Theory Of Separation Of Powers Essay

explanatory Essay
1137 words
1137 words

Theory of Separation of Powers Constitution is a set of rules which details a country’s system of government (Elliott & Quinn 2009, p. 2). Most of the time, the constitution is a written document, but in Britain, the constitution cannot be found written down in one document, and is known as an unwritten constitution. There are three basic fundamental principles of Britain’s unwritten constitutional tradition which are: • The Separation of Powers; • The Supremacy of Parliament; and • The Rule of Law Separation of powers, briefly explained, is the principle that too much power should not be invested in the hands of a single person or body (Elliott & Quinn 2009, p. 1). The Theory of Separation of Powers holds that the three organs of government …show more content…

In this essay, the author

  • Explains that britain's unwritten constitution is a set of rules which details its system of government.
  • Explains the theory of separation of powers and the supremacy of parliament.
  • Explains that the three organs of government or state powers that need to be separated are: executive, legislative and judicial. legislative power belongs to people who make the law, executive power is in law enforcement.
  • Explains montesquieu's principle of separation of powers, stating that each type of power should be exercised by a different body so that they can keep an eye on the activities of the other.
  • Explains montesquieu's theory of separation of powers: if the legislative and executive powers were combined and held by the same body, the interpretation of law would become meaningless.
  • Explains that the theory of separation of powers has been applied in many things and it had caused few changes in the government’s legal system.
  • Explains that the lord chancellor's role in the english legal system is being reformed following criticism due to the theory of separation of powers.
  • Explains that the position of lord chancellor was retained, though his or her role was significantly reduced with the constitutional reform act 2005.
  • Explains that the lord chancellor remains as the head of a government department, but his or her powers and links to the judges have been removed to practice the principle of the separation powers.

The basis of Montesquieu’s theory was that these types of power should not be concentrated in the hands of one person or group, since this would give them absolute control, with no one to check that the power was exercised for the good of country. Montesquieu stated that each type of power should be exercised by a different body, so that they can keep an eye on the activities of the other and make sure that they do not behave unacceptably (Elliott & Quinn 2009, p. 1). Since all three powers are related and dependent on one another, it would be dangerous to a body having a complete control over all three by having the three essential powers of a …show more content…

Lord Chancellor has played a central role in the English legal system, but the position is currently being reformed following persistent criticism due to the theory separation of powers which stated that the state powers should operate independently and any of it should not be combined. The Lord Chancellor has had such wide powers, which extended to all three state powers. First, the Lord Chancellor’s judicial power which is one of the most prominent power that he has. The Lord Chancellor has been a judge in the House of Lords and Privy Council, President of the Supreme Court, and he has also officially been President of the Chancery Division of the High Court. As for his legislative role, the Lord Chancellor has been a Cabinet Minister and Speaker of the House of Lords. Although technically appointed by the Queen, the Lord Chancellor is actually chosen by the Prime Minister and goes out of office when that party loses an election, as well as being eligible for removal by the Prime Minister. The executive power of the Lord Chancellor is government minister, he was at the head of the Lord Chancellor’s department. He had powers to give directions about the business of the courts, and responsibility for the Law Commission and the state funding of legal services. Most controversially, he has had control over the judicial appointments. It is clear that the powers of Lord Chancellor is against the theory of

Get Access