Separation Of Powers Case Study

995 Words2 Pages

In this essay I am going to explain and evaluate the statement that was given by the first President of the Court, Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers. He said “For the first time, we have a clear separation of powers between the legislature, the judiciary and the executive in the United Kingdom.”
Separation of powers reinforces the way in which powers are used by the bodies of the state and it divides governmental powers between the legislative, the executive and the judiciary in order to prevent abuse of powers in all three bodies. In order to prevent abuse of power, Queen’s powers has been limited as before Queen had more personal power.
The legislation makes law as they are primary lawmakers, they make or change law. The executive has the power to put law in action as they are able to formulate policy, they investigate areas of laws in order to reform the law. The judiciary interprets the law, apply and declares law. Each government branch has its own powers and personnel so this means the …show more content…

They function in regards to the executives is to ensure that the delegated legislation is reliable with the power given by the parliament and lawfulness of government action and other. However there is an overlap which can be in the case of M v Home office [1994]. In this case, M was an asylum seeker and his application was refused, so orders, deportation by the Home Secretary even the High Court judge made it clear that he must stay in the country until court resolved the matter but the Home Secretary ignored and deported M to his country. The home office was held as contempt of court as they ignored what the judge said. This shows even though he was a minister doesn’t mean that he is above the law because no one should be above the law because its judges (judiciary) to apply law not the Home Office (executive) and it is their duty to obey

Open Document