Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1 . Introduction
This paper seeks to discuss the import and impact of the doctrine The meaning of separation of powers in United States of America
of separation of powers (‘the doctrine’) in South Africa. It discusses and France shows a variety of meanings. The concept may mean
the meaning of the doctrine, its origin, historical development, at least three different things:
its main objectives (in line with the writer’s views), its place in (a) That the same person should not form part of more than
our Constitution and its application by the Constitutional Court. one of the three organs of government, for example, that
The doctrine is discussed in the context of seeking to contribute ministers should not sit in parliament;
towards a debate on whether there is an off-side rule in its practical (b) that one organ of government should not control or interfere
application. A brief comparative overview of the some foreign with the work of another, for example, that the executive should
constitutions on the doctrine is presented as a prelude to the not interfere in judicial decisions;
conclusion proposed. (c) that one organ of government should not exercise the
functions of another, for example, that ministers should not
have legislative powers.3
2 . Meaning of separation of powers
The doctrine means that specific functions, duties and respon- Sight should not be lost of the fact that complete separation of
sibilities are allocated to distinctive institutions with a defined powers is not possible -neither in theory nor in practice. Some
means of competence and jurisdiction. It is a separation of three overlapping is unavoidable; given the fact that we talk here of
main spheres of government, namely, Legislative, Executive and spheres of what is in fact one government.
Judiciary. Within the constitutional framework the meaning of
the terms legislative, executive and judicial authority are of im-
portance: 3 . The origin of the doctrine of separation of powers
(a) Legislative authority – Is the power to make, amend and The modern design of the doctrine of separation of powers is to
repeal rules of law. be found in the constitutional theory of John Locke (1632-1704).
(b) Executive authority – Is the power to execute and enforce He wrote in his second treaties of Civil Government as follows:
rules of law. ‘It may be too great a temptation for the humane frailty, apt to
(c) Judicial authority – Is the power; if there is a dispute, to grasp at powers, for the same persons who have power of making
determine what the law is and how it should be applied in laws, to have also in their hands the power to execute them,
the disputes.1 whereby they may exempt themselves from the law, both in its
making and execution to their own private advantage’.4
The doctrine of separation of powers means ordinarily that if
one of the three spheres of government is responsible for the It is clear that he was advocating the division of government
enactment of rules of law, that body shall not also be charged functions into legislative, executive and judicial. However it is
with their execution or with judicial decision about them. The the French philosopher (jurist) Montesquieu (1689–1755) who is
same will be said of the executive authority, it is not supposed to usually credited with the first formulation of the doctrine of
enact law or to administer justice and the judicial authority should separation of powers. He based his exposition on the British
not enact or execute laws. Constitution. In the pertinent chapter of his well celebrated work,
Lord Mustill in R v Home Secretary, Ex p Fine Brigades Union2 L’ Esprit des Lois (1748),5 he purported to describe the British
defined the doctrine of separation of powers in England as: Constitutional system of the 18th Century6 so that it might serve
‘It is a feature of the peculiary British conception of the Sepa- as an example to France of a political dispensation founded on
ration of powers that Parliament, the executive and the courts liberty, which according to him, was the supreme objective of a
have each their distinct and largely exclusive domain. Parliament political society. JD van Der Vyver observed that Montesquieu
has a legally unchallengeable right to make whatever laws it was a poor observer, since the British constitutional system did
thinks right. The executive carries on the administration of the not comply then, neither does it today, with the basic norms of
country in accordance with the powers conferred on it by law. the idea of separation of powers.7 Even if it were so, Montesquieu’s
The courts interpret the laws, and see that they are obeyed.’ analysis of the British system, is generally accepted as political
ideal which is worth pursuing.
Montesquieu recognised the three basic pillars of state
* Paper delivered at the Middle Temple South Africa Conference, September 2012. authority, which includes the executive, legislature and the judicial