More handpicked essays just for you.
Judicial system in australia and more
Judicial system in australia and more
Judicial system in australia and more
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
“Describe the principles of separation of powers and assess the extent to which these principles adequately explain how Australia’s political and legal system operates”
Separation of powers refers to the division of different powers among three branches of government. It is principles such as checks and balances that allow Australia’s political and legal system to operate under a fair government, even though there is not complete separation of powers. This is because true separation only exists in theory in the Australian Constitution, but through practice some responsibilities have overlapped into different branches. It can then be determined that Australia does have separation of powers, but not to a large extent as it doesn’t always work.
…show more content…
PARAGRAPH ONE – WHAT IS SEPARATION OF POWERS In more specific detail, separation of powers divides the responsibilities of government into three branches: the legislative, the executive and the judiciary, which ensures that no one person has the power to do anything entirely on their own, and each branch of the government has "checks and balances" against the other branches.
The powers of these branches are outlined in the first three chapters of the Australian constitution, entitled The Parliament, The Executive Government and The Judicature, respectively. The parliament (or legislative) is responsible for making and amending laws and is made up of the Governor General, Senate and House of Representatives. The parliament’s powers are outlined in section 1 of the constitution. The executive is responsible for putting laws into action and is made up of the Queen, Prime Minister and Ministers. The executive’s powers are addressed in section 61 of the constitution. The judiciary makes judgements about legislation and is made up of the High Court and other federal courts. The powers of the judicial branch are outlined in section 71 of the constitution. It can be concluded that the separation of powers doctrine, if it were completely true in practice, would ensure that the branches of government would only have a certain amount of power, meaning that Australia’s political and legal system operates …show more content…
fairly. PARAGRAPH TWO – HOW IT DOESN’T WORK However, Australia does not have complete separation of powers as outlined theoretically in the constitution. This can be seen clearly in Australia’s political system, as certain roles overlap. An example of this is that the Prime Minister, High Court judges and ministers are appointed by the Governor General, who is a member of the executive and the parliament. Another example of the lack of separation of power is through the concept of responsible government, which can be seen in sections 62 and 64 of the constitution. Responsible government refers to the way in which the Prime Minister is selected from the party in the House of Representatives that has the majority of seats. This means that Australia’s executive is selected from the legislative branch, which unites the two branches instead of keeping them separate. Through the appointment of ministers by the Governor General as well as responsible government connecting branches, it is proven that Australia does not have true separation of powers in the operation of its political and legal system. PARAGRAPH THREE – HOW IT WORKS Even though aspects of the separation of powers doctrine are not completely upheld in Australia, there are still some features that are.
Although certain features of separation of powers overlap, as discussed above, the specific roles of each branch of government are still upheld, as no department has more power than the other. This is ensured though the system of checks and balances. This means that each branch has the power to check on other branches, and keep them accountable for their actions and decisions, as well as keeping the power balanced between the three branches. An example of this in the Australian system, is how the executive is kept accountable through questioning from committees and how they must retain the support of their party from the legislative branch. It is this system of prohibiting branches from receiving uneven amounts of power, that ensures Australia’s political and legal systems can keep branches in check even though there is no true separation of
powers. CONCLUSION Therefore, it can be concluded that although it is outlined in the constitution, Australia does not have true separation of powers. Because certain roles of government overlap into other branches, it can be determined that the powers of branches are not kept completely set apart from each other, as is outlined in sections 1, 61 and 71 of the Australian constitution. Although, there are still certain concepts, like the system of checks and balances, that allow a fair allocation of powers within the branches of executive, legislative and judicial. Consequently, it can be determined that although Australia does not have complete separation of powers as outlined in the constitution, there is no branch that has too much power, and it’s political and legal systems still operates fairly.
The same things go to the three branches of government; they don't have too much power because of checks and balances. So each branch has its own powers split evenly. This is another reason why separation of powers protect America from tyranny. Checks and balances help protect America from tyranny. Checks and balances protect America because each branch can cancel out one another.
In conclusion this is why tyranny and federalism, separation of power, checks and balances and big and small states all mean that they are important to know also the branches are a big part especially in the separation of
The decision for Australia to adopt the Federal system was on the principle of which the State’s governments wanted to keep their power. For this reason there was the separation of powers between the newly formed Commonwealth government and the existing State governments. At a constitutional level, there are rulings in which the powers are separated, these rulings due to disputes have slightly changed since 1901. These changes all fell towards the one government, the Commonwealth (Federal) government. However this was not just a landslide event, the Constitution of Australia set up this imbalance of powers between the Commonwealth and State governments. We will explore this further in the points discussed later in this essay.
Separation of powers means what it says. Power id distributed among the three branches of government: the executive branch, the legislative branch, and the judicial branch. In Document B of the DBQ Packet, James Madison quotes, “’the accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands… may be justly pronounced the very definition of tyranny…. (L)iberty requires that the three great departments should be separate and distinct.’” In other words, if one person or group owns too much power in a government, then they are considered a tyrant, whether the person (or group) who gained the power was elected into power, born into it, or declared themselves ruler. If the government was not divided into three branches and was only a single department, then too much power would be granted to that government, defying Madison’s ideals of a tyranny-free country. With the government split into different departments, each branch owns its own set of powers. The legislative branch creates laws, the executive branch administers the laws, and the judicial branch interprets laws. Separation of powers guards against tyranny because it helps prevent the development of a branch of government that may ratify, carry out, and portray laws as they wish. Power is distributed among branches ensuring that all offices play a role in the United States’
Checks and Balances. Checks and balances is a system that is a part of out U.S. Constitution. This system was put in to place so that no part of government would have too much power. The three branches: judicial, legislative and executive are constantly granting and checking the other branches actions, this is to make sure no one person can gain an excessive amount of control in government. For example according to ," the legislative branch is in charge of making laws. The executive branch can veto the law, thus making it harder for the legislative branch to pass the law. The judicial branch may also say that the law is unconstitutional and thus make sure it is not a law.The legislative branch can also remove a president or judge that is not doing his/her job properly. The executive branch appoints judges and the legislative branch approves the choice of the executive branch. Again, the branches check and balance each other so that no one branch has too much power".
The separation of powers keeps any one branch from gaining too much power by creating 3 separate, distinct branches power can be shared equally among. According to Madison, “Liberty requires that the three great departments of power should be separate and distinct.”(Document B) In other words, to avoid tyranny and achieve liberty, the three branches of government (executive, legislative, and judicial) must be separate and diverse. The purpose of a separation of powers is to divide the powers of the government so there is not only one central source of power. The three branches must be as distinct as possible to avoid falling into the hands of one individual leader. There are also checks and balances between these three branches. Checks and balances are a system of each branch monitoring an...
Nowadays, the Australian legal system has three powers, which are legislative, executive and judicial. Legislative power is in charge of making the laws; subsequently those laws will be passed to the executive power to administer the laws it...
A Constitution is a set of rules put in place to govern a country, by which the parliament, executive and judiciary must abide by in law making and administering justice. In many countries, these laws are easily changed, while in Australia, a referendum process must take place to alter the wording of the Constitution (Commonwealth of Australia, date unknown, South Australian Schools Constitutional Convention Committee 2001). Since the introduction of the Australian Constitution in January 1901, there have been sufficient proposals to alter and insert sections within the body to reflect the societal values of the day, ensuring the Constitution remains relevant to the Australian people. Although Constitutional reform can be made on a arrangement of matters, the latest protests on Indigenous recognition and racial references within the body of the Constitution has called into question the validity of racial inclusion, and whether amendments should be made to allow for recognition. This essay will focus on the necessity of these amendments and evaluate the likelihood of change through the process of referenda.
When the framers of our revered Constitution came together to produce our governing system, they wanted to avoid the precedent of an all powerful entity that could control its citizens. They broke governments role into three important phases, which were the power to make laws, the power to interpret laws, and the ability to enforce them. To further decentralize these authority holding organizations, they created a system that allowed each of the three sections to have a say in each of the others ability to exercise said authority. This organization of overlapping power is referred to as a checks and balances system and was intended to create three equal powers to govern the United States. Over the years since its creation the initially equal powers have become unbalanced, but to understand how the scales have been tipped, one must understand each branches powers that allow them to carry out their mission, the powers that they have to balance out the other two branches, and the circumstances that have led to a change in the power equation.
Our Constitution establishes three branches of government and defines their very existence. The reason for the three branches is to separate the powers. The phrase “separation of powers” isn’t in the constitution, but it best explains the intention of the Constitution. It is essential that the assignment of lawmaking, enforcing and interpreting be spread out among the separated powers to ensure that all power doesn’t fall into the lap of one group, or even a power-hungry individual. The powers of which I’m speaking that were intentionally separated by way of the Constitution are the Legislative Branch, Executive Branch and finally, the Judicial Branch.
The legislative branch is a bigger branch the the executive branch. The Judicial branch has the constitution and themselves to keep in control of both the executive and legislative branch. This is able to happen because the judicial branch has the constitution and with the constitution they are able to declare if any of the legislative or executive decisions are unconstitutional. To add on to this in document 3 this is where the 22nd amendment comes into place. This document is an example of how we keep our government in control. The 22nd amendment limits the power of the presidency because the president is only allowed to be elected twice for a total of eight years.
The separation of powers is very important in maintaining a balanced government. Separation of powers prevents one person in government from having too much power. In Federalist Paper #47, James Madison said, “The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny…Liberty requires that the three
The principle of separation of powers is laid out in Articles I, II, and III, in effort to avoid tyranny. It is a part of a system called check and balances. The check and balances play the roles of the three branches of government. This system was made so that no one branch will over power the other. The three branches come together and help one another by being independent of the other. The legislative branch consists of the Congress, the judicial branch consists of the courts, and the executive branch consists of the president. For an example, when a bill is in progress and the chief executive (president or governor) does not approve of it, he can reject legislation and return it to the legislature with reasons for the rejection. This is a process called veto power.
One of the features of the Australian constitution is that is it structured in a way that in theory reflects the rule of law. This doctrine, the separation of powers, doctrine is assumed to be a fair structure of government as its principles suggest that power does not lie with one branch, but is spread out amongst the three (legislative, executive and judicial.
Lisa Webley and Harriet Samuels defined the separation of powers as a theory or doctrine that describes the way in which a state organises the distribution of power and function between its different parties. The separation of powers is divided into three branches which are the executive, legislative and Judiciary.