Montesquieu's Theory Of Separation Of Powers

2780 Words12 Pages
“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.” - James Madison INTRODUCTION: HISTORY AND BACKGROUND The origin of the doctrine of Separation of Powers can be traced back to the Age of Enlightenment in France (1620s-1780s). It was first articulated by Charles-Louis de Secondat, Baron de La Brède et de Montesquieu (popularly known as Montesquieu) in his book De l 'Esprit des Lois (The Spirit of Laws). In ‘The Spirit of Laws’, Montesquieu argued that “when the legislative and executive powers are united in the same person, or in the same body of magistrates,…show more content…
The doctrine of Separation of Powers in India is as old as the Constitution itself, and was extensively, though, perhaps not exhaustively, discussed in the Constituent Assembly Debates. Emphasis was laid on giving Constitutional Recognition to Separation of Powers by Prof. K.T. Shah, a member of Constituent Assembly. It was to be culled out by Art. 40-A as under: “There shall be complete separation of powers as between the principal organs of the State, viz; the legislative, the executive, and the judicial.” However, this idea was opposed by Shri Hanumathaiyah, who envisioned a functional, harmonious government, instead of complete separation of powers. This would result in a ‘conflicting trinity’, in his…show more content…
v. State of Kerala and Anr. Kesavananda Bharati’s case also held that Separation of Powers creates a system of checks and balances, and demarcation of this power is a basic constitutional feature. It is a part of the Basic Structure of the Constitution. This decision was reaffirmed in the case of Smt. Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Shri Raj Narain. Judicial pronouncements further strengthened this as recently as 2014, in the case of Madras Bar Association v. Union of
Open Document