Answer:
The doctrine of Separation of Power refers to the model of governance where the executive, legislative and judicial powers are not concentrated in one body but instead divided into different branches. The degree of separation varies. ‘Strict separation’ implies branches are independent of each other. On the other hand, ‘checks and balances’ implies that reasonable checks and balances are in place to check misuse of power.
Articles in the Consitution facilitating Separation of Powers are as follows-
- Article 50: State shall take steps to separate the judiciary from the executive. This is for the purpose of ensuring the independence of the judiciary.
- Article 122 and 212: validity of proceedings in Parliament and the Legislatures cannot be called into question in any Court.
- Judicial conduct of a Judge of the Supreme Court and the High Courts cannot be discussed in the Parliament and the State Legislature, according to Article 121 and 211 of the Constitution.
- Articles 53 and 154 respectively, provide that the executive power of the Union and the State shall be vested with the President and the Governor and they enjoy immunity from civil and criminal liability.
- Article 361: the President or the Governor shall not be answerable to any court for the exercise and performance of the powers and duties of his office.
How SOP in India is based on the principles of Checks and Balances:
Although prima facie it appears that the Constitution has based itself upon the doctrine of strict separation of powers. But, if studied carefully, it is clear that it is more inclined towards proper checks and balances.
- The doctrine has not been awarded Constitutional status. The Constitution doesn’t explicitly back any doctrine.
- Article 75 implies the executive is collectively responsible to the Lok Sabha.
- Articles 13, 32, 131-136, 143, 226 and 246 imply the doctrine of Judicial Review. Judiciary can strike down any legislation that violates the Constitution.
- Judgment of SC in Ram Jawaya Case:-
- Supreme Court of India (SC) had to deal with the question of the extent of executive power and executive function in a situation where the executive was alleged to have violated the fundamental rights of the citizens vested in them by the Constitution of India without a legislative sanction.
- This landmark judgment delivered by our apex court in the wake of our independence is now acting as a touchstone for understanding the federal feature of the Indian Constitution through the separation of powers.
- Even years after this judgment, it becomes an important case not only in understanding the separation of powers in the Indian context but also worldwide as it discusses the basis for the new understanding of the doctrine of separation of powers in present times.
From the above it is clear that
- First, the Indian constitution ensures that the different branches control each other. This is intended to make them accountable to each other – these are the ‘checks’;
- Secondly, the constitution divides power between the different branches of government – these are the ‘balances’. Balance aims to ensure that no individual or group of people in government is ‘all-powerful’. Power is shared and not concentrated in one branch.
It’s quite evident that the Constitution of India does not accept the principle of strict separation of powers. Though it appears dilatory of the doctrine of separation of powers, it is essential in order to enable a just and equitable functioning and close coordination.
please review…
payment id:MOJO9a29300A6177473
The overall content is decent.
What you could have done in order to make a better structure is that you could divide the content discussing the separation of power and separately discuss each of them.
For example, give subheadings like Legislature and Executive; Legislature and Judiciary; and Executive and Judiciary and discuss provisions of checks and balances in each part.
Also, later on, you have to mention the concept of constitutional supremacy before ending the answer.
This could fetch you more marks.
The content of your answer will remain the same, just the structuring will be on a better footing.
The content is well explained and good use of articles to show your depth of knowledge of the topic.
MOJO9a02U00D28381180
How can the legislature appoint the CJI?
The explanation of the answer is weak but the direction is right.
The discussion needs maturity given the importance of the question.
What you could have done in order to make a better structure is that you could divide the content discussing the separation of power and separately discuss each of them.
For example, give subheadings like Legislature and Executive; Legislature and Judiciary; and Executive and Judiciary and discuss provisions of checks and balances in each part.
Also, later on, you have to mention the concept of constitutional supremacy before ending the answer.
Work on expressing your knowledge in a better and lucid manner and try to give more dimensions in your answers.
Keep practising.
Read the answer of Sahithya. See how she has approached this question in the same number of pages and covered all the necessary arguments.
Payment ID:MOJO9b01O00A90839766
Please review
The intro and the subsequent paragraph are well discussed.
The use of small diagrams is fine and it presents a clear picture. Keep it up. These small things go a long way in improving your marks. Plus this shows the conceptual clarity in you.
Perfect main body of the answer.
Your structure of this part is superb and the use of relevant articles is satisfactory.
The 2nd part of the answer is also well managed. The judgements quoted are decent and the end analysis is top class.
It is good that you briefly discussed the issues with SOP through that flowchart.
Excellent conclusion.
This is an ideal candidate for the model answer for this question! Keep it up!