User:LegesFundamentales/Separation of powers (userspace draft)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Separation of powers or division of powers, in political philosophy and constitutional law, is the idea that a distinction may be made between several qualitatively different types of state power, and that each of them properly belong to a specific governing body or group of such bodies. These bodies are usually referred to, individually or in conjunction with other bodies, as branches of government (also known as departments, divisions, or arms, of government). Most commonly, three branches are distinguished: Executive, legislative, and judicial. "Separation of powers" may describe a such a system of government that conforms to this principle, or it may prescribe such a principle as a matter of political wisdom or of law.

The terms "separation of powers" and "division of powers" are somewhat ambiguous. Used expansively, they may cover any political or legal principle restricting concentrations of power in government (distribution of power). A closely related principle, often subsumed into the separation of powers, is that of checks and balances, which demands that governing bodies be given joint responsibility for exercising a single type of power -- such as by cooperating, obstructing, or supervising one another. The countervailing principle to the separation of powers is the intertwining or fusion of powers.
Some conceptions reject the separation of powers on the grounds that it is inconsistent with the undivided sovereignty of the state. Others deny that a meaningful qualitative distinction can be made between types of power, or that a system of government adhering to the separation of powers principle is inherently superior to any other system wherein the power of the state is distributed.

The purpose driving the commitment to a doctrine of division of powers has most often been the prevention of the tyrannical exercise of state power, as a safeguard for political and civil rights. It has also, at times, been considered conducive to efficient and effective government. Thus, the principle of separation of powers has guided constitutional design in many countries, and it has been given political or legal force in many constitutions.

The doctrine of separation of powers in its most popular form, the specifically tripartite division of government into executive, legislative and judicial powers, developed in 17th and 18th century England, France, and America. ...
They are usually defined by their relation to law: The legislative branch has the right and duty to make law, the executive branch carries the law into effect, and the judicial branch resolves disputes arising under the law.

History[edit]

See also: Republicanism; classical republicanism; constitutionalism; republicanism in the United States.

Intellectual precursors[edit]

See also: Ancient constitutionalism

Distinction of functions or powers

Ancient Greece and Rome: Plato, Aristotle, and Polybius[edit]

Klosko Vol. 1 (2012), pp. 182-188 on Polybius. Esp. on p. 186: "Perhaps because of its clarity, Polybius' account became an influential discussion of the mixed constitution in the subsequent history of political theory, exercising strong influence on Macchiavelli, Montesquieu, and other thinkers. [...] Polybius does not clearly distinguish separation of powers and checks and balances from other aspects of the mixed constitution [...]. It should be noted that Polybius' view of the 'mixed constitution' is highly eccentric and difficult to defend. Rather than concentrating on separation of powers or checks and balances per se, he rests his view upon the cycle of political change. Simple forms are inherently subject to decline and so the ideal constitution combines rule of one, few, and many. Of course, the validity of this constitutional theory depends on the valditiy of the historical view on which it rests. Of this, little good can be said." (put this in an explanatory footnote?)

High and Late Middle Ages: The Magna Carta, Marsilius, and Bracton[edit]

Catholic canon law differentiated between papal auctoritas and imperial potestas, represented here by two swords, being bestowed by Jesus Christ on the Pope and the Holy Roman Emperor, respectively.

Marsilius of Padua (Marsilio de Mainardini), esp. Defensor pacis (compl. 1324).

Gubernaculum <--> jurisdictio (Bracton, 13th century)
Doctrine of the limitation on all power: See Charles H. McIlwain (1947), Constitutionalism, Ancient and Modern (Ithica, NY: Great Seal Books), esp. pp. 69 et seq., 126 et seq., 144 et seq.

Ständestaatlichkeit (cf. Heun, Werner (Habil. 1989). Staatshaushalt und Staatsleitung.)

Absolutism and early development of separation of powers[edit]

(Early modern period) Advent of modern statehood
Absolutism (in England and France) - Niccolò Machiavelli; Jean Bodin; Thomas Hobbes

Failed revolution in England (Commonwealth of England) and earliest liberal thought (religious freedom) --> Hobbes (Leviathan)
Impeachement of ministers for countersigning exercises of the royal prerogative (oblique reference in McIlwain 1947, pp. 19)?

Moderate/conservative liberalism of early Whigs (Algernon Sidney, et alia)

John Locke (England, 1632 - 1704)[edit]

Enlightenment thought[edit]

In opposition to Leviathan and absolutism

Montesquieu (France, 1689 - 1755)[edit]

Arg. (Montesquieu?): Intra-function separation cannot be maintained

Connection between mixed government and differentiation of a few abstract functions to form "powers". First appearance of "separation of powers" in the modern sense
Main article: Mixed government
Weaking ("moderating") the state (minimizing intervention) -- negatory effects
(guarantee of limited government)
Compromise between real actors in society, by giving each defined powers in the state

Jean-Jacques Rousseau (Geneva, 1712 - 1778)[edit]

Counter-point to mixed government: Popular sovereignty, supremacy of the legislative function (in the material sense). Executive as a commissioner of the legislative power.

American and French revolutions[edit]

American Revolution and Confederation period[edit]

See also: Confederation period; Articles of Confederation.

The United States constitution and the early republic[edit]

Main article: History of the United States Constitution; Federalist Era (1789-1800); Jeffersonian democracy (1801-1817).

Madison, Federalist No. 47 (see also Federalist No. 10)

Thomas Jefferson (esp. thoughts on the senate)

McIlwain, C.H. (1923). The American Revolution. A Constitutional Interpretation. New York: Macmillan.

French Revolution and constitution of 1791[edit]

Criminal responsibility of ministers for countersigning the King's executive actions (if they were not pursuant to the laws) -- principle of legality for the executive power (Gesetzmäßgikeit der Exekutive).

1793 and 1795 French constitutions[edit]

Constitutional monarchism in mainland Europe[edit]

Immanuel Kant (Prussia, 1724 - 1804)[edit]

German-speaking lands[edit]

In the German-speaking lands, the struggle between the monarchies and the rising bourgeois class (Bürgertum) saw the separation of powers take on a strongly dualistic nature in constitutional legal thought. The distinction between executive and legislative power eventually became largely synonymous with the demarcation between kingly prerogative and acts requiring the assent of parliament (which represented the newly ascendant bourgeois estate in society).[1]

France[edit]

Other mainland European states[edit]

Parliamentarism on the British Isles and in mainland Europe[edit]

Pure parliamentarism[edit]

(Parliamentary sovereignty as a leftover of the sovereignty of the King-in-Parliament)

Presidential parliamentarianism[edit]
Limited parliamentarism[edit]

Reception in Euro-American colonies[edit]

Modern theoretical approaches[edit]

What are these "powers" you speak of?

Formal principles of separation[edit]

Not to be confused with the use of formalist legal doctrine to distinguish functions (see below).

Multiple organs holding power
Hierarchy between forms of exercise of state power
Personal exclusion

Discernment of functions[edit]

Main article: Functions of government


Differentiation of powers (in order to determine the proper competency and area of responsibility)


Functions and structures[edit]

Traditionally, certain functions have been designated to belong to certain organs, or to require particular procedures in order to be exercised. Also, some organs of state have traditionally been associated with certain powers which may or may not be associated with one function or another.

Adjacent and overlapping concepts[edit]

Sovereignty
Pouvoir constituant
Staatszwecklehre
Non-delegation doctrine, Wesentlichkeitslehre
Verfassung als Rahmenordnung, die durch die Gesetzgebung ausgefüllt wird; oder als geschlossenes System, dass die verfassten Gewalten abschließend ermächtigt; Kompetenzvermutung


Purposes and roles[edit]

(Contemporary ideological context)
Cf. M.J.C. Vile, Constitutionalism and the Separation of Powers, p. 315.


Rule of law
Limited government (cf. Federalist No. , 1986 MichLRev article)
Representation and responsibility
Efficiency and coordination
Rational decision-making, to the end of just and good outcomes
Multiplicity of sources of legitimation

See also: Constitutional economics#Separation of powers

Central criticisms[edit]

Insufficiency (liberalism)
Fixation on procedure in some ways

In structural constitutions[edit]

(Navbox: Constitutions series)
See also: History of constitutionalism § Allocation of constitutionalism
See also: Strutural constitution; Constitutional design; Structure of government

As a constitutional principle,


This is where presidential vs. parliamentary systems must be discussed

Inter-function division of powers[edit]

Pure theory/execution

Trias politica branches[edit]

Main article: Branches of government

Other branches[edit]

Many alternatives have been proposed to the three-branch, trias politica, model. Indeed, many constitutions explicitly distinguish more branches, such as a moderating branch or pouvoir neutre, an electoral branch, or a branch responsible for civil service examinations (Taiwan).

Intra-function divisions[edit]

Legislative bicameralism[edit]

Plural executive[edit]

Mixed models[edit]

Countervailing principle to pure separation: Checks and balances

Specific implementations[edit]

For historic constitutions see: History of constitutionalism § Separation of powers

Replace all these sections with a big table, and perhaps create separate articles for them??

World map representing the Bertelsmann Transformation Index's separation of powers / checks and balances score from 1-10; data only collected non-Western countries

European Union[edit]

Craig, Paul. Institutions, Power, and Institutional Balance, in: Craig, Paul; de Búrca, Gráinne (eds.). The Evolution of EU Law, 3rd ed. (Oxford University Press 2021), pp. 46-89. Available online (subscription only) at doi: 10.1093/oso/9780192846556.003.0003.

France and former colonies[edit]

German-speaking world[edit]

United Kingdom and former colonies[edit]

Main article: Separation of powers in the United Kingdom

United States and sphere of influence[edit]

Main article: Separation of powers in the United States

Great Law of Peace[edit]

Main article: Great Law of Peace; see also: Haudenosaunee (Iroquois Confederacy)
https://www.pbs.org/native-america/blogs/native-voices/how-the-iroquois-great-law-of-peace-shaped-us-democracy/

Former Warsaw pact countries[edit]

Other nations[edit]

Separation of powers law[edit]

Main article: Separation of powers in law
Legal doctrine

Formalist approaches[edit]

Functionalist approaches[edit]

Doctrinal justification of the principle[edit]

  • Different bases of legitimation
  • Fitness of certain organs to perform certain functions

Cf. M.J.C. Vile, Constitutionalism and the Separation of Powers, p. 315.

  • Rule of law/Rechtsstaatlichkeit
  • Enumerated powers (cf. limited government, above)
  • Representation and responsibility (Verantwortungszusammenhang)
  • Efficiency and coordination (effectiveness; cf. einheitlicher Staatswille idea)
  • Rational decision-making, to the end of just and good outcomes

By legal system[edit]

Germany[edit]

Main article: Separation of powers in the law of Germany
The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Germany (Grundgesetz) does not expressly refer to the separation of powers. However, article 20, section 2 -- "[State authority] shall be exercised by the people [...] through specific legislative, executive and judicial bodies."[a] -- is broadly understood to allude to the idea of separation of powers. This is particularly significant to German constitutional law because art. 20 sec. 1-3, are subject to the Eternity Clause of art. 79 sec. 3, meaning they cannot be amended using the German Basic Law's procedure for its own amendment.[2]
Further, art. 20 sec. 3 provides that the legislature is bound to the "constitutional order", and that the executive and the judiciary are bound by "law and justice".
The Federal Constitutional Court of Germany (Bundesverfassungsgericht, BVerfG) has authoritatively interpreted art. 20 sec. 2 sentence 2 as enshrining the separation of powers as principle of constitutional law.[b]
Constitutional scholarship in Germany

United Kingdom[edit]

Main article: Separation of powers in UK law; see also: Parliamentary sovereignty in the UK; Royal prerogative in the UK § Limitations; Delegated legislation in the UK § Controls; UK constitutional law § Substantive judicial review

United States[edit]

Main article: Separation of powers in U.S. law; see also: Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer; Marbury v. Madison; Unitary executive theory; INS v. Chadha

Modern challenges[edit]

(Mention also: Empirical research. Throughout, where possible, but in particular here.)

Industrialized societies[edit]

Imperial presidency (war) Enormous scope of government (parliaments overwhelmed)

Modern social state[edit]

Agencies

Political planning[edit]




Separation of powers refers to the division of a state's government into "branches", each with separate, independent powers and responsibilities, so that the powers of one branch are not in conflict with those of the other branches. The typical division into three branches of government, sometimes called the trias politica model, includes a legislature, an executive, and a judiciary. It can be contrasted with the fusion of powers in parliamentary and semi-presidential systems where there can be overlap in membership and functions between different branches, especially the executive and legislative. In most non-authoritarian jurisdictions, however, the judiciary almost never overlaps with the other branches, whether powers in the jurisdiction are separated or fused.

The intention behind a system of separated powers is to prevent the concentration of power by providing for checks and balances. The separation of powers model is often imprecisely and metonymically used interchangeably with the trias politica principle. While the trias politica model is a common type of separation, there are governments that have more or fewer than three branches.

See also[edit]

Citations[edit]

https://network.bepress.com/law/

References[edit]

  • McIlwain, Charles H. (1923). The American Revolution. A Constitutional Interpretation. New York City: Macmillan.
  • McIlwain, Charles H. (1958) [1947]. Constitutionalism, Ancient and Modern (rev. ed.). Ithica, NY: Great Seal Books.
  • von Fritz, K. A. Kurt (1954). The Theory of the Mixed Constitution in Antiquity: A Critical Analysis of Polybius' Political Ideas. New York City: Columbia University Press.
  • Kägi, Werner [in German] (1961). "Von der klassischen Dreiteilung zur umfassenden Gewaltenteilung". In Imboden, Max; Bäumlin, Richard; Eichenberger, Kurt (eds.). Verfassungsrecht und Verfassungswirklichkeit: Festschrift für Hans Huber zum 60. Geburtstag. Berne: Stämpfli+Cie. pp. 151–173.
  • Gwyn, William B. (1965). The Meaning of the Separation of Powers. New Orleans; The Hague: Tulane University Press; Martinus Nijhoff.
  • Loewenstein, Karl (1965). Political Power and the Governmental Process (With a New Postscript by the Author). Chicago University Press.
  • Vile, Maurice J. C. (1967). Constitutionalism and the Separation of Powers. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  • Küster, Otto (1969). "Das Gewaltenproblem im modernen Staat (1949)". In Rausch, Heinz (ed.). Zur heutigen Problematik der Gewaltentrennung. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.
  • Leisner, Walter (1969). "Quantitative Gewaltenteilung". Die Öffentliche Verwaltung (DÖV): 405 ff.
  • Michel, Troper [in French] (1973). La séparation des pouvoirs et l'histoire constitutionnelle française (dissertation). Bibliothèque constitutionnelle et de science politique, vol. 48. Paris: Pichon et Durand-Auzias. OCLC 699128.
  • Panagopoulos, Epaminondas P. (1985). Essays on the History and Meaning of Checks and Balances. Lanham et al.: University Press of America. ISBN 0819149969.
  • Franklin, Julian H. (1991). "Sovereignty and the mixed constitution: Bodin and his critics". In Burns, James Henderson; Goldie, Mark (eds.). The Cambridge History of Political Thought 1450-1700. Cambridge University Press. pp. 298–328. ISBN 0-521-24716-0.
Exekutive als reiner Gesetzesvollzug (magistracy)
  • Michalowski, Sabine; Woods, Lorna (1999). German Constitutional Law: The Protection of Civil Liberties. Aldershot, UK; Brookfield, Vermont, U.S.A.: Ashgate/Dartmouth. ISBN 1 85521 920 4.
  • Lorz, Ralph Alexander [in German] (2001). Interorganrespekt im Verfassungsrecht: Funktionenzuordnung, Rücksichtnahmegebote und Kooperationsverpflichtungen; eine rechtsvergleichende Analyse anhand der Verfassungssysteme der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, der Europäischen Union und der Vereinigten Staaten (Habilitation thesis). Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck. ISBN 9783161474460. OCLC 237400046.
  • Maxwell A. Cameron, Tulia G. Falleti. Federalism and the Subnational Separation of Powers. Publius, Vol. 35, No. 2 (Spring, 2005), pp. 245-271 - https://www.jstor.org/stable/4624711.
  • Barendt, Eric (2005). "Separation of Powers and Constitutional Government (ch. 12)". In Bellamy, Robert (ed.). The Rule of Law and the Separation of Powers. London: Routledge.
  • Carolan, Eoin (2009). The New Separation of Powers: A Theory for the Modern State. Oxford University Press. (based on the author's 2006 doctoral dissertation, "A Theory of Institutional Separation for the Administrative State", available (PDF) via Trinity's Access to Research Archive.)
  • Matthew Stephenson & Jide O. Nzelibe, Complementary Constraints: Separation of Powers, Rational Voting, and Constitutional Design, 123 Harv. L. Rev. 617 (2010). https://dash.harvard.edu/handle/1/10849723. --> Economic analysis
  • Troper, Michel. Chagnollaud, Dominique. Traité International de Droit Constitutionnel, Tome 1: Théorie de la Constitution, Tome 2: Distribution des Pouvoirs. ISBN (Vol. 1): 978-2-2471-0744-5; ISBN - (Vol. 2, online ed.): 978-2-247-12195-3.
  • Séparation des pouvoirs et contre-pouvoirs (Actes des 1ères journées scientifiques de droit constitutionnel - Palais des Congrès de Niamey, du 10 au 13 octobre 2017 - Oumarou Narey - Avec l'Association Nigérienne de Droit Constitutionnel (ANDC) - Collection : Harmattan Sénégal
  • Mikuli, Piotr (2018). "Separation of Powers" (PDF). In Grote, Rainer; Lachenmann, F.; Wolfrum, Rüdiger (eds.). Max Planck Encyclopedia of Comparative Constitutional Law. Oxford University Press.
  • 5 Journal of International and Comparative Law, Issue 2
  • Saunders, Cheryl (2018). "Theoretical underpinnings of separation of powers". In Jacobsohn, Gary J.; Schor, Miguel (eds.). Comparative Constitutional Theory. Cheltenham, UK; Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar. pp. 66–85.
  • Le Divellec, Armel (2020). "Parliament in constitutional law". In Benoît, Cyril; Rozenberg, Olivier (eds.). Handbook of parliamentary studies. Cheltenham, UK; Northampton, Mass., U.S.A.: Edward Elgar. ISBN 978 1 78990 650 9. OCLC 1231963438.
  • Craig, Paul (2021). "Institutions, Power, and Institutional Balance". In Craig, Paul; de Búrca, Gráinne (eds.). The Evolution of EU Law. Oxford University Press.
  • Sandro, Paolo (2022). The Making of Constitutional Democracy: From Creation to Application of Law. Oxford/New York City: Hart Publishing/Bloomsbury. ISBN 9781509905225.

Primary sources[edit]

  • Dallison, Charles (attributed) (1648). The Royalist's Defence. London – via Early English Books Online (Univ. of Michigan).
  • Artur, Émile Marie Gustave (1 July 1900). "Séparation des pouvoirs et séparation des fonctions". Revue du droit public et de la science politique en France et à l'étranger. 7 (2). Paris: Chevalier-Marescq (at that time): 32–64. ISSN 1963-1790. available at Gallica.

Table of cases[edit]

  • Südumfahrung Stendal [Stendal South Bypass case], 95 BVerfGE 1, 15 (or at para. 42 online) (Federal Constitutional Court of Germany 17 July 1996).


Notes[edit]

Explanatory notes[edit]

  1. ^ Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany . art. 20. 2010 – via Wikisource. {{citation}}: Cite uses deprecated parameter |authors= (help)CS1 maint: location (link) CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  2. ^ Stendal case (Fed. Const. Ct. Germany) 1996, at para. 42 (online) - Relevant excerpt translated in Bumke & Voßkuhle 2019, at margin note no. 1407 (p. 348).

Shortened references[edit]

  1. ^ Achterberg 1970, pp. 12–15.
  2. ^ Bumke & Voßkuhle 2019, para. 1293 (p. 320).

Further reading and links[edit]