IS SEPARATION OF POWER A FALLACY ? - (Blog)
Introduction
"The
accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive and judiciary in the same
hands may justly be pronounced as the very definition of tyranny".
We all know the principle
and object of separation of power, but did we really achieve or is it a mere
fabricated delusion. Let's analyse its true nature as of now and maybe someday
we'll come up with "What's next".
True Nature
Legislature
composes of people's representatives; voting system is used for electing the
members of the legislature. Now these legislative authorities appoint executive
and judicial officers. Despite our public service commission and CADRE Rules,
we all are well aware of the bias prevailing in our system. Don’t we give
absolute power to the legislation at times? Yes, though we have checks and
balances, it does not work all the time.
We have a lot of
instances to understand that the three organs are interdependent.
Public
prosecutors are appointed by the Central or the state respectively (sec -24 of
CrPC); so if an accused who is a supporter or a member of the ruling party, he
can be favoured by the Public prosecutor.
For e.g.: Tandoor case, which witnessed judicial and administrative bias because of the ruling party.
What's Next?
As a rational
thinker, I came up with an idea.
What if the
people are given the power to elect their own administrative and judicial officers?
For e.g.: We can
have an election for the Public prosecutor along with the existing criteria for
selection. It's like selection and election.
Maybe in this way all the three organs can be free from bias and interdependence, which is very hard to implement. However while discussing itself my friend collapsed my thought by saying “don't you think, this people will bring caste in there too". And then i went "ooohhh".So let's leave it to the jurisprudence to come up with a new principle for absolute separation of power.
Problem of fame
"However good a constitution may be,
if those who are implementing it are not good, it will prove to be bad. However
bad a constitution may be, if those implementing it are good, it will prove to
be good"
- Dr.B.R.Ambedkar.
A democratic rule in its
entirety is based on the votes of people. But the problem here is fame, being
famous can only be possible through media and cinema. We need to be famous to
contest in an election; otherwise we don’t stand a chance. People should see
your face often, should know your name, an election candidate need to earn the
trust or someone else should convince us to vote for him/her. (M.G.R's face is
the reason many voted for an unknown candidate). This problem of fame is the
reason for chaos in our system. To become famous, various wrongful means are
adopted (bribe from corporates for election work). Along with fame, the problem
of caste is here too.
Our intention should not only be
for creating a good political structure, it should also be concentrated to
create good leaders without any limits. The limits are media and cinema (fame).
"When wrong is been rightly
done, it ceases to be wrong". And I believe that’s what is happening in
our new world order.
Comments
Post a Comment