Separation two thirds of majority from the total

      Separation of powers can be defined as division of government
responsibilities or jobs into certain specific function as to avoid overlapping
responsibilities. This division is to prevent the dominated power in a certain
division as well as to provide a system of checks and balances in a way that
divisions can check between one another, and if there are any divisions that
become too strong, the other division will help to balance it. Usually, there
are three separation of division which are division who makes law
(Legislative), division that carries out the laws that have been made
(Executive) and lastly, division that also known as courts where they decide
whether the laws that currently implement have been broken or not (Judicial).

      In
Malaysia, there is no division of government responsibilities into certain
function such as executive and legislative. Malaysia have type of organization
which is cabinet. Cabinet of Malaysia is led by the Prime Minister and it is an
executive branch of Malaysia’s government. Prime Minister should come from the
Dewan Rakyat as it is a must in a democratic country. Based on Article 43 of the constitution, only
members of houses of Parliament can be selected to become members of the
cabinet. Ceremonial executive who stands as monarchy power, the Yang di-Pertuan
Agong play an essential part in the Parliament and also Separation of powers in
Malaysia. This had stated clearly in Federal constitution which are in the article of 121, 44 and 39. In Malaysia,
administration must follow body of laws’ rule only. If there is anything in
contrast, it will consider as null and void. Body of laws are being use as a
tradition including for fundamental rights and liberties. Therefore, there is
no difference between Bill of rights in Malaysia and Bill of Human Rights Act 1998 in England. This
fundamental right of an individual had been mentioned in second part of Federal
Constitution and thus, it cannot be change in a normal way but need to have two
thirds of majority from the total numbers of legislature. This might be seeming
as fundamental rights and individual are secure in the body of law but in
reality, only some part of them are based on the law, while others are
depending on certain qualifications. This make it more delusional than the
truth in reality. This issue can be clearly seen in article 8 of Federal Constitution which are freedom of speech,
peacefully and calm assembly and association but parliament can force some
restrictions as to maintain the security, community serenity and morality of
Malaysia. Parliament had modified the Sedition
Act 1948 and make it as fault to question about sovereignty powers,
advantage of rulers, national language of Malaysia which is Bahasa Melayu,
Malays and natives of Sarawak and Sabah that have a special position and
allowable interest of other society. Moreover, with new clause (4) into article 63 of Federal Constitution had made
Parliamentary to limit the using of their words that they had enjoyed the
absolute immunity and visible before. Case of Mark Koding v Pubic Prosecutor 1982 had shown the limitation that
caused by new clause (4) to article of
63(2). In this case, Mark Koding who are the member of Parliament from
Sabah was to be blame as he saying that Chinese and Tamil school should be stop
or terminate and the usage of Tamil and Mandarin language for the road sign
must be restricted. His statement can cause race riot in Malaysia as Malaysia
is a multi-racial country. The breach of separation of powers can be seen in
the last part of check and balances where the declaration of emergency by Yang
di-Pertuan Agong do not have any requirement to be refer. Yang di-Pertuan Agong
only made decision by his discretionary powers or advices from government
itself. This issue had been questioned by the case of Stephen Kalong Ningkan v Government of Malaysia and this had been
settled by modify the clause 8 to
article 150 of Federal Constitution that give Yang di-Pertuan Agong full
power to make a final decision and conclusive, and need to make sure that it
cannot be challenged or being question by any court anywhere. In the case of Dato Seri Anuar Ibrahim v Public Prosecutor,
the amendment by FCJ Haidar had stated no challenge can be done as to continue
to implement the rule that made under Article
150 even though it seems not fair. FCJ Haidar also suggested that it should
be signed by legislature not the courts that disagree with the modification.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

      In
United Kingdom, Separation of Powers is implemented through conventions and
common law tradition. Often, members of one organ of government are also
consist of members from other parties. Naturally and legally, Queen act as ‘the
Queen in Parliament’ or monarchy itself become a leader of all three
government’s organs. The Queen is also the legislature that approve the bill to
make it as law. She acts as Executive and Judiciary as She has power to
pardoning individuals. However, monarch play a very little personal
constitutional power. Executive can be recognized as law officers of the Crown.
Governmental body consist of House of Lords and House of Commons that usually
only approved bills that is needed through procedure and conventions which has
been fixed in administration. Meanwhile, Parliament can make law as they
determined and decide until what extend Separation of powers in United Kingdom
can be argue and this is due to the existence of doctrine of parliamentary
supremacy. Next, the Lord Chancellor position who are the most senior judge
always become a controversial issue and later this problem had solved by making
a change in Constitutional Reform Bill that is published in February 2004.
Judicial authority had mentioned that separation of powers is an important
thing in law of United Kingdom which is also stated by Lord Diplock in the case of R v Hinds (1979). Any problem between
courts and executive, Human Rights Act
1988 will actually help to solved it. In this Human Rights Act, the courts
had been given a right to take an action towards and executive operation and
also give power to public authorities to control law and avoid executive from
over used their power. Thus, Human Rights Act actually shows any changes and
emphasis to protect rights of individuals in United Kingdom.

 

      Separation of powers can be defined as division of government
responsibilities or jobs into certain specific function as to avoid overlapping
responsibilities. This division is to prevent the dominated power in a certain
division as well as to provide a system of checks and balances in a way that
divisions can check between one another, and if there are any divisions that
become too strong, the other division will help to balance it. Usually, there
are three separation of division which are division who makes law
(Legislative), division that carries out the laws that have been made
(Executive) and lastly, division that also known as courts where they decide
whether the laws that currently implement have been broken or not (Judicial).

      In
Malaysia, there is no division of government responsibilities into certain
function such as executive and legislative. Malaysia have type of organization
which is cabinet. Cabinet of Malaysia is led by the Prime Minister and it is an
executive branch of Malaysia’s government. Prime Minister should come from the
Dewan Rakyat as it is a must in a democratic country. Based on Article 43 of the constitution, only
members of houses of Parliament can be selected to become members of the
cabinet. Ceremonial executive who stands as monarchy power, the Yang di-Pertuan
Agong play an essential part in the Parliament and also Separation of powers in
Malaysia. This had stated clearly in Federal constitution which are in the article of 121, 44 and 39. In Malaysia,
administration must follow body of laws’ rule only. If there is anything in
contrast, it will consider as null and void. Body of laws are being use as a
tradition including for fundamental rights and liberties. Therefore, there is
no difference between Bill of rights in Malaysia and Bill of Human Rights Act 1998 in England. This
fundamental right of an individual had been mentioned in second part of Federal
Constitution and thus, it cannot be change in a normal way but need to have two
thirds of majority from the total numbers of legislature. This might be seeming
as fundamental rights and individual are secure in the body of law but in
reality, only some part of them are based on the law, while others are
depending on certain qualifications. This make it more delusional than the
truth in reality. This issue can be clearly seen in article 8 of Federal Constitution which are freedom of speech,
peacefully and calm assembly and association but parliament can force some
restrictions as to maintain the security, community serenity and morality of
Malaysia. Parliament had modified the Sedition
Act 1948 and make it as fault to question about sovereignty powers,
advantage of rulers, national language of Malaysia which is Bahasa Melayu,
Malays and natives of Sarawak and Sabah that have a special position and
allowable interest of other society. Moreover, with new clause (4) into article 63 of Federal Constitution had made
Parliamentary to limit the using of their words that they had enjoyed the
absolute immunity and visible before. Case of Mark Koding v Pubic Prosecutor 1982 had shown the limitation that
caused by new clause (4) to article of
63(2). In this case, Mark Koding who are the member of Parliament from
Sabah was to be blame as he saying that Chinese and Tamil school should be stop
or terminate and the usage of Tamil and Mandarin language for the road sign
must be restricted. His statement can cause race riot in Malaysia as Malaysia
is a multi-racial country. The breach of separation of powers can be seen in
the last part of check and balances where the declaration of emergency by Yang
di-Pertuan Agong do not have any requirement to be refer. Yang di-Pertuan Agong
only made decision by his discretionary powers or advices from government
itself. This issue had been questioned by the case of Stephen Kalong Ningkan v Government of Malaysia and this had been
settled by modify the clause 8 to
article 150 of Federal Constitution that give Yang di-Pertuan Agong full
power to make a final decision and conclusive, and need to make sure that it
cannot be challenged or being question by any court anywhere. In the case of Dato Seri Anuar Ibrahim v Public Prosecutor,
the amendment by FCJ Haidar had stated no challenge can be done as to continue
to implement the rule that made under Article
150 even though it seems not fair. FCJ Haidar also suggested that it should
be signed by legislature not the courts that disagree with the modification.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

      In
United Kingdom, Separation of Powers is implemented through conventions and
common law tradition. Often, members of one organ of government are also
consist of members from other parties. Naturally and legally, Queen act as ‘the
Queen in Parliament’ or monarchy itself become a leader of all three
government’s organs. The Queen is also the legislature that approve the bill to
make it as law. She acts as Executive and Judiciary as She has power to
pardoning individuals. However, monarch play a very little personal
constitutional power. Executive can be recognized as law officers of the Crown.
Governmental body consist of House of Lords and House of Commons that usually
only approved bills that is needed through procedure and conventions which has
been fixed in administration. Meanwhile, Parliament can make law as they
determined and decide until what extend Separation of powers in United Kingdom
can be argue and this is due to the existence of doctrine of parliamentary
supremacy. Next, the Lord Chancellor position who are the most senior judge
always become a controversial issue and later this problem had solved by making
a change in Constitutional Reform Bill that is published in February 2004.
Judicial authority had mentioned that separation of powers is an important
thing in law of United Kingdom which is also stated by Lord Diplock in the case of R v Hinds (1979). Any problem between
courts and executive, Human Rights Act
1988 will actually help to solved it. In this Human Rights Act, the courts
had been given a right to take an action towards and executive operation and
also give power to public authorities to control law and avoid executive from
over used their power. Thus, Human Rights Act actually shows any changes and
emphasis to protect rights of individuals in United Kingdom.

 

x

Hi!
I'm Mary!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out