The Separation of Powers in the Presidential Government

The informality of these procedures also reflects the political philosophy that underlies the entire presidential system of the government, especially in the United States of America (USA). The assumption is that the chances of tyranny or dictatorship are reduced insofar as legislature and executive (and judiciary) branches of the government are separated in terms of both institutions and personnel.

In the USA, the principle of checks and balances (for instance, the presidents authority to veto legislation or senates' authority to approve or disapprove president's appointment) is actually corollary to the more fundamental principle of separation of powers.

By distributing a part of the powers of each governmental branch to the other branches of government, the writers of the Constitution intended to provide each branch with the means of ensuring its constitutional integrity. The record of parliamentary government, however, makes it clear that the principle of separation of powers is not essential to democracy; some parliamentary democracy (including those in Great Britain and Scandinavian states) are more democratic than most, if not all, presidential systems of government.

It is necessary to look elsewhere for explanations of the extent of democracy (or authoritarianism) characterising a particular state. Presidential systems, like parliamentary systems, may be relatively democratic or they may be relatively authoritarian.

Popular posts from this blog

What has MCA done to the Chinese community in Malaysia?

Perlukah sesebuah gabungan parti politik kekal secara wajib?

Seek for quick success and instant benefits