I. INTRODUCTION
It is an obvious articulation that, there is an inherent danger in
giving all powers to a single individual, office or organ. As Lord
Acton says, “Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts
absolutely”. The concept of separation of powers thus emerges
from this apprehension.
II. MEANING
The doctrine of separation of powers emphasises on the “Mutual
Exclusiveness” of the three organs of a modern Government
namely, the legislature, executive and judiciary. The legislature
makes the laws, executive implements/enforces the laws made by
the legislature and the judiciary interprets them.
III. RATIONALE
The idea behind the Doctrine is to ensure distribution of powers
as against its concentration in a single body. It therefore, aims
to prevent monopoly. The Doctrine signifies three formulations
of structural classification of governmental powers. These are:
The same person should not form part of more than one
of the three organs of the Government.
One organ of the Government should not interfere with
any other organ of the former.
One organ of the Government should not exercise the
functions assigned to any other organ.
IV. HISTORY
French jurist Baron de Montesquieu propounded the Doctrine
of Separation of Powers in the 18th century, in his book titled,
“Spirit of Law”. According to him, “When the legislative and
executive powers are united in the same person, or in the same
body of Magistrates, there can be no liberty….Again, there is no
liberty if the judicial power be not separated from the legislative
and executive”. Montesquieu feared tyranny in the absence of
separation of powers which, he believed was vital for
democratic governance. His model was also known as “TRIAS
POLITICA” wherein, the State was divided into branches or
estates, each estate being given separate and independent
powers and areas of responsibility.
The Doctrine, in its pure form, as advocated by Montesquieu, is
strictly adhered to in the United States of America.
V. NATURE
The Doctrine of Separation of Powers is DILUTORY in nature that
is; it does not imply absolute demarcation. It thus, cannot be
literally applied to any modern government, whose powers
cannot be kept in water-tight compartments. If that is done, it
shall make the government chaotic, unworkable and
potentially dangerous. Therefore, some overlapping has to be
permitted.
VI. ADVANTAGES
It ensures a system of checks and balances.
Negates tyranny.
Protects democracy.
It guarantees the independence of judiciary and the power of
judicial review.
It warrants the supremacy of the Constitution. The legislature
is also sub-servient to it. The latter is created by the
Constitution and is also, governed by the same.
It assures protection of individual rights.
X. CONCLUSION
Doctrine of separation of powers in today’s context of liberalisation,
privatisation and globalisation cannot be interpreted to mean a strict
principle of restraint but community powers exercised in the spirit of
co-operation by various organs of the State, in the interest of people.
Thus, though on the whole, the doctrine in its strict sense is
impracticable nevertheless, its value lies in the emphasis on those
checks and balances which are necessary to prevent an abuse of
enormous powers of the executive. The object of the doctrine is to
have, “a government of law rather than of official will or whim”.