Our federal government has three parts. They are the Executive, (President and about 5,000,000 workers) Legislative (Senate and House of
Representatives) and Judicial (Supreme Court and lower Courts). The President of the United States administers the Executive Branch of our government. The President enforces the laws that the Legislative Branch (Congress) makes. The President is elected by United States citizens, 18 years of age and older, who vote in the presidential elections in their states. These votes are tallied by states and form the Electoral
College system. States have the number of electoral votes which equal the number of senators and representatives they have. It is possible to have the most popular votes throughout the nation and NOT win the electoral vote of the Electoral College. The Legislative part of our government is called Congress. Congress makes our laws. Congress is divided into 2 parts. One part is called the Senate. There are 100 Senators--2 from each of our states. Another
part is called the House of Representatives. Representatives meet together to discuss ideas and decide if these ideas (bills) should become laws. There are 435 Representatives. The number of representatives each state gets is determined by its population. Some states have just 2 representatives. Others have as many as 40. Both senators and representatives are elected by the eligible voters in their states. The Judicial part of our federal government
includes the Supreme Court and 9 Justices. They are special judges who interpret laws according to the Constitution. These justices only hear cases that pertain to issues related to the Constitution. They are the highest court in our country. The federal judicial system also has lower courts located in each state to hear cases involving federal issues. All three parts of our federal government have their main headquarters in the city of Washington D.C. The doctrine of the separation of powers in the Westminster system is usually regarded as one of the most fundamental tenets of liberal democracy. The doctrine of the separation of powers divides the institutions of government into three branches: legislative, executive and judicial: the legislature makes the laws; the executive puts the laws into operation; and the judiciary interprets the laws. The powers and functions of each are separate and carried out by separate personnel. No single agency is able to exercise complete authority, each being interdependent on the other. Power thus divided should prevent absolutism (as in monarchies or dictatorships where all branches are concentrated in a single authority) or corruption arising from the opportunities that unchecked power offers. The doctrine can be extended to enable the three branches to act as checks and balances on each other. Each branch’s independence helps keep the others from exceeding their power, thus ensuring the rule of law and protecting individual rights. Under the Westminster System – the parliamentary system of government Australia adopted and adapted from England – this separation does not fully exist and the doctrine is not exemplified in the constitutions of the Australian states. However in Australia the three branches exist: legislature in the form of parliaments; executive in the form of the ministers and the government departments and agencies they are responsible for; and the judiciary or the judges and courts. However, since the ministry (executive) is drawn from and responsible to the parliament (legislature) there is a great deal of interconnection in both personnel and actions. The separation of the judiciary is more distinct. If the object of separation of powers is to develop mechanisms to prevent power being overly concentrated in one arm of government, then in practice in Australia mechanisms for avoiding the over-concentration of power exist in many ways – through constitutions and conventions; the bicameral system; multiple political parties; elections; the media; courts and tribunals; the federal system itself; and the active, ongoing participation of citizens.
(The information on these page comes from Separation of Powers: Doctrine and Practice by Graham Spindler which originally appeared in the publication Legal Date in March 2000). Under the doctrine of separation of powers, the governance of a state is traditionally divided into three branches each with separate and independent powers and responsibilities: an executive, a legislature and a judiciary. The distribution of power in this way is intended to prevent any one branch or person from being supreme and to introduce ‘checks and balances’ through which one branch may limit another. According to a strict interpretation of the separation of powers, none of the three branches may exercise the power of the other, nor should any person be a member of more than one of the branches. In practice, however, many countries do not aim for a strict separation of powers, but opt for a compromise, where some functions are shared between the institutions of state. This is the case in the United Kingdom. For UK, as a whole, the executive comprises the Crown and the UK Government, including the Prime Minister and Cabinet Ministers. The executive formulates and implements policy. The legislature, the UK Parliament, comprises the Crown, the House of Commons and the House of Lords. The judiciary comprises the judges and other officers of the courts and tribunals of the three UK legal jurisdictions, overseen by the Supreme Court. Senior judicial appointments are made by the Crown. Separation of the executive and the legislatureIn the UK, and other common law jurisdictions, the executive and legislature are closely entwined. The UK Prime Minister and a majority of his or her ministers are Members of the House of Commons (the Prime Minister usually being both head of the executive branch and leader of the majority party in the legislature). In addition, Parliament may delegate law-making powers to the Government through powers to make subordinate legislation. Although in the UK/common law system the legislature and executive are not kept strictly separate, the executive’s presence in the legislature is made subject to scrutiny with Ministers regularly appearing before and being required to answer the questions of Members of Parliament. Separation of the legislature and the judiciaryIn cases before the courts judges are required to interpret legislation in line with the intention of Parliament. Judges can be influential in the way they interpret and apply legislation but they may not challenge the validity of an Act of Parliament unless it is in breach of European law. They may declare an Act of Parliament to be incompatible with the European Convention of Human Rights but may not strike it down for this reason. Senior judges have, however, recently suggested that there may be limits to Parliament’s sovereignty, and that they may not be obliged to apply an Act of Parliament which breaches a fundamental constitutional principle, such as the rule of law. Although judges are responsible for the development of the common law, Parliament may legislate to overturn or modify the common law, thus overriding the judge made law. Judges in the senior courts have life tenure, which protects their independence. A resolution of both Houses of Parliament is needed to remove a High Court judge from office, while judges at the lower levels can only be removed after disciplinary proceedings. Judges are prohibited from standing for election to Parliament. Article 9 of the Bill of Rights 1688 establishes the principle of Parliamentary privilege allowing Members of Parliament complete freedom of speech and debate without the threat of action in the courts (for example for libel). On the other hand there is a convention that Members of Parliament will not criticise judicial decisions, and the rule of ‘sub judice’ (under judgment) prohibits Parliamentary interference in cases currently before the courts. Separation of the executive and the judiciaryThe judiciary exercises scrutiny over the executive by ensuring that the executive acts within its powers. This involves ensuring that the executive only acts where it has the power to do so, and that it exercises its powers in accordance with the law. This judicial scrutiny extends to checking that any legislative acts carried out by the executive (that is, the making of subordinate legislation) are within the scope of the powers delegated by Parliament. The courts can therefore question the lawfulness of actions by public bodies, including government Ministers, and this is done through a procedure known as judicial review. This role of the judiciary highlights why it is so important for judges to be independent of the influence of the executive. Constitutional Reform Act 2005Important steps were taken in 2005 to create a greater degree of separation between the judiciary, executive and legislature. Before 2005, the office of Lord Chancellor crossed the institutions of the state, with a role in the judiciary, the executive and the legislature. The Lord Chancellor was head of the judiciary with responsibility for the appointment of judges, a member of the Cabinet and Speaker of the House of Lords. This was seen as problematic in the context of the doctrine of separation of powers. This was amongst the concerns which led to the Constitutional Reform Act 2005. The Act made significant changes to the relationships between the judiciary, the executive and the legislature, including:
At the same time it was also decided that the Lord Chancellor would no longer sit as the speaker in the House of Lords, and so the House of Lords now elects its own speaker. The branches of government in WalesDespite public familiarity with an executive that is closely intertwined with a legislature (the UK Government and UK Parliament), the establishment of the National Assembly for Wales in 1999 as a single body incorporating an executive and (limited) legislature was different and led to considerable confusion. In the early years of devolution many struggled to differentiate between those who exercised power (the cabinet of Ministers appointed by the First Minister as leader of the main political party in the National Assembly) and the National Assembly itself as an institution. Although a system of delegations of power from the National Assembly to the First Minister and from the First Minister to other Ministers and staff was put in place reflecting a traditional division between an executive and legislature, in practice this system proved difficult to understand and operate. The creation of a separate Welsh Government and National Assembly for Wales (now known as Senedd Cymru) by way of the Government of Wales Act 2006 (GoWA 2006) meant a more conventional and familiar system was formally put in place. As is the case in both Scotland and Northern Ireland (and many other countries around the world), there are now two legislatures and two executives governing Wales. Notwithstanding the devolution of power, the UK Parliament continues to be able to legislate on any matter in relation to Wales, whereas the competence of Senedd Cymru is determined by section 108A and Schedules 7A and 7B to GoWA 2006. The UK Parliament will not, however, normally make legislation for Wales on matters within the competence of Senedd Cymru unless the Senedd has consented to that. The division of executive functions between UK and Welsh Ministers is also based on the Senedd's legislative competence, but it does not always correspond exactly to it. In Wales (and Scotland and Northern Ireland) the relationship between the judiciary and the legislature differs from the relationship between the judiciary and the UK Parliament. The courts (by virtue of provisions made by Parliament) may strike down Senedd Acts if they are outside devolved competence or incompatible with European law or the European Convention Rights set out in the Human Rights Act 1998. Unlike in Scotland and Northern Ireland, and probably uniquely, there are two legislatures for Wales making different laws in the same legal jurisdiction (England and Wales), and therefore one judiciary. This single judiciary, therefore, interprets and applies the legislation made for Wales both by the UK Parliament and Senedd Cymru. What is the term for a government in which the legislature and the executive are distinct and separate and check each other's power?Separation of powers is a doctrine of constitutional law under which the three branches of government (executive, legislative, and judicial) are kept separate. This is also known as the system of checks and balances, because each branch is given certain powers so as to check and balance the other branches.
What is the term for a government where power is located in a single location?unitary state, a system of political organization in which most or all of the governing power resides in a centralized government, in contrast to a federal state. A brief treatment of the unitary state follows. For additional discussion, see Political system: Unitary nation-states.
Which of the following is a form of government in which the executive and legislative branches are separate and coequal?Presidential Government - A form of government in which the executive and legislative branches of the government are separate, independent, and coequal.
What term defines how each branch of government has some control over the other?To be sure that one branch does not become more powerful than the others, the Government has a system called checks and balances. Through this system, each branch is given power to check on the other two branches.
|
What is the term for a government in which the legislature and the executive are distinct?
zusammenhängende Posts
Urheberrechte © © 2024 berikutyang Inc.
