Separation Of Powers With Judicial Point Of View With Judges
According to the text, the concept of separation of powers is crucial for keeping a country's major institutions in check by dividing their powers and making them interdependent. In the UK, the Supreme Court fulfills this by ensuring a separation between the branches of government and common law. The purpose of this separation is to prevent the concentration of power in any one branch. However, there are overlaps and the concept is not absolute in the UK Constitution. In the UK, there is a fusion of powers and a system of checks and balances to maintain the separation of powers principle. In smaller territories, the legislature may have more limited law-making powers while the Governor retains substantial authority. The traditional view of separation of powers divides public power into three categories: legislative, executive, and judicial. This doctrine is meant to ensure that each branch of government has separate and distinct roles in governing a state.
The principle of separation of powers has been shaped by significant case laws and statutes, reflecting the judiciary's viewpoint and its role in upholding the constitutional framework in the UK. Below are several key judicial decisions and statutes exemplifying the judicial perspective on the separation of powers:
-
R (Miller) v The Prime Minister and Cherry v Advocate General for Scotland [2019] UKSC 41: This landmark case, heard by the UK Supreme Court, pertained to the prorogation of Parliament and its implications for the separation of powers. The court's ruling emphasized the judiciary's role in reviewing executive actions to ensure compliance with constitutional principles and the rule of law. The decision underscored the judiciary's function as a check on the powers of the executive, thereby reinforcing the significance of the separation of powers in the UK.
-
European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Act 2020: This statute is an example of legislative action that intersected with the principle of separation of powers. The Act encompassed provisions relating to the implementation of the Withdrawal Agreement between the UK and the EU. Judicial review of the Act's constitutional implications would serve as an illustration of the judiciary's engagement with legislative measures and the upholding of the separation of powers.
-
Factortame case (R v Secretary of State for Transport, ex p Factortame Ltd) [1990] 2 AC 85: This case, heard by the House of Lords, addressed the supremacy of EU law in the UK and its impact on the principle of parliamentary sovereignty. The judiciary's interpretation and application of legal principles in the context of EU law exemplify the judiciary's role in navigating the interactions between legislative and judicial powers, further elucidating the complexities of the separation of powers.
These case laws and statutes exemplify the judiciary's engagement with the principle of the separation of powers and its implications within the UK constitutional framework. The judiciary's rulings and interactions with legislative measures underscore its pivotal role in upholding the constitutional balance and ensuring the integrity of the UK's governance structure.
Sources
Related Questions
Work fast from anywhere
Stay up to date and move work forward with BrutusAI on macOS/iOS/web & android. Download the app today.