Separation of Powers between the United States and the United Kingdom in Law - Essay Example

The United States of America (U.S.) and the United Kingdom (U.K) both consist of a first-world country but there are many differences in their structure of government from the point of view of the law and the application. The purpose of this paper is to identify the structural differences in the application of the separation of powers between the United States and the United Kingdom in Law.

Separation of Powers tends to be a feature of a republic with a President and is a feature of the current U.S. model. The other model is a fusion model that exists in the U.K.and is more common in parliamentary systems. A main difference between the two systems is the way in which the different branches of government are created and the choices presented to the electorate. The main characteristic of this is that the legislative branch creates the executive branch, where complete separation of power exists stipulates that the executive, (most of the time- a president) is elected by the electorate. It is explained that in a fusion-based model, the electorate elects the legislative branch with subsequently creates the executive branch.

“As Professor Cheryl Saunders writes, "...the intermixture of institutions [in the UK] is such that it is almost impossible to describe it as a separation of powers." In a separation of powers, the national legislature does not select the person or persons the executive; instead, the executive is chosen by other means (direct popular election, electoral college selection, etc.) In a parliamentary system, when the term of the legislature ends, so too may the tenure of the executive selected by that legislature. Although in a presidential system the executive's term may or may not coincide with the legislature's, their selection is technically independent of the legislature.”

Another major difference between the two systems is the way in which and the number of checks and balances in place. In the U.S., at the time of founding Madison argued that restraints should be placed on both the minority and majority to prevent the majority from ruling with an iron fist. This makes the U.S. system deliberately inefficient. For example, the President has the capability. In the U.K. the majority householder has control of the house and now more for ceremonial reasons it must be passed by the monarch. These changes in the balance of power create the main differences between the U.S. and U.K systems.

In conclusion, the primary and most basic distinction between the two systems is the way in which decisions are made, whether or not the majority holds the power and the methodology used to create each branch of the government. The independence of these branches is important for many reasons, but voters must stay involved. The U.K. system may be much more efficient but is too truly representative of the people who elected them.