Jump to content
SAU Community

  

22 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

In your opinon, should the elected parliament be the sole law-makers in Australia?

Why should the elected parliament be the sole law-makers in Australia?

Should other bodies such as the executive (government) and the judicial body (courts) make laws?

If yes, why should these bodies make laws that against the theory of separation of powers popularised by Montesquieu 1748?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/78808-australia-legal-system/
Share on other sites

Hmmm, this is a good recall of my Intro to Law unit @ uni.....

No, the elected parliament should NOT be the sole makers of law in the Australian legal system. In a very concise nutshell......

There are a number of reasons for this.

Firstly, in relation to the seperation of powers.

The seperation of powers is necessary to insure the existance of an equal and democratic society, hence, to place 'absolute power' in the hands of politicians (of all people!) would mostly result in laws being passed, against the will of the general public, leading to corruption, misrepresentation, misfeasence of public office etc.....

It is necessary for more than one of the executive bodies to be involved in the law-making process, more importantly, the judiciary. The judiciary provide legal insight into problems and their knowledge of the law, should allow them to come to a sound decision in relation to public legal matters.

I suppose, in the end, the saying hold true that "absolute power corrupts absolutely" thus to avoid such consequences, it is necessary to observe a general 'spread' in power, in order to maintain a system of law that is both efficient and effective. If you're writing some sort of an essay, I'd elaborate on the aforementioned concepts......

Hope that helps........man I'm so bored, had nothing better to do at 12.15am on a Wednesday night (thursday morning)

PS: Montesquieu, although an ideallist, had very admirable intentions with his thoughts on governance.

His theory of separation is a good one, in that it has a supposed 'fail safe' for any one branch of government becoming too powerful and, in his 'trias politica' sence - judge, jury and executioner... if you remove these checks and balances (his term) - then problems arise. However, allowing one arm of government to create laws carte blanche also causes problems - so the other branches cannot be completely removed from the process.

It's a fine line.

The extension to his theory is that the 4th branch is the press. Primarily as a 'who polices the police' style watchdog. Anyone who says the press isn't involved in the legal process in a democratic society is certainly not cynical enough ;)

That said - i'm sure the Baron wouldn't be too impresed with the current state of constitution in a number of governments which based upon his theories. Good luck :P

Some info here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_powers

Baron Montesquieu:

montesquieu_1.jpg

* and yes, I picked the silliest picture I could find :D

Time for me to go home...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Hope you aren't too sore after that one, might take a day or 2 to notice yet and I guess it is a loooooong drive home. On the bright side, tube frame front end is a thing at superlap, right?
    • https://www.facebook.com/share/p/18rmVb1SKB/ 
    • The chart of front pressure to rear pressure (with one being on the x axis and the other being on the y axis) is not a straight line on a typical proportioning valve. At lower pressures there is a straight line with one slope, and at higher pressures that changes to a lower slope. That creates a bend in the line at that pressure, called the knee point. If you do not change the proportionng as the pressure gets higher, you will suffer excessive pressure (at one end of the car or the other, depending on which way you look at the proportioning action) and then get lockups at that end. The HFM BM57, from my memory of previous discussions, is based on the BM57 from a different car (to a Skyline), with a different requirement for the location of the knee point and the distribution of pressure front to rear, and so is not a good choice for an upgrade on a Skyline. Here's a couple of links to some old posts, one from here, one from elsewhere. A lot of it pertains to adjustable prop valves, but the idea is the same. There are plenty of discussions on here about this issue from al the many years of people wanting a cheap/accessible option. https://grassrootsmotorsports.com/forum/grm/learn-me-brake-proportioning-valves/236880/page1/ https://grassrootsmotorsports.com/forum/grm/learn-me-brake-proportioning-valves/236880/page1/  
    • Yeah dunno why johhny posted that here with no context, just post on FB/insta bro where he put it up?  Laine had an off at T4 during Thurs prac, he's ok, car is less than perfect, they are done for the weekend, he can fill in the rest. Bando also binned it like 100m up the road.   
    • I feel there must have been a FB/insta post and the weekend did not start well at all I hope everyone is all okay
×
×
  • Create New...