THE REQUISITE DIVISION OF THE POWERS OF REPRESENTATIVE ASSEMBLIES
Representative government should ideally separate the powers of legislation and administration, with a clear line between elected representatives and appointed officials. However, in practice, elected assemblies have often claimed authority to both legislate and govern. This combination can lead to unchecked power, similar to absolute rule, where no guidelines restrict the authority of the assembly. Such power, even in the hands of well-intentioned representatives, can result in arbitrary decisions that lack a foundation in justice.
Constitutions aim to prevent arbitrary actions but mostly fall short of fully achieving that goal. Consequently, many people mistakenly equate arbitrary actions with unconstitutional actions, ignoring that a constitution may still allow arbitrary decisions. A supreme power must justify its actions under general rules, even if a majority supports a specific action. Any change in rules must involve an explicit commitment to new principles.
Legislation, as the true exercise of power, should focus on long-term principles rather than immediate decisions. It serves the broader community and considers future conditions and needs. Unlike constitution-making, which is more static, legislation should be an ongoing process that adapts to new situations.
To effectively manage these responsibilities, a three-tiered system is needed: one body for constitutional matters, another for continual improvement of laws, and a third for day-to-day governance. This separation of roles is crucial for maintaining justice and preventing the misuse of power.
Representative government should ideally separate the powers of legislation and administration, with a clear line between elected representatives and appointed officials. However, in practice, elected assemblies have often claimed authority to both legislate and govern. This combination can lead to unchecked power, similar to absolute rule, where no guidelines restrict the authority of the assembly. Such power, even in the hands of well-intentioned representatives, can result in arbitrary decisions that lack a foundation in justice.
Constitutions aim to prevent arbitrary actions but mostly fall short of fully achieving that goal. Consequently, many people mistakenly equate arbitrary actions with unconstitutional actions, ignoring that a constitution may still allow arbitrary decisions. A supreme power must justify its actions under general rules, even if a majority supports a specific action. Any change in rules must involve an explicit commitment to new principles.
Legislation, as the true exercise of power, should focus on long-term principles rather than immediate decisions. It serves the broader community and considers future conditions and needs. Unlike constitution-making, which is more static, legislation should be an ongoing process that adapts to new situations.
To effectively manage these responsibilities, a three-tiered system is needed: one body for constitutional matters, another for continual improvement of laws, and a third for day-to-day governance. This separation of roles is crucial for maintaining justice and preventing the misuse of power.