Abstract
It is commonly suggested in Japanese academia that the legistative, executive, and judicial powers of the U.S. government are completely separate, and each power is exclusively distributed to each branch of the government. This article is an examination and analysis of the way in which the American constitution has shaped American governments on the basis of the principle of "separation of powers" and "checks and balances." This article is also written on the basis of a hypothesis that it is impossible to separate powers under the system of government in which teh principle of the checks and balances has been adopted. The term, "separation of powers," is somewhat misleading. Although the constitution established institutional checks and separated powers, in reality, the United States is a government of shared powers. The constitutoin simply separates organs of government, but it fuses their functions ans powers. The constitution provided many ways in which the three branches would interact. Because of frequently voiced critiicsm of the blending of executive, legislative, and judiciary in the proposed constitution, Madison had to restate the traditional theories which had been advocated by John Locke and Baron de Montesquieu. Sharing of powers through the scheme of checks and balances was, Madison explained, a valuable additional restraint on goverment. The blendin of powers limits not only government, but also provides weapons by which each department could defend its position in the contsitutional system. The prisidental veto protects the president against legislative encroachments, and his power of appointments gives him influence against judicial assault. The courts have the power to pass on legislation, and the judges are protected by life tenure. The congress can impeach a president and members of the courts, and the congress controls the purse upon which both the other departments depend. The congress is involved in the executive process in its watchdog role and through its power to create federal executive agencies and to advise on and consent to the appointment of hign-level federal officials. The congress controls the appellate jurisdiction of the supreme court. Through the process of judicial review, the courts decide whether or not laws passed by the congress or actions taken by the president are constitutional. Although the courts do not legislate in the strict sense of the word, their decisions may be regarded from a realistic point of view as a form of law making. The president participates in teh judicial process throuch his power to nominate federal judges, including members of the supreme court. And the congress can pass laws to overrule supreme court decisons. In order areas as well, the lines among the three branches of government are biurred. Today, for example, the complex task of managing the economy has been delegated in part to independent regulatory commissions and agencies that do not fall neatly into the three categories - legislative, executive, and judicial - and, in fact, exhibit features of all three. In conclusion, although the three branches of the U.S. government are based on the principle of separation of powers, they share the three powers. The American government is not a system of government of separated powers, but of "separated institutions sharing powers."
