Why is the Executive not supposed to replace the Judiciary
Supreme Court deems bulldozer demolition a 'chilling sight,' asserts the Executive cannot replace the Judiciary.
Certainly! Here are some points explaining why the Executive is not supposed to replace the Judiciary:
- The separation of powers: The Constitution typically establishes three branches of government – Executive, Legislative, and Judicial – each with its own distinct powers. This separation is essential to maintain a system of checks and balances.
- Judicial independence: The Judiciary is meant to be independent from the Executive and Legislative branches to ensure fair and impartial decision-making. Allowing the Executive to replace the Judiciary would undermine this independence.
- Upholding the rule of law: The Judiciary plays a crucial role in interpreting laws and ensuring that they are applied fairly and consistently. By replacing the Judiciary, the Executive could potentially manipulate legal outcomes for its own benefit, eroding the rule of law.
Answered
5 months ago