Contents
I. INTRODUCTION 2- II. JUSTICE HEYDON’s STATEMENT 3
- III. AUSTRALIAN COMMON LAW 3
- IV. SEPERATION OF POWERS 4
- V. ANALYSIS OF HEYDON’s STATEMENT 4
- A. Analysis through the Separation of Power Approach 4
- B. Analysis through the Common Law Approach 7
- VI. CONCLUSION 9
- VII. Bibliography 10
Description
All the countries have their constitutions and law making bodies. Different countries have different systems in place on how laws are formed and implemented. There are various laws that are common in many countries. Common law is one such law which different countries have adopted. Common law consists of legal principles and concepts that have evolved over the centuries. It is mainly derived from the English common law. Separation of powers under the framework of the common law has been under much debate in Australia in the recent times. The distribution of power and the law making ability has come under a lot debate in the recent times in Australia. Justice Heydon in October 30, 2002 stated that, ‘Radical Legal Change is best effected by professional politicians who have a lifetime’s experience of assessing the popular will. They might not be an ideal class, but they are fitter than the courts to make radical legal changes’. This statement in itself has led to a lot of debate. It has drawn mixed reactions; it is criticized by a few and appreciated by a few.
This report critically analyses and discusses Justice Heydon’s statement in context with the separation of powers within the frame work of the common law. For better understanding the common law and the separation of powers are first briefed. The repot then analyses both the positive and negative implications of this statement.
