,CSL2601 Assignment 1 (COMPLETE ANSWERS)
Semester 2 2025 - DUE August 2025; 100% TRUSTED
Complete, trusted solutions and explanations.
(3 essays provided)
"Checks and Balances in South Africa’s Constitutional
Democracy: Principles, Practice, and Contemporary Challenges"
Introduction
The principle of separation of powers lies at the heart of South Africa’s
constitutional democracy, underpinning mechanisms of checks and
balances designed to ensure that legislative, executive, and judicial
powers offset and oversee one another. This structure seeks to prevent
power consolidation, protect institutional integrity, and uphold the rule
of law. Yet, recent political developments have exposed vulnerabilities,
testing the resilience of these constitutional safeguards.
1. Checks and Balances in Practice: Each Branch in Action
Legislature → Executive
Parliament wields oversight power over the executive through tools such
as motions of no confidence, impeachment, and public participation.
In Economic Freedom Fighters v Speaker of the National
Assembly (2017), the Constitutional Court held that Parliament
must create rules for presidential impeachment under Section 89
and undertake inquiries when impeachable conduct is alleged—
riveting a central accountability role for the legislative branch.
During the Jacob Zuma years, multiple no-confidence motions
reflected attempts at oversight, though the ANC’s majority
consistently stymied removal.
, In the Farmgate scandal, the EFF sought to revive impeachment
proceedings via the Constitutional Court, arguing that Parliament
failed its constitutional duty to hold the presidency accountable.
These examples illustrate the legislature’s potential as a check on the
executive—but also expose how party dominance can undermine that
role.
Executive → Legislature & Judiciary
The executive has limited yet critical powers to check other branches—
especially through presidential referrals and selective actions.
In Blind SA v President (2025), the President referred legislation to
the Constitutional Court under Sections 79 and 84 due to
constitutional concerns, prompting judicial scrutiny over
parliamentary output.
In Tembani v President (2024), the Court held that the President’s
conduct in limiting SADC Tribunal jurisdiction was
unconstitutional at the time he acted—demonstrating that
executive actions can be reviewed and constrained.
These cases show how the executive’s power isn't immune to judicial
and legislative counterweights.
Judiciary → Legislature & Executive
The judiciary serves as a key protector of constitutional order through
judicial review, invalidating overreach or procedural failures.
Glenister v President (2011) declared the Hawks lacked sufficient
independence, violating the requirement for a robust anti-
corruption entity—reinforcing judicial supervision of executive
structures.
McBride v Minister of Police (2016) struck down provisions
empowering the Police Minister to remove IPID’s head,
safeguarding the body's independence.
Semester 2 2025 - DUE August 2025; 100% TRUSTED
Complete, trusted solutions and explanations.
(3 essays provided)
"Checks and Balances in South Africa’s Constitutional
Democracy: Principles, Practice, and Contemporary Challenges"
Introduction
The principle of separation of powers lies at the heart of South Africa’s
constitutional democracy, underpinning mechanisms of checks and
balances designed to ensure that legislative, executive, and judicial
powers offset and oversee one another. This structure seeks to prevent
power consolidation, protect institutional integrity, and uphold the rule
of law. Yet, recent political developments have exposed vulnerabilities,
testing the resilience of these constitutional safeguards.
1. Checks and Balances in Practice: Each Branch in Action
Legislature → Executive
Parliament wields oversight power over the executive through tools such
as motions of no confidence, impeachment, and public participation.
In Economic Freedom Fighters v Speaker of the National
Assembly (2017), the Constitutional Court held that Parliament
must create rules for presidential impeachment under Section 89
and undertake inquiries when impeachable conduct is alleged—
riveting a central accountability role for the legislative branch.
During the Jacob Zuma years, multiple no-confidence motions
reflected attempts at oversight, though the ANC’s majority
consistently stymied removal.
, In the Farmgate scandal, the EFF sought to revive impeachment
proceedings via the Constitutional Court, arguing that Parliament
failed its constitutional duty to hold the presidency accountable.
These examples illustrate the legislature’s potential as a check on the
executive—but also expose how party dominance can undermine that
role.
Executive → Legislature & Judiciary
The executive has limited yet critical powers to check other branches—
especially through presidential referrals and selective actions.
In Blind SA v President (2025), the President referred legislation to
the Constitutional Court under Sections 79 and 84 due to
constitutional concerns, prompting judicial scrutiny over
parliamentary output.
In Tembani v President (2024), the Court held that the President’s
conduct in limiting SADC Tribunal jurisdiction was
unconstitutional at the time he acted—demonstrating that
executive actions can be reviewed and constrained.
These cases show how the executive’s power isn't immune to judicial
and legislative counterweights.
Judiciary → Legislature & Executive
The judiciary serves as a key protector of constitutional order through
judicial review, invalidating overreach or procedural failures.
Glenister v President (2011) declared the Hawks lacked sufficient
independence, violating the requirement for a robust anti-
corruption entity—reinforcing judicial supervision of executive
structures.
McBride v Minister of Police (2016) struck down provisions
empowering the Police Minister to remove IPID’s head,
safeguarding the body's independence.
