Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Workshop 6.1 - The separation of powers: Overview - Coggle Diagram
Workshop 6.1 - The separation of powers: Overview
Theory of the separation of powers
Its widely acknowledged that the concentration of all types of power into the same hands can lead to an inefficient government.
Lord Acton "Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely"
Constitutional theorists argue that for a constitution to be efficient, the three branches of state should be separated into different bodies/persons.
Montesquieu
Montesquieu is a french philosopher who believed that liberty would be best protected in a state with there was a separation of powers into judicial, executive, and legislative branches.
Separation of powers in practice
The separation of powers is just a theory or an ideal.
Different political cultures tend to have differing perspectives on the degree to which the theory can and should be implemented.
Most modern democratic nations have a form of government which depends on the support and confidence of the legislature, selected through general election (as in the UK).
Context of separation of powers in the UK
The model of separation of powers in the UK is a product of the organic development of the UK's constitution and the UK's continued attachment to the principle of parliamentary sovereignty.
The UK's attachment to parliamentary sovereignty means that there is not an equal balance of power in the first place.
UK court's don't have the power to invalidate primary legislation if its not unconstitutional.
The Supreme Court is not a constitutional court in the sense of being able to review primary legislation for compliance with constitutional fundamentals.
Consequences
Institutional overlaps
The lack of design to the UK constitution means that historically there's been significant overlaps between all three bodies.
How far does this fusion impact the efficiency and balance of the constitution?
Two main issues impacting the judiciary
What power does the judiciary have to scrutinise and control the actions of the executive?
To what extent, if at all, can the judiciary make law?