an over-concentration of power: o Legislature – Parliament. Their function is to pass legislation. o Executive – Government. They govern – make policy decisions and enacts legislation of the legislature. Executive power also exists in EU and devolved parliaments/assemblies. o Judiciary – the courts. Interpret and rule upon legal disputes.

Why embrace the separation of powers? • Reduces risk of power being abused. Too much power in one person is dangerous. “The accumulation of all powers…in the same hands…may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny” – James Madison • Mutually reinforcing democracy. • Allows different functions to be assigned to those most suited to carry out those functions. Areas of expertise. No conflicts of interest in exercising role. Conceptions of the separation of powers: • Pure view envisages absolute independence. No branch has power over another and nobody can be a member of more than one branch. • In reality there is often some overlap, which may be a good thing. The partial version is justifiably, so long as the breach of the separation is in the interest of the philosophy. The framers of the US Constitution intended that the branches ‘by their mutual relations be the means of keeping each other in their proper places’. Most countries have at least a recognisable partial version of the separation of powers. Separation of powers in the UK: • Bagehot: “the close union, the nearly complete fusion, of the executive and legislative powers” • Some argue that the UK has a ‘fusion of powers’, largely facilitated by executive/legislative overlap: o Party who makes up government also have a majority in the House of Commons. They get their legislation through without much scrutiny. • But if the rationale behind the separation of powers is upheld, it doesn’t really matter if there is no strict separation. So the question really is:...