1. bookVolume 13 (2020): Issue 2 (December 2020)
Journal Details
License
Format
Journal
eISSN
2029-0454
First Published
05 Feb 2009
Publication timeframe
2 times per year
Languages
English
access type Open Access

The Principle of the Separation of Powers: the Ontological Presumption of an Ideologeme

Published Online: 18 Mar 2021
Volume & Issue: Volume 13 (2020) - Issue 2 (December 2020)
Page range: 1 - 23
Received: 04 May 2020
Accepted: 03 Nov 2020
Journal Details
License
Format
Journal
eISSN
2029-0454
First Published
05 Feb 2009
Publication timeframe
2 times per year
Languages
English
Abstract

The theoretical materiality of the principle of the separation of powers is beyond doubt. This principle is inevitable in discourse on the constitutional framework of the state, democracy and the rule of law, and it has its own form of expression in positive law. Although the relevance of the principle of the separation of powers in social discourse creates the illusion of the conceivability of its content, the ontological questions concerning this principle remain largely vague. This can be explained by considering two aspects. First, as established in scientific doctrines and constitutional forms of expression, the principle of the separation of powers has become a social and legal ideologeme; it approximates an axiom which is no longer substantiated anew. Second, discourse concerning ontology is always complicated, since it calls to question the essence itself. It is complicated not only because it requires a particular intellectual effort and academic courage, but also because the outcome of such discourse is unpredictable and can lead either to the ideologeme being confirmed to be true or being unexpectedly revised, or perhaps can even lead to the demise of what has so far been self-evident, unquestionable, obvious, universally known, etc. This article analyses the ontological essence of the principle of the separation of powers – an approach towards the human being, whereby meaning is given to the consequent system of causal relationships within the whole theory. Discourse in this article takes ontological issues as its object of inquiry: why did we decide to separate powers and how many of these separated powers are there?

Keywords

1. Adams, John. John Adams to Thomas Jefferson, with Postscript by Abigail Adams, 2 February 1816 // https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Jefferson/03-09-02-0285. Search in Google Scholar

2. Alder, John. Constitutional and Administrative law. 8th edition. London: Palgrave MacMillan, 2011. Search in Google Scholar

3. Ardant, Philippe. Institutions politiques et droit constitutionnel. Paris: LGDJ, 2001. Search in Google Scholar

4. Aristotelis. Rinktiniai raštai (Selected Works). Vilnius: Mintis, 1990. Search in Google Scholar

5. Berkmanas, Tomas. “Motives in support of judicial activism: critique and ethics of restrained adjudication as an alternative.” Baltic Journal of Law & Politics 2:1 (2009): 112–134 //10.2478/v10076-009-0007-7 Search in Google Scholar

6. Bumke, Christian, and Andreas Voßkuhle. German Constitutional Law. Introduction, cases, and principles. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019.10.1093/law/9780198808091.001.0001 Search in Google Scholar

7. BVerfGE 95, 1, 15 – Sudumfahrung Stendal // https://www.servat.unibe.ch/tools/DfrInfo?Command=ShowPrintVersion&Name=bv095001. Search in Google Scholar

8. Chagnollaud, Dominique. Droit constitutionnel contemporain. Théorie générale. Les grands régimes étrangers. Tome 1. Paris: Armand Colin, 2001. Search in Google Scholar

9. Delpérée, Francis. Le droit constitutionnel de la Belgique. Paris: LGDJ, 2000.10.3917/rfdc.048.0675 Search in Google Scholar

10. Favoreu, Louis, and Loïc Philip. Le Conseil constitutionnel. Paris: Puf, 2005.10.3917/puf.favor.2005.01 Search in Google Scholar

11. Favoreu, Louis. Konstituciniai teismai (Constitutional Courts). Vilnius: Garnelis, 2001. Search in Google Scholar

12. Hobbes, Thomas. Leviatanas (Leviathan). Vilnius: Pradai, 1999. Search in Google Scholar

13. Hogue, Arthur R. Origins of Common Law. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 1986. https://content.sciendo.com/downloadpdf/journals/bjlp/2/1/article-p112.xml. Search in Google Scholar

14. Kantas, Imanuelis. Praktinio proto Kritika (The Critique of Practical Reason). Vilnius: Mintis, 1987. Search in Google Scholar

15. Kelsen, Hans. General Theory of Law and State. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1945. Search in Google Scholar

16. Kortmann, Constantijn A.J.M., and Paul P.T. Bovend’Eert. Dutch Constitutional Law. The Hague: Kluwer law International, 2000. Search in Google Scholar

17. Kuhn, Thomas S. Mokslo Revoliucijų struktūra (The Structure of Scientific Revolutions). Vilnius: Pradai, 2003. Search in Google Scholar

18. Locke, John. Second Treatise of Government. Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Company, 1980. Search in Google Scholar

19. Lutz, Donald S. The Origins of American Constitutionalism. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1988. Search in Google Scholar

20. Madison, James. “The Structure of the Government Must Furnish the Proper Checks and Balances Between the Different Departments”: 242–275. In: R. C. Kesler and C. Rossiter, eds. The Federalist Papers. New York, 1999. Search in Google Scholar

21. Mesonis, Gediminas, Konstitucijos interpretavimo metodologiniai pagrindai (Methodological Basis for the Interpretation of the Constitution). Vilnius: Registrų centras, 2010. Search in Google Scholar

22. Mesonis, Gediminas. “Valdžių padalijimo teorija ir jos įgyvendinimo modeliai: kriterijų kokybės problema” (The Separation of Powers: The Problem of the Criteria Quality). Jurispudencija Vol. 61(53) (2004): 5–18. Search in Google Scholar

23. Monteskjė, Šarlis L. “Apie įstatymų dvasią” (On the Spirit of Laws): 285–311; in: Filosofijos istorijos chrestomatija. Naujieji amžiai (Chrestomathy on the History of Philosophy. New Ages) (Vilnius: Mintis, 1987). Search in Google Scholar

24. Munro, Colin R. Studies in Constitutional Law. London: Butterworths, 1987. Search in Google Scholar

25. Rousseau, Dominique. Droit du contentieux constitutionnel. Préface de Georges Vedel. 4e édition. Paris: Montchrestien, 1995. Search in Google Scholar

26. Sabine, George H., and Thomas L. Thorson. Politinių teorijų istorija (History of Political Theories). Vilnius: Pradai, 1995. Search in Google Scholar

27. Saunders, Cheryl. “Theoretical underpinnings of separation of powers”: 66–86. In: Gary Jacobsohn and Miguel Schor, eds. Comparative Constitutional Theory. Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2018. Search in Google Scholar

28. Tamošaitis, Antanas. Istoriškoji teisės mokykla Vokietijoje. Istorizmo reakcija prieš racionalizmą XIX šimtmečio pradžiFoje (The German Historical School of Law. The Reaction of Historicism against Rationalism at the Beginning of the 19th Century). Kaunas: Printing House Spindulio b-vės spaustuvė, 1928. Search in Google Scholar

29. Turpin, Dominique. Contentieux Constitutionnel. Paris: Puf, 1986. Search in Google Scholar

30. Varga, András Zs. From Ideal to Idol? The Concept of Rule of Law. Budapest: Dialóg Campus, 2019. Search in Google Scholar

31. Weber, Albrecht. European Constitutions Compared. München: Verlag C.H. Beck oHG, 2019. Search in Google Scholar

32. Weber, Max. Protestantiškoji etika ir kapitalizmo dvasia (The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism). Vilnius: Pradai, 1997. Search in Google Scholar

Recommended articles from Trend MD

Plan your remote conference with Sciendo