Yasin Al Razi

The separation of powers is a fundamental political doctrine that underpins constitutional governance, emphasizing the unequivocal segregation of legislative, executive, and judicial powers within the government apparatus. This principle serves as a safeguard against any single branch of government amassing excessive authority and potentially exploiting its powers.   Historical Origins The origins of the separation of powers can be traced back to the profound insights of ancient political philosophers, notably Aristotle and Polybius, who expounded upon the necessity of delineating distinct governmental functions. However, the modern articulation of this doctrine is predominantly attributed to the eminent English philosopher, John Locke, who, in his seminal 1689 treatise, "Two Treatises of Government," meticulously elucidated the doctrine's essence. Locke passionately contended that the separation of powers was imperative in shielding the innate rights of individuals f...

  Judicial activism is a doctrine positing that judges must actively interpret the law and safeguard the rights of individuals and groups. This may encompass nullifying laws deemed unconstitutional or delivering rulings that extend the rights of individuals or groups. Conversely, judicial self-restraint adheres to the doctrine that judges should yield to the decisions of other government branches, notably the legislature. This implies that judges should only invalidate unconstitutional laws while refraining from questioning the choices of elected officials. In Bangladesh, the discourse on judicial activism and judicial self-restraint has been an enduring debate. Here, this debate is frequently framed in the context of reconciling the competing tenets of judicial independence and judicial deference. Judicial independence emphasizes that judges should be shielded from political interference in their decision-making, whereas judicial deference posits that judges should exhibit re...