The doctrine of separation of power was pivotal in allowing the court to find that section 29 of the Juveniles Act 1951 was incompatible to the constitutional principle of separation of powers--where judicial powers like sentencing must be exercised by the judiciary and not the executive.
This was decided on the basis that judicial powers like sentencing must be exercised by the judiciary and not the executive. The doctrine of separation of power was pivotal in allowing the court to find that section 29 of the Juveniles Act 1951 was incompatible to the constitutional principle of separation of powers.
The doctrine of separation of power was pivotal in allowing the court to find that section 29 of the Juveniles Act 1951 was incompatible to the constitutional principle of separation of powers. This was decided on the basis that judicial powers like sentencing must be exercised by the judiciary and not the executive.
The doctrine of separation of power was pivotal in allowing the court to find that section 29 of the Juveniles Act 1951 was incompatible to the constitutional principle of separation of powers. This was decided on the basis that judicial powers like sentencing must be exercised by the judiciary and not the executive.