document_title: Rise of the Planet of the Apes

question_text: who plays caesar in rise of the planet of the apes 2011

text: Rise of the Planet of the Apes

text: Plot[edit]

text: Will Rodman, a scientist at the San Francisco biotech company Gen-Sys, is testing the viral-based drug ALZ-112 on chimpanzees to find a cure for Alzheimer's disease. ALZ-112 is given to a chimp named Bright Eyes, greatly increasing her intelligence. But then, during Will's presentation for the drug, Bright Eyes is forced from her cage, goes on a rampage, and is shot to death. Will's boss Steven Jacobs terminates the project and has the chimps slaughtered. However, Will's assistant Robert Franklin discovers that the reason for Bright Eyes' rampage was that she had recently given birth to an infant chimp. Will reluctantly agrees to take in the chimp, who is named Caesar. Will learns that Caesar has inherited his mother's intelligence and decides to raise him. Three years later, Will introduces Caesar to the redwood forest at Muir Woods National Monument. Meanwhile, Will treats his dementia-suffering father Charles with ALZ-112, which seems to restore his cognitive ability.

text: Five years later, when Caesar reaches adolescence and sees a dog on a leash like his own, he questions his identity and learns of his origins from Will. Meanwhile, Charles's condition returns as he becomes resistant to ALZ-112. Caesar injures an aggressive neighbor, Douglas Hunsiker, while defending a confused Charles from him. As a result, he is placed in a primate shelter where he is tormented by a chimp named Rocket and the chief guard, Dodge Landon, but also where he befriends an orangutan named Maurice who came from a circus. Caesar learns how to unlock his cage, gaining free access to the common area. With the assistance of a gorilla named Buck, he confronts the sanctuary's alpha, Rocket and claims that position. Meanwhile, Jacobs clears development of a more powerful, gaseous version of the drug – ALZ-113 – when Will tells him it can also improve intelligence. Will takes the drug home to try to save his father, but Charles declines further treatment and dies overnight.

text: After attempting to test the drug on a scarred bonobo test subject named Koba, Franklin becomes exposed to ALZ-113 and becomes ill. Attempting to warn Will at his home, he sneezes blood onto Hunsiker and is later discovered dead. Will attempts to reclaim Caesar, but the chimp refuses to go home with him so he could look after the other apes. Instead, he escapes from the facility and returns to Will's house, where he takes canisters of the ALZ-113. Upon returning, Caesar releases the gas and allows it to enhance the intelligence of the other apes. When Dodge attempts to get him back into his cage, Caesar speaks for the first time, yelling "No!" and gets in a fight which inadvertently leads to Dodge's death. The apes flee the facility, release the remaining chimps from Gen-Sys, and free more apes from the San Francisco Zoo on the way.

text: A battle ensues as the ape army fights their way past a police blockade on the Golden Gate Bridge to escape into the redwood forest. Buck sacrifices himself to save Caesar by jumping into the helicopter in which Jacobs is riding. The helicopter crashes onto the bridge, trapping Jacobs in the wreckage. Koba seizes his chance for revenge and sends Jacobs falling to his death in the bay below.

text: As the apes find their way into the forest, Will arrives and warns Caesar that the humans will hunt them down, and begs him to return home. In response, Caesar hugs him and says that, "Caesar is home." Will, realizing that this is indeed their last goodbye, respects Caesar's wishes. The apes embrace their new lifestyle in the forest.

text: In a mid-credits scene, an infected Hunsiker leaves his house for work as an airline pilot, arriving at San Francisco International Airport for his flight to Paris. His nose begins to drip blood onto the floor. A graphic traces the spread of the humanity-ravaging virus around the globe via international flight routes.

text: Cast[edit]

text: Humans[edit]

text:
James Franco as Dr. William "Will" Rodman, a biologist who is trying to discover a cure for his father's Alzheimer's disease by testing ALZ-112 on chimps. He is a father figure to Caesar. James Franco was cast after talks with Tobey Maguire broke down.[7][8]
Freida Pinto as Caroline Aranha, a primatologist who starts a relationship with Will and grows attached to Caesar.
John Lithgow as Charles Rodman, Will's Alzheimer's-afflicted father and a former music teacher who improves after Will gives him the ALZ-112 and forms a grandfatherly bond with Caesar.
Brian Cox as John Landon, manager of the San Bruno Primate Shelter where Caesar is confined for a time. His full name is a reference to one of the astronauts in the original Planet of the Apes.
Tom Felton as Dodge Landon, John's son and an animal caretaker at the shelter, who abuses the apes for sport. His first and last name are references to two of the astronauts in the original Planet of the Apes.
David Oyelowo as Steven Jacobs, Will's arrogant boss. His last name is a reference to Arthur P. Jacobs, the producer of the original Planet of the Apes series.
Tyler Labine as Robert Franklin, a chimp handler at Gen-Sys and one of Will's friends. His surname is a reference to Franklin Schaffner, the director of the original film.
Jamie Harris as Rodney, a caretaker and a nightwatchman who is much kinder to the apes at the sanctuary and is regularly mocked by Dodge for this.
David Hewlett as Douglas Hunsiker, Will's hot-headed neighbor.
Chelah Horsdal as Irena, a nurse who is looking after Charles.

tag: ul

text: Apes[edit]

text:
Andy Serkis as Caesar, a common chimpanzee whose intelligence is increased from inheriting ALZ-112 from his mother during her pregnancy, and who is raised by Will for eight years.
Karin Konoval as Maurice, a wise and benevolent Bornean orangutan who was retired from the circus and knows sign language; he becomes Caesar's closest ally. Konoval also cameos as the court clerk whom Will briefly argues with about his appeal. His name is a reference to Maurice Evans who portray Dr. Zaius in the original Planet of the Apes.[citation needed]
Terry Notary as Rocket, the dominant common chimpanzee at the ape sanctuary, until Caesar overthrows him. Notary also plays Bright Eyes, Caesar's mother who was captured in Africa.
Richard Ridings as Buck, a Western lowland gorilla who pledges his allegiance to Caesar after he is freed by him.
Devyn Dalton as Cornelia, a female common chimpanzee in the ape sanctuary.
Jay Caputo as Alpha, the dominant male common chimpanzee of Bright Eyes' troop and Caesar's father.
Christopher Gordon as Koba, a scarred and aggressive bonobo who has spent most of his life in laboratories and holds a grudge against humans.

text: Production[edit]

text: Development and writing[edit]

text: In 2006, screenwriter-producer Rick Jaffa was searching for a script idea. As Jaffa searched a newspaper articles clipping, one about pet chimpanzees that become troublesome to their owners and heartbroken for not adapting well to the human environment intrigued him. As Jaffa eventually realized it fit the Planet of the Apes series, he called his wife and screenwriting partner Amanda Silver to express his ideas of such a chimpanzee eventually starting the ape revolution, and then the couple started developing the character of Caesar. Jaffa indicated that "it's a reinvention" and if he had to pick between calling it a prequel or a reboot he would say it is a reboot: "It's a different story of who Caesar is, and how he came to be. So it's really kind of hard to put a label on it. We are hopefully rebooting it." He went on to say that "we tried really hard to create a story that would stand on its own and yet also pay homage and honor the movies that came before us."[9] Jaffa and Silver then wrote a script and sold it to Fox, producers of the Apes franchise. The script added other elements which the couple had researched, such as genetic engineering.[10] Several tributes to specific scenes, characters, and cast and crew from the previous Apes film series were added in the script. In particular, Caesar's treatment at the primate sanctuary parallels Taylor's treatment as a captive in the original film.[11][12]

text: In a segment of a video blog post, director Rupert Wyatt commented on the originality of the plot: "This is part of the mythology and it should be seen as that. It's not a continuation of the other films; it's an original story. It does satisfy the people who enjoy those films. The point of this film is to achieve that and to bring that fan base into this film exactly like Batman Begins."[6] In a 2009 interview, Wyatt said, "We've incorporated elements from Conquest of the Planet of the Apes, in terms of how the apes begin to revolt, but this is primarily a prequel to the 1968 film...Caesar is a revolutionary figure who will be talked about by his fellow apes for centuries...This is just the first step in the evolution of the apes, and there's a lot more stories to tell after this. I imagine the next film will be about the all-out war between the apes and humans."[13] Mark Bomback did an uncredited rewrite of the script.[14]

text: Filming[edit]

text: Filming began in July 2010 in Vancouver, British Columbia.[15] Filming also happened in San Francisco, California (the primary setting of the film),[15] and around Oahu, Hawaii, which doubled for the African jungle as the schedule and budget did not allow for location shooting in Africa.[16]

text: Visual effects[edit]

text: As the apes in Rise were meant to be actual apes, the producers decided not to use actors in ape suits. After considering real apes, instead Weta Digital created the apes digitally in almost every case through performance capture.[17] Advances in the technology allowed the use of performance capture in an exterior environment, affording the film-makers the freedom to shoot much of the film on location with other actors, as opposed to the confines of a soundstage.[18][19] The main breakthrough was a camera that enabled viewing the motion capture dots in daylight, employed mostly for the Golden Gate Bridge battle. A maximum of six actors could have their movements captured, with larger ape crowds using fully digital animals animated using Weta's move library. The Golden Gate Bridge set used both a physical set which was extended digitally, and a fully computer-generated model of the bridge that also included the ocean and nearby hills.[20]

text: After shooting the actors playing humans interacting with others wearing the motion capture suits, a clean plate was shot with actors for extra reference. Actor-stuntman Terry Notary guided the actors on realistic ape movement, while Weta studied the chimps in the Wellington Zoo for reference. The digital apes also received detailed models with skeletons, muscles and nerve tissue layers for accurate animation. Cast models of apes' heads and limbs helped the texture department replicate skin details such as wrinkles and pores. Given the difference between human and chimpanzee facial muscles, the animators tweaked the performance through a new facial muscle system adding dynamics, ballistics, and secondary motion. As the silent performance required expressive eyes, a new eye model was made to depict both greater accuracy in muscle movement in and around the eyes, and also tears, pupil dilation, and light refraction.[17][21] While Andy Serkis was the primary performer for Caesar, as the effects team considered that at times "Andy overcame the character," other motion capture team actors were also used, especially Devyn Dalton, whose height matched that of a chimpanzee. Along with that, they used Notary to play Caesar in stunt-filled scenes such as the Golden Gate Bridge scene.[22]

text: Music[edit]

text: The score for the film was written by Patrick Doyle and performed by the Hollywood Studio Symphony conducted by James Shearman.[23] The main concern was to have the music help progress the plot in the scenes without dialogue, for instance, conveying the emotions of Caesar's relationships with Will and Charles. To turn the score into a "driving force that keeps audiences paying attention," Doyle employed an African-American chorus and focused on percussion and "low and deep" orchestra sounds. Doyle collaborated closely with the sound department to make the music complement the sound effects, including writing a recurring theme based on their recording of a chimpanzee.[24]

text: Reception[edit]

text: Critical response[edit]

text: On review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes, the film has an approval rating of 81% based on 252 reviews, with an average rating of 7.1/10. The site's critical consensus reads, "Led by Rupert Wyatt's stylish direction, some impressive special effects, and a mesmerizing performance by Andy Serkis, Rise of the Planet of the Apes breathes unlikely new life into a long-running franchise."[25] Another review aggregator, Metacritic, gave the film a score of 68 out of 100, based on 39 critics, indicating "generally favorable reviews".[26]

text: Roger Ebert gave the film 3 out of 4 stars and praised the role of Caesar and Andy Serkis by stating it was a "wonderfully executed character" and "one never knows exactly where the human ends and the effects begin, but Serkis and/or Caesar gives the best performance in the movie."[27] Giving the film 5 out of 5 stars, Joe Neumaier of Daily News labelled Rise of the Planet of the Apes as the summer's best popcorn flick.[28] Nick Pinkerton of The Village Voice wrote, "Caesar's prison conversion to charismatic pan-ape revolutionist is near-silent filmmaking, with simple and precise images illustrating Caesar's General-like divining of personalities and his organization of a group from chaos to order."[29] Roger Moore of Orlando Sentinel wrote, "Audacious, violent and disquieting, "Rise of the Planet of the Apes" is a summer sequel that's better than it has any right to be." He gave the film 3.5 out of 4 stars.[30] Manohla Dargis of The New York Times praised the film by saying, "Precisely the kind of summer diversion that the studios have such a hard time making now. It's good, canny-dumb fun." She also gave it 3.5 out of 4 stars.[31]

text: Peter Travers of Rolling Stone noted that the film has mixed "twists lifted from 1972's Conquest of the Planet of the Apes and 1999's Deep Blue Sea".[32]

text: Box office[edit]

text: Rise of the Planet of the Apes made its debut in the United States and Canada on roughly 5,400 screens within 3,648 theaters.[33] It grossed $19,534,699 on opening day and $54,806,191 in its entire opening weekend, making it #1 for that weekend as well as the fourth-highest-grossing August opening ever.[34] The film held on to the #1 spot in its second weekend, dropping 49.2%, and grossing $27,832,307.[35] Rise of the Planet of the Apes crossed the $150 million mark in the United States and Canada on its 26th day of release. Entertainment Weekly said that this was quite an accomplishment for the film since the month of August is a difficult time for films to make money.[36]

text: The film ended its run at the box office on December 15, 2011, with a gross of $176,760,185 in the U.S. and Canada as well as $305,040,864 internationally, for a total of $481,801,049 worldwide.[1]

text: Home media[edit]

text: Rise of the Planet of the Apes was released on Blu-ray Disc, DVD, and Digital Copy on December 13, 2011.[37]

text: Awards[edit]

text:
Award
Category
Recipient
Result

84th Academy Awards
Best Visual Effects
Joe Letteri, Dan Lemmon, R. Christopher White and Daniel Barrett
Nominated

Alliance of Women Film Journalists[38]
Best Supporting Actor
Andy Serkis
Nominated

Annie Awards[39]
Character Animation in a Live Action Production
Eric Reynolds
Won

Broadcast Film Critics Association[40]
Best Supporting Actor
Andy Serkis
Nominated

Best Visual Effects
Won

Best Action Film
Nominated

Empire Awards[41]
Best Film
Nominated

Best Sci-Fi/Fantasy
Nominated

Best Director
Rupert Wyatt
Nominated

Best Actor
Andy Serkis
Nominated

Genesis Awards
Best Feature Film
Rick Jaffa and Amanda Silver
Won

Houston Film Critics Society[42]
Best Supporting Actor
Andy Serkis
Nominated

Technical Achievement
Won

IGN Best of 2011[43]
Best Movie
Nominated

Best Sci-Fi Movie
Won

Best Movie Actor
Andy Serkis (also for The Adventures of Tintin)
Nominated

Best Movie Director
Rupert Wyatt
Nominated

IGN Summer Movie Awards[44]

Best Summer Movie
Nominated

Funniest Line
"Why cookie Rocket?"
Nominated

Best All-Out Brawl
Apes vs. Humans on the Golden Gate Bridge
Nominated

Favorite Kill
Helicopter Pushed Over the Golden Gate Bridge
Nominated

Coolest Creature
Caesar
Won

Favorite Hero
Caesar – Andy Serkis
Won

Las Vegas Film Critics Society[45]
Best Visual Effects
Won

London Film Critics Circle
Technical Achievement
Joe Letteri
Nominated

Phoenix Film Critics Society
Best Visual Effects
Nominated

San Diego Film Critics Society[46]
Best Supporting Actor
Andy Serkis
Nominated

Satellite Awards[47]
Best Supporting Actor – Motion Picture
Andy Serkis
Nominated

Best Visual Effects
Jeff Capogreco, Joe Letteri, R. Christopher White
Nominated

Saturn Awards[48]
Best Science Fiction Film
Won

Best Supporting Actor
Andy Serkis
Won

Best Director
Rupert Wyatt
Nominated

Best Writing
Rick Jaffa and Amanda Silver
Nominated

Best Special Effects
Dan Lemmon, Joe Letteri, R. Christopher White, and Daniel Barrett
Won

Visual Effects Society[49]
Outstanding Visual Effects in a Visual Effects-Driven Feature Motion Picture
Dan Lemmon, Joe Letteri, Cyndi Ochs, Kurt Williams
Won

Outstanding Animated Character in a Live Action Feature Motion Picture
Caesar – Daniel Barrett, Florian Fernandez, Matthew Muntean, Eric Reynolds
Won

Outstanding Virtual Cinematography in a Live Action Feature Motion Picture
Thelvin Cabezas, Mike Perry, R. Christopher White, Erik Winquist
Nominated

Outstanding Compositing in a Feature Motion Picture
Jean-Luc Azzis, Quentin Hema, Simon Jung, Christoph Salzmann
Nominated

Washington D.C. Area Film Critics Association[50]
Best Supporting Actor
Andy Serkis
Nominated

tag: table

text: Sequels[edit]

text: Regarding the story setting up possible sequels, director Rupert Wyatt commented: "I think we're ending with certain questions, which is quite exciting. To me, I can think of all sorts of sequels to this film, but this is just the beginning."[51] Screenwriter and producer Rick Jaffa also stated that Rise of the Planet of the Apes would feature several clues as to future sequels: "I hope that we're building a platform for future films. We're trying to plant a lot of the seeds for a lot of the things you are talking about in terms of the different apes and so forth."[6]

text: On May 31, 2012, 20th Century Fox announced that the sequel would be named Dawn of the Planet of the Apes.[52] Reports said that Wyatt was leaving the sequel due to his concern that a May 2014 release date would not give him enough time to properly make the film;[53] he was replaced by Cloverfield director Matt Reeves.[54] Jaffa and Silver returned as producers and to pen the screenplay, with rewrites from Scott Z. Burns[55] and Mark Bomback.[14]

text: Taking place ten years after Rise, Dawn follows Caesar's growing nation of evolved apes threatened by human survivors that put both sides in the brink of war.[citation needed] Andy Serkis, Terry Notary and Karin Konoval reprised their roles as Caesar, Rocket and Maurice.[56] James Franco returned as Will Rodman in a "cameo via video".[57] Judy Greer and Toby Kebbell replace Devyn Dalton and Christopher Gordon as Cornelia and Koba, respectively.[citation needed] Filming of Dawn of the Planet of the Apes started on North Vancouver Island in April 2013.[58] The film was released July 11, 2014.

text: On January 6, 2014, 20th Century Fox announced a third installment with Reeves returning to direct and co-write along with Bomback, with a planned July 2016 release.[59][60] In January 2015, Fox delayed the release to July 14, 2017.[61][62] On May 14, 2015, the title was given as War of the Planet of the Apes,[63] later re-titled to War for the Planet of the Apes.


document_title: Separation of powers

question_text: who designed the system of checks and balances

question_tokens: who designed the system of checks and balances

root

text: Separation of powers

text: History[edit]

text:
Part of the Politics series onRepublicanism
Central concepts[show]
Anti-monarchism
Liberty as non-domination
Popular sovereignty
Republic
Res publica
Social contract

Schools[show]
Classical republicanism
Neo-republicanism

Important thinkers[show]
Hannah Arendt
Cicero
James Harrington
Thomas Jefferson
John Locke
James Madison
Montesquieu
Philip Pettit
Polybius
Jean Jacques Rousseau
Michael J. Sandel
Algernon Sidney
Quentin Skinner
Cass Sunstein
Mary Wollstonecraft

History[show]
Roman Republic
Gaṇa sangha
Classical Athens
Republic of Venice
Republic of Genoa
Republic of Florence
Dutch Republic
American Revolution
French Revolution
Spanish American wars of independence
Trienio Liberal
French Revolution of 1848
5 October 1910 revolution
Xinhai Revolution
Russian Revolution
German Revolution of 1918–19
Turkish War of Independence
Mongolian Revolution of 1921
11 September 1922 Revolution
1935 Greek coup d'état attempt
Spanish Civil War
Birth of the Italian Republic
Egyptian Revolution of 1952
14 July Revolution
North Yemen Civil War
Zanzibar Revolution
1969 Libyan coup d'état
Cambodian coup of 1970
Third Hellenic Republic
Iranian Revolution
1987 Fijian coups d'état
Nepalese Civil War

By country[show]
Australia
Barbados
Canada
Ireland
Jamaica
Morocco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Spain
Sweden
Turkey
United Kingdom
United States

Related topics[show]
Communitarianism
Liberalism
Monarchism

Politics portalvte

text: Antiquity[edit]

text: Aristotle first mentioned the idea of a "mixed government" or hybrid government in his work Politics where he drew upon many of the constitutional forms in the city-states of Ancient Greece. In the Roman Republic, the Roman Senate, Consuls and the Assemblies showed an example of a mixed government according to Polybius (Histories, Book 6, 11–13).

tag: p

text: Early modern biparty systems[edit]

text: John Calvin (1509–1564) favoured a system of government that divided political power between democracy and aristocracy (mixed government). Calvin appreciated the advantages of democracy, stating: "It is an invaluable gift if God allows a people to elect its own government and magistrates."[1] In order to reduce the danger of misuse of political power, Calvin suggested setting up several political institutions which should complement and control each other in a system of checks and balances.[2]

text: In this way, Calvin and his followers resisted political absolutism and furthered the growth of democracy. Calvin aimed to protect the rights and the well-being of ordinary people.[3][need quotation to verify] In 1620, a group of English separatist Congregationalists and Anglicans (later known as the Pilgrim Fathers) founded Plymouth Colony in North America. Enjoying self-rule, they established a bipartite democratic system of government. The "freemen" elected the General Court, which functioned as legislature and judiciary and which in turn elected a governor, who together with his seven "assistants" served in the functional role of providing executive power.[4] Massachusetts Bay Colony (founded 1628), Rhode Island (1636), Connecticut (1636), New Jersey, and Pennsylvania had similar constitutions – they all separated political powers. (Except for Plymouth Colony and Massachusetts Bay Colony, these English outposts added religious freedom to their democratic systems, an important step towards the development of human rights.[5][6]) Books like William Bradford's History of Plymoth Plantation (written between 1630 and 1651) were widely read in England.[citation needed] So the form of government in the colonies was well known in the mother country, including to the philosopher John Locke (1632–1704). He deduced from a study of the English constitutional system the advantages of dividing political power into the legislative (which should be distributed among several bodies, for example, the House of Lords and the House of Commons), on the one hand, and the executive and federative power, responsible for the protection of the country and prerogative of the monarch, on the other hand. (The Kingdom of England had no written constitution.)[7][need quotation to verify]

text: Montesquieu's separation of powers system[edit]

text: The term "tripartite system" is commonly ascribed to French Enlightenment political philosopher Baron de Montesquieu, although he did not use such a term. In reality he referred to "distribution" of powers. In The Spirit of the Laws (1748), Montesquieu described the various forms of distribution of political power among a legislature, an executive, and a judiciary. Montesquieu's approach was to present and defend a form of government which was not excessively centralized in all its powers to a single monarch or similar ruler, form of government known then as "aristocracy". He based this model on the Constitution of the Roman Republic and the British constitutional system. Montesquieu took the view that the Roman Republic had powers separated so that no one could usurp complete power.[8][9][10] In the British constitutional system, Montesquieu discerned a separation of powers among the monarch, Parliament, and the courts of law.

text: In every government there are three sorts of power: the legislative; the executive in respect to things dependent on the law of nations; and the judiciary in regard to matters that depend on the civil law.

text: By virtue of the first, the prince or magistrate enacts temporary or perpetual laws, and amends or abrogates those that have been already enacted. By the second, he makes peace or war, sends or receives embassies, establishes the public security, and provides against invasions. By the third, he punishes criminals, or determines the disputes that arise between individuals. The latter we shall call the judiciary power, and the other, simply, the executive power of the state.

text: Montesquieu argues that each Power should only exercise its own functions, it was quite explicit here:

text: When the legislative and executive powers are united in the same person, or in the same body of magistrates, there can be no liberty; because apprehensions may arise, lest the same monarch or senate should enact tyrannical laws, to execute them in a tyrannical manner.

text: Again, there is no liberty if the judiciary power be not separated from the legislative and executive. Were it joined with the legislative, the life and liberty of the subject would be exposed to arbitrary control; for the judge would be then the legislator. Were it joined to the executive power, the judge might behave with violence and oppression.

text: There would be an end of every thing, were the same man, or the same body, whether of the nobles or of the people, to exercise those three powers, that of enacting laws, that of executing the public resolutions, and of trying the causes of individuals.

text: Separation of powers requires a different source of legitimization, or a different act of legitimization from the same source, for each of the separate powers. If the legislative branch appoints the executive and judicial powers, as Montesquieu indicated, there will be no separation or division of its powers, since the power to appoint carries with it the power to revoke.

text: The executive power ought to be in the hands of a monarch, because this branch of government, having need of dispatch, is better administered by one than by many: on the other hand, whatever depends on the legislative power, is oftentimes better regulated by many than by a single person.

text: But, if there were no monarch, and the executive power should be committed to a certain number of persons, selected from the legislative body, there would be an end of liberty, by reason the two powers would be united; as the same persons would sometimes possess, and would be always able to possess, a share in both.

text: Montesquieu did actually specify that the independence of the judiciary has to be real, and not merely apparent.[13] The judiciary was generally seen as the most important of the three powers, independent and unchecked,[14] while also likely to claim to be the least dangerous one.[13]

text: Checks and balances[edit]

text: The examples and perspective in this article deal primarily with the United States and do not represent a worldwide view of the subject. You may improve this article, discuss the issue on the talk page, or create a new article, as appropriate. (May 2018) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

text: Checks and balances is the principle that each of the Branches has the power to limit or check the other two and this creates a balance between the three separate powers of the state, this principle induces that the ambitions of one branch prevent that one of the other branches become supreme, and thus be eternally confronting each other and in that process leaving the people free from government abuses. Checks and Balances are designed to maintain the system of separation of powers keeping each branch in its place. This is based on the idea that it is not enough to separate the powers and guarantee their independence but to give the various branches the constitutional means to defend their own legitimate powers from the encroachments of the other branches.[15] They guarantee that the powers of the state have the same weight (co-equal), that is, to be balanced, so that they can limit each other, avoiding the abuse of state power. The origin of checks and balances, like separation of powers itself, is specifically credited to Montesquieu in the Enlightenment (in The Spirit of the Laws, 1748), under this influence was implemented in 1787 in the Constitution of the United States.

text: The following example of the separation of powers and their mutual checks and balances for the experience of the United States Constitution is presented as illustrative of the general principles applied in similar forms of government as well.

text: «But the great security against a gradual concentration of the several powers in the same department, consists in giving to those who administer each department the necessary constitutional means and personal motives to resist encroachments of the others. The provision for defense must in this, as in all other cases, be made commensurate to the danger of attack. Ambition must be made to counteract ambition. The interest of the man must be connected with the constitutional rights of the place. It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government. But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.»

text: «A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions. This policy of supplying, by opposite and rival interests, the defect of better motives, might be traced through the whole system of human affairs, private as well as public. We see it particularly displayed in all the subordinate distributions of power, where the constant aim is to divide and arrange the several offices in such a manner as that each may be a check on the other that the private interest of every individual may be a sentinel over the public rights. These inventions of prudence cannot be less requisite in the distribution of the supreme powers of the State.»

text:
Legislative (Congress)

Executive (President)

Judicial (Supreme Court)

Passes bills; has broad taxing and spending power; regulates inter-state commerce; controls the federal budget; has power to borrow money on the credit of the United States (may be vetoed by President, but vetoes may be overridden with a two-thirds vote of both houses)
Has sole power to declare war, as well as to raise, support, and regulate the military.
Oversees, investigates, and makes the rules for the government and its officers.
Defines by law the jurisdiction of the federal judiciary in cases not specified by the Constitution.
Ratification of treaties signed by the President and gives advice and consent to presidential appointments to the federal judiciary, federal executive departments, and other posts (Senate only).[17]
Has sole power of impeachment (House of Representatives) and trial of impeachments (Senate); can remove federal executive and judicial officers from office for high crimes and misdemeanors

Is the commander-in-chief of the armed forces
Executes the instructions of Congress.
May veto bills passed by Congress (but the veto may be overridden by a two-thirds majority of both houses)
Executes the spending authorized by Congress.
Declares states of emergency and publishes regulations and executive orders.
Makes executive agreements (does not require ratification) and signs treaties (ratification requiring approval by two-thirds of the Senate)
Makes appointments to the federal judiciary, federal executive departments, and other posts with the advice and consent of the Senate. Has power to make temporary appointment during the recess of the Senate
Has the power to grant "reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment."

Determines which laws Congress intended to apply to any given case
Exercises judicial review, reviewing the constitutionality of laws
Determines how Congress meant the law to apply to disputes
Determines how a law acts to determine the disposition of prisoners
Determines how a law acts to compel testimony and the production of evidence
Determines how laws should be interpreted to assure uniform policies in a top-down fashion via the appeals process, but gives discretion in individual cases to low-level judges. The amount of discretion depends upon the standard of review, determined by the type of case in question.

text: Comparison between tripartite and bipartite national systems[edit]

text: Constitutions with a high degree of separation of powers are found worldwide. The UK system is distinguished by a particular entwining of powers.[18] A number of Latin American countries have electoral branches of government.

text: Countries with little separation of power include New Zealand and Canada. Canada makes limited use of separation of powers in practice, although in theory it distinguishes between branches of government.

text: New Zealand's constitution is based on the principle of separation of powers through a series of constitutional safeguards, many of which are tacit. The Executive's ability to carry out decisions often depends on the Legislature, which is elected under the mixed member proportional system. This means the government is rarely a single party but a coalition of parties. The Judiciary is also free of government interference. If a series of judicial decisions result in an interpretation of the law which the Executive considers does not reflect the intention of the policy, the Executive can initiate changes to the legislation in question through the Legislature. The Executive cannot direct or request a judicial officer to revise or reconsider a decision; decisions are final. Should there be a dispute between the Executive and Judiciary, the Executive has no authority to direct the Judiciary, or its individual members and vice versa.

text: Complete separation of powers systems are almost always presidential, although theoretically this need not be the case. There are a few historical exceptions, such as the Directoire system of revolutionary France. Switzerland offers an example of non-Presidential separation of powers today: It is run by a seven-member executive branch, the Federal Council. However, some might argue[weasel words] that Switzerland does not have a strong separation of powers system, as the Federal Council is appointed by parliament (but not dependent on parliament) and although the judiciary has no power of review, the judiciary is still separate from the other branches.

text: Typical branches[edit]

text:
executive
legislative
judicial

text: Additional branches[edit]

text:
auditory
electoral – in which election commissions, tribunals or courts are maintained separately from other branches
prosecutory
civil service commission

text: Three branches[edit]

text: Australia[edit]

text: Australia does not maintain a strict separation between the legislative and executive branches of government—indeed, government ministers are required to be members of parliament—but the federal judiciary strictly guards its independence from the other two branches. However, under influence from the American constitution, the Australian constitution does define the three branches of government separately, and this has been interpreted by the judiciary to induce an implicit separation of powers.[19] State governments have a similar level of separation of power, but this is generally on the basis of convention, rather than constitution.

text: Austria[edit]

text: The Constitution of Austria was originally written by Hans Kelsen, the prominent constitutional scholar in Europe at that time. Kelsen was to serve as a part of the judicial court of review for Austria as part of its tripartite government.

text: Czech Republic[edit]

text:
The Constitution of the Czech Republic, adopted in 1992 immediately before the dissolution of Czechoslovakia, establishes the traditional tripartite division of powers[20] and continues the tradition of its predecessor constitutions.
The Czechoslovak Constitution of 1920, which replaced the provisional constitution adopted by the newly independent state in 1918, was modeled after the constitutions of established democracies such as those of the United Kingdom, United States and France, and maintained this division,[21] as have subsequent changes to the constitution that followed in 1948 with the Ninth-of-May Constitution, the 1960 Constitution of Czechoslovakia as well as the Constitutional Act on the Czechoslovak Federation of 1968.

text: Denmark[edit]

text:
Parliament – legislature
Prime Minister, Cabinet, Government Departments and Civil Service – executive
High Courts and lower courts – judiciary

text: France[edit]

text: According to the Constitution of the Fifth Republic, the government of France[22] is divided up into three branches:

text:
Executive. This includes the popularly elected president as well as the prime minister and cabinet. The French Prime minister is nominated by the president, but the government is responsible to the lower house of the legislature, the National Assembly.
Legislature. A bicameral legislature that includes the Senate (upper house) and the National Assembly (lower house). The relationship between the two houses is asymmetric, meaning that in case of dispute, the National Assembly has the final word according to Article 45[23]  of the Constitution.
Judiciary. This includes the judicial and administrative orders. It also includes a constitutional court.

text: Hong Kong[edit]

text: Hong Kong is a Special Administrative Region established in 1997 pursuant to the Sino-British Joint Declaration, an international treaty made between Britain and China in 1984, registered with the United Nations. Currently, Hong Kong has three branches of government as codified in the Basic Law, its constitution, which largely preserved political structures of the British colonial era, under the doctrine of one country, two systems:

text:
Legislative Council – legislature
Government – executive
Judiciary (Court of Final Appeal and other courts and tribunals) – judiciary

text: The Chief Executive, elected by a 1200-member Election Committee which historically was dominated by pro-Beijing establishment members, is both head of the region and head of government, and chairs the Executive Council which is composed of "unofficial" members and government secretaries.

text: The legislature consists of 70 members, 35 of whom are elected by "functional" constituencies represented by members within various industries rather than the public at large.[24] Separation of power between executive and legislature is, therefore, questionable.[25]

text: The courts frequently exercise a power of judicial review of administrative actions and also decide matters of constitutionality of legislation, though this power is circumscribed under the power of the People's Republic of China's National People's Congress to make final determinations as to interpretation.[26] Hence, the separation of powers is again structurally weak.

text: It is worth noting that the branches' separation of power may not be intended within the Hong Kong Basic Law as leaders of the PRC have publicly called for the three branches to cooperate and be led by the Chief Executive.[27]

text: Further, Deng Xiaoping was quoted to have categorically dismissed Hong Kong having a "Trias Politica" system.[28]

text: India[edit]

text: India follows constitutional democracy which offers a clear separation of powers. The judiciary branch is fairly independent of the other two branches with the power to interpret the constitution. Parliament has the legislative powers. Executive powers are vested with the President who is advised by the Union Council of Ministers headed by the Prime Minister. The constitution of India vested the duty of protecting, preserving and defending the constitution with the President as common head of the executive, parliament, armed forces, etc. not only for the union government but also the various state governments in a federal structure. All three branches have "checks and balances" over each other to maintain the balance of power and not to exceed the constitutional limits.[29]

text:
President can set aside a law passed by the legislative or an advise given by the Union Council of Ministers when it is inconsistent with the constitution of India.
Even if the president accepts a law passed duly by the legislative, it can be repealed by the Supreme Court after a fair trial if it is against the Basic structure of the constitution. Any citizen of India can approach the Supreme Court directly to repeal the unconstitutional laws made by the legislative or executive.
President can be impeached after conducting a fair trial by the parliament for his unconstitutional orders/decisions.
President can be asked to step down by the judiciary for his unconstitutional orders/decisions on the grounds of losing eligibility criteria of the president.
Parliament can impeach judges of Supreme Court and High Courts of states for their incompetence and mala fides. Higher bench of judges can set aside the incorrect judgements of smaller bench of judges to uphold the constitution.

text: Iran[edit]

text:
Government – Executive
The legislature of Islamic Republic of Iran – Legislative
Judicial system – Judicial

text: Italy[edit]

text: In Italy the powers are separated, even though the Council of Ministers needs a vote of confidence from both chambers of Parliament, that represents a large number of members (almost 1,000).[30]

text: Like every parliamentary form of government, there is no real separation between Legislature and Executive, rather a continuum between them due to the confidence link. By the way, the balance is protected by Constitution also between these two branches.[31] and, obviously, between them and the judiciary branch, which is really independent.

text: Malaysia[edit]

text:
Parliament – legislature
Prime Minister, Cabinet, Government Departments and Civil Service – executive
Federal Courts and lower courts – judiciary

text: Nepal[edit]

text:
Legislative Parliament – Legislature
Prime Minister, Cabinet of Minister and Government Departments – Executive
Supreme Court – Judiciary

text: Norway[edit]

text:
Parliament – legislature
The King, Prime Minister, Cabinet of Norway, Government Departments and Civil Service – executive
The Supreme Court, High Courts and lower courts – judiciary

text: A note on the status of separation of power, checks and balances, and balance of power in Norway today.[32]

text: In the original constitution of 1814 the Montesquieu concept was enshrined, and the people at the time had the same skepticism about political parties as the American founding fathers and the revolutionaries in France. Nor did people really want to get rid of the king and the Council of State (privy council). King and council was a known concept that people had lived with for a long time and was for the most part comfortable with. The 1814 constitution came about as a reaction to external events, most notable the Treaty of Kiel see 1814 in Norway. There was no revolution against the current powers that had been be the case in the US and France.

text: As there was no election of the executive, the king reigned supremely independent in selecting the members of the Council of State, no formal political parties formed util the 1880s. A conflict between the executive and legislature started developing in the 1870s and climaxed with the legislature impeaching the entire Council of State in 1884. (See Statsrådssaken (Norwegian Wikipedia page))

text: With this came a switch to a parliamentary system of government and while the full process takes decades, it has led to a system of parliamentary sovereignty where the Montesquieu idea of separation of powers is technically dead even though the three branches remain important institutions.

text: This does not mean that there are no checks and balances. With the introduction of a parliamentary system, political parties started to form quickly and this led to a call for electoral reform that saw the introduction of a Party-list proportional representation in 1918. The peculiarities of the Norwegian election system generate 6–8 parties and make it extremely difficult for a single party to gain an absolute majority. It has only occurred for a brief period in the aftermath of World War II where the Labour Party had an absolute majority.

text: A multi-party system parliament that must either form a minority executive or a coalition executive function as a perfectly good system of checks and balances even if it was never a stated goal for the introduction of multiparty system. The multiparty system came about in response to a public outcry of having too few parties and a general feeling of a lack of representation. For this reason you'll find very little on the topic of separation of powers or checks and balances in the works of Norwegian political sciences today.

text: Pakistan[edit]

text:
Parliament – Legislative
Prime Minister and his Cabinet – Executive
Supreme Court and lower courts – Judicial

text: United Kingdom[edit]

text:
Parliament – legislature
Prime Minister, Cabinet, Government Departments and Civil Service – executive
Courts – judiciary

text: The development of the British constitution, which is not a codified document, is based on this fusion in the person of the Monarch, who has a formal role to play in the legislature (Parliament, which is where legal and political sovereignty lies, is the Crown-in-Parliament, and is summoned and dissolved by the Sovereign who must give his or her Royal Assent to all Bills so that they become Acts), the executive (the Sovereign appoints all ministers of His/Her Majesty's Government, who govern in the name of the Crown) and the judiciary (the Sovereign, as the fount of justice, appoints all senior judges, and all public prosecutions are brought in his or her name).

text: Although the doctrine of separation of power plays a role in the United Kingdom's constitutional doctrine, the UK constitution is often described as having "a weak separation of powers" A. V. Dicey, despite its constitution being the one to which Montesquieu originally referred. For example, in the United Kingdom, the executive forms a subset of the legislature, as did—to a lesser extent—the judiciary until the establishment of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom. The Prime Minister, the Chief Executive, sits as a member of the Parliament of the United Kingdom, either as a peer in the House of Lords or as an elected member of the House of Commons (by convention, and as a result of the supremacy of the Lower House, the Prime Minister now sits in the House of Commons) and can effectively be removed from office by a simple majority vote. Furthermore, while the courts in the United Kingdom are amongst the most independent in the world,[citation needed] the Law Lords, who were the final arbiters of judicial disputes in the UK sat simultaneously in the House of Lords, the upper house of the legislature, although this arrangement ceased in 2009 when the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom came into existence. Furthermore, because of the existence of Parliamentary sovereignty, while the theory of separation of powers may be studied there, a system such as that of the UK is more accurately described as a "fusion of powers".[citation needed]

text: Until 2005, the Lord Chancellor fused the Legislature, Executive and Judiciary, as he was the ex officio Speaker of the House of Lords, a Government Minister who sat in Cabinet and was head of the Lord Chancellor's Department which administered the courts, the justice system and appointed judges, and was the head of the Judiciary in England and Wales and sat as a judge on the Judicial Committee of the House of Lords, the highest domestic court in the entire United Kingdom, and the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, the senior tribunal court for parts of the Commonwealth. The Lord Chancellor also had certain other judicial positions, including being a judge in the Court of Appeal and President of the Chancery Division. The Lord Chancellor combines other aspects of the constitution, including having certain ecclesiastical functions of the established state church, making certain church appointments, nominations and sitting as one of the thirty-three Church Commissioners. These functions remain intact and unaffected by the Constitutional Reform Act. In 2005, the Constitutional Reform Act separated the powers with Legislative functions going to an elected Lord Speaker and the Judicial functions going to the Lord Chief Justice. The Lord Chancellor's Department was replaced with a Ministry of Justice and the Lord Chancellor currently serves in the position of Secretary of State for Justice.

text: The judiciary has no power to strike down primary legislation, and can only rule on secondary legislation that it is invalid with regard to the primary legislation if necessary.

text: Under the concept of parliamentary sovereignty, Parliament can enact any primary legislation it chooses. However, the concept immediately becomes problematic when the question is asked; "If parliament can do anything, can it bind its successors?". It is generally held that parliament can do no such thing.

text: Equally, while statute takes precedence over precedent-derived common law and the judiciary has no power to strike down primary legislation, there are certain cases where the supreme judicature has effected an injunction against the application of an act or reliance on its authority by the civil service. The seminal example of this is the Factortame case, where the House of Lords granted such an injunction preventing the operation of the Merchant Shipping Act 1988 until litigation in the European Court of Justice had been resolved.

text: The House of Lords ruling in Factortame (No. 1), approving the European Court of Justice formulation that "a national court which, in a case before it concerning Community law, considers that the sole obstacle which precludes it from granting interim relief is a rule of national law, must disapply that rule", has created an implicit tiering of legislative reviewability; the only way for parliament to prevent the supreme judicature from injunctively striking out a law on the basis of incompatibility with Community law is to pass an act specifically removing that power from the court, or by repealing the European Communities Act 1972.

text: The British legal systems are based on common law traditions, which require:

text:
Police or regulators cannot initiate complaints under criminal law but can only investigate (prosecution is mostly reserved for the Crown Prosecution Service), which prevents selective enforcement—e.g., the "fishing expedition" which is often specifically forbidden.
Prosecutors cannot withhold evidence from counsel for the defendant; to do so results in mistrial or dismissal. Accordingly, their relation to police is no advantage.
Defendants convicted can appeal, but only fresh and compelling evidence not available at trial can be introduced, restricting the power of the court of appeal to the process of law applied.

text: United States[edit]

text: Separation of powers was first established in the United States Constitution, the founding fathers included features of many new concepts, including hard-learned historical lessons about the checks and balances of power. Similar concepts were also prominent in the state governments of the United States. As colonies of Great Britain, the founding fathers considered that the American states had suffered an abuse of the broad power of parliamentarism and monarchy. As a remedy, the US Constitution limits the powers of the federal government through various means, in particular, the three branches of the federal government are divided by exercising different functions, and the executive and legislative powers are separated in origin by separate elections and the judiciary is kept independent, each branch controls the actions of others and balances its powers in some way.

text: In the United States Constitution, Article 1 Section I gives Congress only those "legislative powers herein granted" and proceeds to list those permissible actions in Article I Section 8, while Section 9 lists actions that are prohibited for Congress. The vesting clause in Article II places no limits on the Executive branch, simply stating that, "The Executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America."[33] The Supreme Court holds "The judicial Power" according to Article III, and it established the implication of Judicial review in Marbury v. Madison under the Marshall court.[34]

text: The presidential system adopted by the Constitution of the United States obeys the balance of powers sought, and not found, by the constitutional monarchy. The people appoint their representatives to meet periodically in a legislative body, and, since they do not have a king, the people themselves elect a preeminent citizen to perform, also periodically, the executive functions of the State. The direct election of the head of state or of the executive power is an inevitable consequence of the political freedom of the people, understood as the capacity to appoint and depose their leaders. Only this separate election of the person who has to fulfill the functions that the Constitution attributes to the president of the government, so different by its nature, and by its function, from the election of representatives of the electors, allows the executive power to be controlled by the legislative and submitted to the demands of political responsibility.[35]

text: Judicial independence is maintained by appointments for life that makes disappear very soon any sense of dependence on the Executive, with voluntary retirement and a high threshold of dismissal by the Legislature, in addition to a salary that can not be diminished during their service.

text: The federal government refers to the branches as "branches of government", while some systems use "government" to describe the executive. The Executive branch has attempted[36] to claim power arguing for separation of powers to include being the Commander in Chief of a standing army since the American Civil War, executive orders, emergency powers and security classifications since World War II, national security, signing statements, and the scope of the unitary executive.

text: «In order to lay a due foundation for that separate and distinct exercise of the different powers of government, which to a certain extent is admitted on all hands to be essential to the preservation of liberty, it is evident that each department should have a will of its own; and consequently should be so constituted that the members of each should have as little agency as possible in the appointment of the members of the others. Were this principle rigorously adhered to, it would require that all the appointments for the supreme executive, legislative, and judiciary magistracies should be drawn from the same fountain of authority, the people, through channels having no communication whatever with one another. Perhaps such a plan of constructing the several departments would be less difficult in practice than it may in contemplation appear. Some difficulties, however, and some additional expense would attend the execution of it. Some deviations, therefore, from the principle must be admitted. In the constitution of the judiciary department in particular, it might be inexpedient to insist rigorously on the principle: first, because peculiar qualifications being essential in the members, the primary consideration ought to be to select that mode of choice which best secures these qualifications; secondly, because the permanent tenure by which the appointments are held in that department, must soon destroy all sense of dependence on the authority conferring them.»

text: «It is equally evident, that the members of each department should be as little dependent as possible on those of the others, for the emoluments annexed to their offices. Were the executive magistrate, or the judges, not independent of the legislature in this particular, their independence in every other would be merely nominal.»

text: Other systems[edit]

text: Republic of China[edit]

text: According to Sun Yat-sen's idea of "separation of the five powers", the government of the Republic of China has five branches:

text:
Executive Yuan – led by the premier but in actuality it is the president who sets policy – executive
Legislative Yuan – unicameral – legislature
Judicial Yuan – its Constitutional Court (highest) and Supreme Court have different jurisdictions – judiciary
Control Yuan – audit branch
Examination Yuan – civil service personnel management and human resources

text: The president and vice president as well as the defunct National Assembly are constitutionally not part of the above five branches. Before being abolished in 2005, the National Assembly was a standing constituent assembly and electoral college for the president and vice president. Its constitutional amending powers were passed to the legislative yuan and its electoral powers were passed to the electorate.

text: The relationship between the executive and legislative branches are poorly defined. An example of the problems this causes is the near complete political paralysis that results when the president, who has neither the power to veto nor the ability to dissolve the legislature and call new elections, cannot negotiate with the legislature when his party is in the minority.[37] The examination and control yuans are marginal branches; their leaders as well as the leaders of the executive and judicial yuans are appointed by the president and confirmed by the legislative yuan. The legislature is the only branch that chooses its own leadership. The vice president has practically no responsibilities.

text: Belgium[edit]

text: Belgium is currently a federated state that has imposed the trias politica on different governmental levels. The constitution of 1831, considered one of the most liberal of its time for limiting the powers of its monarch and imposing a rigorous system of separation of powers, is based on three principles (represented in the Schematic overview of Belgian institutions):

text: Trias Politica (horizontal separation of powers):

text:
The legislative power is attributed to an elected parliamentary body elected with a representative general election system (one person one vote).
The executive power is attributed to the Council of Ministers. Ministers are formally appointed by the King, though in practice the prime minister decides the composition of his cabinet. The ministers are usually from the elected members of parliament (non-elected people can also be nominated). However, they must first resign from their elected seat.
The judicial power is in the hands of the courts. Magistrates are nominated by the minister (on proposal from a Council of the Magistrates).
Magistrates can be nominated to become a judge (sitting magistrates) or instructing judge (investigating judge) of Procureur (public prosecutor) (the standing magistrates).
The executive branch of the government is responsible to provide the physical means to execute its role (infrastructure, staff, financial means).
Judges and some other people cannot run for elected office while they are nominated to certain positions (military, police-officers, clergy, notaries, bailiffs).

text: Subsidiarity (vertical separation of powers):

text:
Supranational directives (EU legislation) and international treaties are subjected to approval of the federal level (the federal level being Belgium the nation state)
The federal level is composed of the following:
A bicameral parliament (House of Representative and Senate) (in 2014 this will be a directly elected house and an indirectly appointed Senate of the regions)
A federal government (led by the Prime Minister and the ministers and secretaries of state)
Tasked with overseeing justice, defense, foreign affairs, and social security, public health
High Court, Constitutional Court, Cassation Court and Council of State
The regional level is composed of the following:
A monocameral parliament
A regional government led by the minister-president (ministers and secretaries of state) is tasked with regional matters.
Provinces also have similar structures:
A monocameral provincial council
A nominated provincial governor assisted by deputies is tasked with provincial matters.
Appellate Court, Assisses Court
An intermediate level of Arrondissements subdivides the provinces
it has only an executive level with an arrondissemental commissars
City and communal entities:
A city or communal council
A mayor, assisted by aldermen, is tasked with local matters.
Magistrates Court, Correctional Court (three judges).
Justice of the peace and Police Court judges (single judge courts)

text: Secularism (separation of state and religion):

text:
The king, the head of state, holds no political authority and requires executive approval by a minister for every action and statement; he nominates the ministers but he does not choose them (his executive powers); he signs and decrees the laws voted in parliament (his legislative powers);
The head of state is commander in chief of the military (in title only), politically the military depends of the Minister of Defense and the chiefs of staff are responsible towards parliament and take their orders from the Minister of Defense and the government;
Certain functions are deemed incompatible and people must resign from their function if they want to assume responsibilities in another function (military commanders have never been government ministers, even during a war)

text: Costa Rica[edit]

text: In the aftermath of the 43-day civil war in 1948 (after former President and incumbent candidate Rafael Álgel Calderón Guardia tried to take power through fraud, by not recognising the results of the presidential election that he had lost), the question of which transformational model the Costa Rican State would follow was the main issue that confronted the victors. A Constituent Assembly was elected by popular vote to draw up a new constitution, enacted in 1949, and remains in force. This document was an edit of the constitution of 1871, as the constituent assembly rejected more radical corporatist ideas proposed by the ruling Junta Fundadora de la Segunda República (which, although having come to power by military force, abolished the armed forces). Nonetheless, the new constitution increased centralization of power at the expense of municipalities and eliminated provincial government altogether, at the time it increased the powers of congress and the judiciary.

text: It established the three supreme powers as the legislature, executive, and judicial branches, but also created two other autonomous state organs that have equivalent power, but not equivalent rank. The first is the Tribunal Supremo de Elecciones de Costa Rica (electoral branch) which controls elections and makes unique, unappealable decisions on their outcomes.

text: The second is the office of the Comptroller General (audit branch), an autonomous and independent organ nominally subordinate to the unicameral legislative assembly. All budgets of ministries and municipalities must pass through this agency, including the execution of budget items such as contracting for routine operations. The Comptroller also provides financial vigilance over government offices and office holders, and routinely brings actions to remove mayors for malfeasance, firmly establishing this organization as the fifth branch of the Republic.

text: European Union[edit]

text:
The European Union is a supranational polity, and is neither a country nor a federation; but as the EU wields political power it complies with the principle of separation of powers. There are seven institutions of the European Union. In intergovernmental matters, most power is concentrated in the Council of the European Union—giving it the characteristics of a normal international organization. Here, all power at the EU level is in one branch. In the latter there are four main actors. The European Commission acts as an independent executive which is appointed by the Council in conjunction with the European Parliament; but the Commission also has a legislative role as the sole initiator of EU legislation.[38][39]
[40] An early maxim was: "The Commission proposes and the Council disposes"; and although the EU's lawmaking procedure is now much more complicated, this simple maxim still holds some truth. As well as both executive and legislative functions, the Commission arguably exercises a third, quasi-judicial, function under Articles 101 & 102 TFEU (competition law ); although the ECJ remains the final arbiter. The European Parliament is one half of the legislative branch and is directly elected. The Council itself acts both as the second half of the legislative branch and also holds some executive functions (some of which are exercised by the related European Council in practice). The European Court of Justice acts as the independent judicial branch, interpreting EU law and treaties. The remaining institution, the European Court of Auditors, is an independent audit authority (due to the sensitive nature of fraud in the EU).

text:
Council of the European Union – executive and legislative
European Commission – executive, legislative and quasi-judicial
European Council – executive
European Court of Auditors – audit
Court of Justice of the European Union and the General Court – judicial
European Parliament – legislative

text: Germany[edit]

text: The three branches in German government are further divided into six main bodies enshrined in the Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany:

text:
Federal President (Bundespräsident) – formally executive, but mainly representative in daily politics
Federal Cabinet (Bundesregierung) – executive
Federal Diet (Bundestag) & Federal Council (Bundesrat) – bicameral legislative
Federal Assembly (Bundesversammlung) – presidential electoral college (consisting of the members of the Bundestag and electors from the constituent states)
Federal Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht) – judiciary

text: Besides the constitutional court the judicial branch at the federal level is made up of five supreme courts—one for civil and criminal cases (Bundesgerichtshof), and one each for administrative, tax, labour, and social security issues. There are also state (Länder / Bundesländer) based courts beneath them, and a rarely used senate of the supreme courts.

text: Hungary[edit]

text: This article's factual accuracy may be compromised due to out-of-date information. Please update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. (August 2014)

text: The four independent branches of power in Hungary (the parliament, the government, the court system, and the office of the public accuser) are divided into six bodies:

text:
Parliament (Magyar Országgyűlés): elected every 4 years by the people in a highly complex, one-round voting system
Government (Magyar Kormány): installed and removed by 50%+1 basic majority vote of the parliament, 4-year terms
Supreme Court (Legfelsőbb Bíróság): Chief justice elected by qualified (2/3) majority of the parliament, no government oversight
Constitutional court (Alkotmánybíróság): members elected by qualified majority of the parliament for 8 years, this body nullifies laws and has no government oversight.
Chief public accuser (Legfőbb ügyész): elected by qualified majority of the parliament, 6-year terms, office budget fixed, no government oversight.
The President of the Republic (Köztársasági Elnök) is elected by qualified majority of the Hungarian parliament for 5-year terms (cannot be reelected more than once). The President's task is to oversee the functioning of the democracy. Most of his/her powers are ceremonial only: like signing laws into power and commanding the military in time of peace. But before signing, once he/she can also return accepted bills with advices to the Parliament for reconsideration, he/she can also request nullification in advance from the Constitutional Court. He can negotiate with civil/professional unions regarding the bills. Without the President's permission, the country can neither declare war nor deploy the armed forces.

text: The independent pillar status of the Hungarian public accuser's office is a unique construction, loosely modeled on the system Portugal introduced after the 1974 victory of the Carnation Revolution. The public accuser (attorney general) body has become the fourth column of Hungarian democracy only in recent times: after communism fell in 1989, the office was made independent by a new clausule XI. of the Constitution. The change was meant to prevent abuse of state power, especially with regards to the use of false accusations against opposition politicians, who may be excluded from elections if locked in protracted or excessively severe court cases.

text: To prevent the Hungarian accuser's office from neglecting its duties, natural human private persons can submit investigation requests, called "pótmagánvád" directly to the courts, if the accusers' office refuses to do its job. Courts will decide if the allegations have merit and order police to act in lieu of the accuser's office if warranted. In its decision No. 42/2005 the Hungarian constitutional court declared that the government does not enjoy such privilege and the state is powerless to further pursue cases if the public accuser refuses to do so.

text: Quadripartite systems[edit]

text: The Empire of Brazil had, in addition to the three traditional powers, the moderating power, which was exercised solely by the Emperor,[41] and which function was resolving conflicts between the other powers.


document_title: Jude the Apostle

question_text: who was the patron saint of the lost cause

text: Jude the Apostle

text: Identity[edit]

text: New Testament[edit]

text: Jude is clearly distinguished from Judas Iscariot, another apostle and later the betrayer of Jesus. Both Jude and Judas are translations of the name Ὶούδας in the Koine Greek language original text of the New Testament, which in turn is a Greek variant of Judah (Y'hudah), a name which was common among Jews at the time. In most Bibles in languages other than English and French, Jude and Judas are referred to by the same name.

text: Aside from Judas Iscariot, the New Testament mentions Jude or Judas six times, in four different contexts:

text:
"Jude of James", one of the twelve apostles (Luke 6:16 and Acts 1:13);
"Judas, (not Judas Iscariot)", apparently an apostle (John 14:22);
the brother of Jesus (Matthew 13:55, Mark 6:3);
the writer of the Epistle of Jude, who identifies himself as "the brother of James" (Jude 1:1).

tag: ol

text: The first two are almost always thought to be the same person,[8] although theologian Raymond Brown saw the identification as uncertain.[9]

text: The latter two are also usually thought to be the same person, though this too is not certain; see Epistle of Jude.

text: Catholic tradition generally holds this to be the same person; while Protestants generally believe 1 and 2, and 3 and 4 were two different people.

text: Brother of James or son of James?[edit]

text: Translations into English from the original Greek of the New Testament vary in their rendering of Luke 6:16 and Acts 1:13. A literal translation of the references to Jude in these passages gives "Jude of James", as in Young's Literal Translation of the Bible, but scholars differ on whether this means "Jude, brother of James" or "Jude, son of James". The King James and the Douay-Rheims versions call him  "Judas the brother of James", making him the same person as the writer of the Epistle of Jude, who identifies himself as "Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James" (Jude 1:1).

text: Most modern translations (including the New International Version, Revised Standard Version and New Revised Standard Version), identify him as "Jude the son of James", and not the same person as the author of the Epistle of Jude. Protestant scholar Darrell L. Bock writes that it must mean "son" not "brother", because when "brother" is intended, the Greek word for "brother" (adelphos) is present.[10] Bock also says that means he was not the brother of Jesus.

text: Brother of Jesus?[edit]

text: Opinion is divided on whether Jude the apostle was also Jude, brother of Jesus, the traditional author of the Epistle of Jude.[11] Generally, Catholics believe the two Judes are the same person,[12] while Protestants generally do not.

text: According to the surviving fragments of the work Exposition of the Sayings of the Lord of the Apostolic Father Papias of Hierapolis, who lived c. 70–163 AD, Mary the wife of Cleophas or Alphaeus would be the mother of Judas the brother of Jesus that Papias identifies with Thaddeus:

text: Mary the wife of Cleophas or Alphaeus, who was the mother of James the bishop and apostle, and of Simon and Thaddeus, and of one Joseph...(Fragment X)[13]

text: Possible identity with Thaddeus[edit]

text: In the apostolic lists at Matthew 10:3 and Mark 3:18, Jude is omitted, but there is a Thaddeus (or in some manuscripts of Matthew 10:3, "Lebbaeus who was surnamed Thaddaeus", and so in the King James Version) listed in his place. This has led many Christians since early times to harmonize the lists by positing a "Jude Thaddeus", known by either name. This is made plausible by the fact that "Thaddeus" seems to be a nickname (see Thaddeus) and that many New Testament figures have multiple names (such as Simon Peter and Joseph Barnabas).

text: A further complication is the fact that the name "Judas" was tarnished by Judas Iscariot. It has been argued that for this reason it is unsurprising that Mark and Matthew refer to him by an alternate name.[14]

text: Some Biblical scholars reject this theory, however, holding that Jude and Thaddeus did not represent the same person.[15] Scholars have proposed alternative theories to explain the discrepancy: an unrecorded replacement of one for the other during the ministry of Jesus because of apostasy or death;[16] the possibility that "twelve" was a symbolic number and an estimation;[17] or simply that the names were not recorded perfectly by the early church.[18]

text: Thaddeus, one of the twelve apostles, is often indistinguishable from Thaddeus of Edessa, one of the Seventy Disciples.[19][20]

text: In some Latin manuscripts of Matthew 10:3, Thaddeus is called Judas the Zealot.

text: Tradition and legend[edit]

text: Tradition holds that Saint Jude preached the Gospel in Judea, Samaria, Idumaea, Syria, Mesopotamia and Libya.[21] He is also said to have visited Beirut and Edessa, though the emissary of the latter mission is also identified as Thaddeus of Edessa, Addai,[22] one of the Seventy.[23] The 14th-century writer Nicephorus Callistus makes Jude the bridegroom at the wedding at Cana. The legend reports that St. Jude was born into a Jewish family in Paneas, a town in Galilee later rebuilt during the Roman period and renamed Caesarea Philippi.[24][note 1]

text: In all probability he spoke both Greek and Aramaic, like almost all of his contemporaries in that area, and was a farmer by trade. According to the legend, St. Jude was a son of Clopas and his mother Mary, a cousin of the Virgin Mary.[26] Tradition has it that Jude's father, Clopas, was martyred because of his forthright and outspoken devotion to the risen Christ.

text: Although Saint Gregory the Illuminator is credited as the "Apostle to the Armenians", when he baptized King Tiridates III of Armenia in 301, converting the Armenians, the Apostles Jude and Bartholomew are traditionally believed to have been the first to bring Christianity to Armenia, and are therefore venerated as the patron saints of the Armenian Apostolic Church. Linked to this tradition is the Saint Thaddeus Monastery (now in northern Iran) and Saint Bartholomew Monastery (now in southeastern Turkey) which were both constructed in what was then Armenia.

text: Tradition holds that Jude the Apostle was vegetarian.[27]

text: Death and remains[edit]

text: According to tradition, Saint Jude suffered martyrdom about 65 AD in Beirut, in the Roman province of Syria, together with the apostle Simon the Zealot, with whom he is usually connected. The axe that he is often shown holding in pictures symbolizes the way in which he was killed.[28] Their acts and martyrdom were recorded in an Acts of Simon and Jude that was among the collection of passions and legends traditionally associated with the legendary Abdias, bishop of Babylon, and said to have been translated into Latin by his disciple Tropaeus Africanus, according to the Golden Legend account of the saints.[29]

text: Sometime after his death, Saint Jude's body was brought from Beirut to Rome and placed in a crypt in St. Peter's Basilica which was visited by many devotees. Now his bones are in the left transept of St. Peter's Basilica under the main altar of St. Joseph in one tomb with the remains of the apostle Simon the Zealot. According to another popular tradition, the remains of St. Jude were preserved in an Armenian monastery on an island in the northern part of Issyk-Kul Lake in Kyrgyzstan at least until the mid-15th century. Later legends either deny that the remains are preserved there or claim that they were moved to a yet more desolate stronghold in the Pamir Mountains.

text: Iconography[edit]

text: Jude is traditionally depicted carrying the image of Jesus in his hand or close to his chest, betokening the legend of the Image of Edessa, recorded in apocryphal correspondence between Jesus and Abgar which is reproduced in Eusebius' History Ecclesiastica, I, xiii. Eusebius relates that King Abgar of Edessa (now Şanlıurfa in southeast Turkey) sent a letter to Jesus seeking a cure for an illness afflicting him. With the letter he sent his envoy Hannan, the keeper of the archives, offering his own home city to Jesus as a safe dwelling place. The envoy painted a likeness of Jesus with choice paints (or alternatively, impressed with Abgar's faith, Jesus pressed his face into a cloth and gave it to Hannan) to take to Abgar with his answer. Upon seeing Jesus' image, the king placed it with great honor in one of his palatial houses. After Christ's execution, Jude Thomas the Apostle sent Addai, one of the 70 or 72 in Luke 10:1–12 to King Abgar[30] and the king was cured. Astonished, he converted to Christianity, along with many of the people under his rule. Additionally, St. Jude is often depicted with a flame above his head, representing his presence at Pentecost, when he was said to have received the Holy Spirit with the other apostles.

text: Veneration[edit]

text: According to tradition, after his martyrdom, pilgrims came to his grave to pray and many of them experienced the powerful intercessions of St. Jude. Thus the title, 'The Saint for the Hopeless and the Despaired'. St. Bridget of Sweden and St. Bernard had visions from God asking each to accept St. Jude as 'The Patron Saint of the Impossible'.[28][31][32]

text: His feast day is October 28 (Roman Catholic Church, the Anglican Communion and Lutheran Church) and June 19 (Eastern Orthodox Church).

text: The Order of Preachers (better known as the Dominicans) began working in present-day Armenia soon after their founding in 1216. At that time, there was already a substantial devotion to Saint Jude by both Catholic and Orthodox Christians in the area. This lasted until persecution drove Christians from the area in the 18th century. Devotion to Saint Jude began again in earnest in the 19th century, starting in Italy and Spain, spreading to South America, and finally to the United States (starting in the vicinity of Chicago) owing to the influence of the Claretians and the Dominicans in the 1920s.

text: Patronage[edit]

text: Among some Roman Catholics, Saint Jude is venerated as the "patron saint of lost causes". This practice stems from the belief that few Christians invoked him for misplaced fear of praying to Christ's betrayer, Judas Iscariot, because of their similar names. The ignored Jude thus supposedly became quite eager to assist anyone who sought his help, to the point of interceding in the most dire of circumstances. The Church also wanted to encourage veneration of this "forgotten" apostle, and maintained that Saint Jude would intercede in any lost cause to prove his sanctity and zeal for Christ.[citation needed]

text: Saint Jude is the patron saint of the Chicago Police Department and of Clube de Regatas do Flamengo (a soccer team in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil). His other patronages include desperate situations and hospitals. One of his namesakes is St. Jude Children's Research Hospital in Memphis, Tennessee, which has helped many children with terminal illnesses and their families since its founding in 1962.[33]

text: Shrines and churches[edit]

text: Many countries venerate the Apostle Jude and have constructed shrines or churches dedicated to his memory. Such sites include those in Australia, Brazil, Sri Lanka, Cuba, India, Iran, the Philippines, the United Kingdom, the United States and Lebanon. The National Shrine of St. Jude in Chicago, Illinois was founded in 1929 by the Claretian Missionaries. The Nationwide Center of St. Jude Devotions [34] in Baltimore was founded in 1917 by the Pallottines. The National Shrine of Saint Jude Thaddeus in the Philippines was erected by the Archdiocese of Manila in 1954 as Espíritu Santo Chinese Parish. The Shrine holds the saint's novena liturgy every Thursday, and is now under the Society of the Divine Word that also runs the attached Saint Jude Catholic School. The National Shrine of Saint Jude at Faversham in England was founded in 1955.[35]


document_title: Trump National Golf Club (Bedminster, New Jersey)

question_text: how much does a trump golf membership cost

text: Details[edit]

text: Donald Trump bought the property, which included the estate of automaker John Z. De Lorean, for less than $35 million in 2002.[4] It was previously known as Lamington Farm and the site of a foundering golf course construction project.[5][6] The 36-hole club was built by golf course architects Tom Fazio and Tom Fazio II, and the first course opened thirteen years ago in 2004.

text: Membership in the club costs at the most $300,000[7][8]  In 2005, Golf Magazine ranked it at #73 in the United States and #84 by Golf Digest for 2005 and 2006.[9]

text: For tax purposes, The Trump Organization secured a classification of the Bedminster course and the Trump course in Colts Neck as farmland.  For that purpose, part of the acreage at Bedminster is used for growing hay and raising eight goats.  The Wall Street Journal estimated that the use of the property tax exemption for farmland reduced the tax bill on the two golf courses from $80,000 to less than $1,000.  The director of the New Jersey chapter of the Sierra Club said that Trump was "hiding behind a farmland assessment to get a massive tax break on a golf course."[10][11]

text: The club hosted the wedding of Trump's daughter, Ivanka Trump, in October 2009.[12][13]

text: Majors host[edit]

text: The golf club hosted the U.S. Women's Open from July 13–16, 2017.[14] The Professional Golfers' Association of America awarded the course the 2022 Men's PGA Championship.[15]

text:
Year

Major

Winner

Score

Margin of
Victory

Runner(s) Up

Winner's Share ($)

2022

Men's (US) PGA Championship

To Be Determined

2017

U.S. Women's Open

 Park Sung Hyun

277 (-11)

1 stroke

 Choi Hye-Jin (a)

900,000

text: Trump presidency[edit]

text: In November 2016, after Trump's presidential election, the property was used to host meetings for the Donald Trump presidential transition.[16] Representative Leonard Lance predicted that the resort could become "Camp David North".[17] In 2017 it became one of the three official presidential residencies, the other two being Trump Tower in New York and Mar-a-Lago in Florida.[18]

text: In May 2017, Trump started to use the property for weekend retreats during the summer when Mar-a-Lago is closed for the season. Trump stated that staying at his property in Bedminster is less expensive and disruptive than going to Trump Tower in New York City. This made the property the "Summer White House".[19]

text: In August 2017, the estate was used as a working vacation of the President for a duration of 17 days while the White House underwent renovations approved by the Obama administration and overseen by the Trump administration.[20][21]

text: In August 2018, the estate became again the site of the President's working vacation for close to two weeks.[22]

text: Security issues[edit]

text: Due to security concerns, flight restrictions are imposed by the Federal Aviation Administration within a 30-mile radius during Trump's stays at his golf club.[23] Restrictions affect 19 airports in New Jersey and Pennsylvania, among them two airports that have to close down completely because they are within a 10 mile-radius, namely Solberg Airport in Readington, New Jersey and Somerset Airport in Bedminster, New Jersey.[23]

text: With the official designation as an official residence of Trump, Congress appropriated up to $41 million in tax-payer dollars for its security costs in the time between inauguration and October 1, 2017.[18]

text: Trump Mausoleum[edit]

text: In 2015, Trump received the approval to build a family cemetery at the estate that would include a classical mausoleum. Trump indicated that he wants to be buried at the Bedminster golf course.[21]