“one constitutional arrangements? To answer this question first

“one must give one power a ballast,
so to speak, to put it in a position to resist another.” Is the concept of
separation of powers guiding the British constitutional arrangements? To answer
this question first we must look towards what the aims and functions of the
constitution and weigh it against the achievements of Separation of Powers
towards that objective. Approach taken to the word “guiding” is one creating an
assumption that Separation of Powers will guide the constitution to its
objective. Especially allowing that the British constitution is uncodified it
renders it very diverse, making it less distinct whether Separation of Powers
is “the guiding” principle.

Intro quote: Montesquieu De
l’Espirit de Lois 1748 ( The Spirit of the Laws) Book V chapter 14

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

The constitution as described by Wheare is a “system of government
of a country, the collection of rules which establish and regulate or govern
the government”. Displaying the constitution to be a set of rules created for
the public actors that the public agrees to follow, since they aim to further
the well-being of the public itself. Due to it being a representative of the
laws people are willing to follow, it also holds and creates a sense of
identity of the people it represents. Combined with its practical functions it
aims to make power accountable, manage disputes and legitimise the power of the
government to name a few

Separation of Powers is one of the key principles limiting power
by spreading it across “three monoliths.” Allocating state power such as creation
of law to the legislature. Giving legitimate power to the parliament using democratic
process also seen within Parliamentary Sovereignty. However as much as it gives
state power it also limits it to remain order and avoid tyranny. This approach
enables the establishment and procreation of human rights and societal norms. Since
it aims to limit any misuse of power though the use of accountability.

As “power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts
absolutely” another aim of separation of powers is to keep politicians
accountable for their actions to avoid misuse of power. To maintain a consensus
and realise the primary objective of Separation of Powers in the form of a “functional
democratic state”.

Establishing a precedent of control in other areas such as
the Judiciary accompanied by elections. Also, one of the main roles of the
legislature is to scrutinise the executive. It does so in many forms ranging
from parliamentary debate to judicial reviews, including power of courts
exemplified by Declaration of Incapability, breach of Human Rights or
international law as seen in Thoburn v Sunderland City Council.

Creating a legitimate power in a democratic state which
through separation of powers rendered control, allows a representation of
people. Thereby furthering their well-being as their interests are represented.
Keeping of the consensus, by scrutinising misuse of power although arguably
political pressure could be a more effective agent for such cause. As well as
providing a legal basis through creation of an independent judiciary, elected
executive and legislature since candidates will be elected on mandate approved by
the majority, making most future legal changes foreseeable.

Miller case is profoundly focused upon separation of powers,
since it shows the judiciary reviewing legislature to reach a constitutional
decision on who should trigger art.50. It does so since the judiciary’s role
under Separation of Powers is to interpret law created by the legislature, and
based on the law predominantly European Communities Act 1972 they were able to
scrutinise the executive for unconstitutional use of prerogative powers.

“The constitutional principle is that when the power of
the Executive to interfere with the property or liberty of subjects has been
placed under Parliamentary control, and directly regulated by statute”

The quote confirms that prerogative powers fall under the
control of statue, the judiciary assess and interpret the law. In result
placing the control over the use of prerogative powers in the hands of the
judiciary who may interpret the law how they wish. Placing power within the
judiciary’s hands to rule against the improper use of law which would harm
constitutional arrangements. As not only is the use of prerogative powers in
most cases unconstitutional since limited by precedent also ruling that the
legislature must trigger art.50 creates a more democratic decision since people
elect the legislature legitimising their power to create an Act triggering
art.50, giving a fairer representation to British people in a decision reached
through a referendum.

Without Separation of Powers we would not be able to have
such a case, since it allows for the courts to scrutinise the work of the
executive as well as rule against it, setting a precedent of promoting
constitutional values such as accountability. In this case, holding the
executive accountable for intent to incorrectly use power given to them through
interpretation of legislature as well as referral to constitutional
arrangements.

A process impossible without judicial
independence allowing for the court to reach a decision the government of the
day may not like, it is crucial for the judiciary to be capable of it to avoid
misuse of power from other branches. Although arguably they have little control
over the legislature which holds Parliamentary sovereignty, still in this case
allowing for a greater scope of accountability, democracy and upkeep of
constitutional arrangements.