Maghreb societies need to move towards separation of powers

Abdelaziz_karraky-250 By: Abdelaziz Karraky

110713-zawaya-photo

All Maghreb countries, except for Libya, are former French colonies whose Constitutions are based on the French semi-presidential model introduced by De Gaulle. This model resulted from a historical experience that confirmed France’s failure in adopting the English parliamentary system, leading to the establishment of an executive authority with two key figures: the President and the Prime Minister.

However, given his charismatic personality, General Charles De Gaulle dominated the executive power, and represented the model that matched the perceptions of the Maghreb’s political elites. People embraced this model at the beginning of the post-independence era, when there was a mass mobilization to build the State, led by individuals who gained their political credibility primarily from their struggle against colonialism, and who believed in the concentration of power in the same hands. However, leading battles and managing political affairs are two different matters. The concentration of power is no longer applicable nowadays to guide political development, which can’t be properly achieved without separating powers. Montesquieu said: “Virtue itself has need of limits. To prevent this abuse, it is necessary from the very nature of things that power should be a check to power….”

To be in line with modern times, and to keep up with the current changes taking place in the world and the Mediterranean region, Maghreb countries have no other choice than democracy. This requires the separation of powers, and that people exercise power through a representative Parliament that monopolizes the legal field as the embodiment of the public will.

The executive power that ensures the implementation of laws is derived from the Parliament and the majority within it, but the balance of powers requires that each authority remains independent from the others. Therefore, while the government has the power to dissolve the Parliament, the latter can withdraw trust from the former and even overthrow it. This system also leaves room for the opposition, which has all the means necessary to access power. This allows the alternation of political elites based on a sort of political competition, which ultimately resorts to citizens as the final judge, through free and fair elections.

Moreover, the judiciary is independent from all authorities, and enforces the application of the law without any discrimination, thus guaranteeing individual and group rights, as no one can be above the law.

This structure of power is not a dispensable luxury, but rather a need that helps eliminate violence and put an end to the monopoly of power, as the latter is exercised according to the law. Lord Acton said: “All power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely”.

Your Comments

comments

Anonymous About 10 months ago

Hello. I really enjoyed your article. It’s like a course on constitutional law, allowing an easier understanding of this subject that is monopolized by political elites and experts. You helped me discover a new concept of the separation of powers, which represents the cornerstone of parliamentary-democratic political systems. I hope that Zawaya will publish a series of articles on the separation of powers and its characteristics.

comments

Anonymous About 10 months ago

I’ll start from where you finished. Absolute authority is a real spoiler that makes individuals feel almost intoxicated by power, and believe that they are superior to humans. Consequently, they commit follies whose prices are paid by people who believe that the individual mind can make authority practices upright to serve the interest of people. Therefore, people always sought restricting authority. By the way, Plato noticed that centuries ago when he closely observed people in power, whereas he initially believed that rulers didn’t need to submit to the law. El-Makki El-Ziachi.

comments

Anonymous About 10 months ago

I don’t think that the Maghreb’s problem lies in the separation of powers, and elaborating new Constitutions to govern relations between powers. I believe that the issue is rather about authority and freedom, and how people perceive them. At the end of the day, authority emanates from society, and whenever the former’s problems are solved on the cultural level, things will change on the political level.

Have your comments posted immediately! Register

1800 characters remaining (1800 max)

Please enter digits
Button

Other Opinions

News from Magharebia