THEORY (CONCEPT) OF SEPARATION OF POWERS: HISTORICAL AND LEGAL DISCOURSE FROM ANTIQUITY TO MODERN TIMES

Abstract

The purpose of the article is to conduct a comprehensive historical and legal analysis of the evolution of the separation of powers doctrine from its inception in Antiquity to its conceptual formalization in the Modern Era. The study aims to reveal the transformation process of this idea from a forced mechanism of the division of labor in ancient Greek city-states to a fundamental principle of the functioning of the state apparatus. Furthermore, the work aims to highlight the influence of prominent philosophers and legal theorists on the development of related institutions: state sovereignty, democracy, and the system of checks and balances; this allows for a deeper understanding of the historical foundations of modern constitutions and mechanisms for protecting natural human rights from the usurpation of power. Methods. The methodological basis of the research is constituted by the dialectical approach, which enabled the examination of the separation of powers doctrine within its evolutionary development and transformation from Antiquity to the Modern Era. Central to the study is the application of the historical-legal method, which was used to analyze the genesis of the state-legal views held by thinkers of various epochs (Plato, Aristotle, Marsilius of Padua, Jean Bodin, John Lilburne, John Locke) within the context of specific historical conditions. The use of the comparative-legal method facilitated the comparison of divergences in the understanding of sovereignty and checks and balances across different political regimes (ranging from slave-owning poleis and feudalism to the bourgeois revolutions), while the systemic-structural method allowed for the investigation of the mechanism of separation of powers as a coherent system of interconnected elements (branches of power, functions, and the institution of prerogative). Additionally, the logical-legal method was employed to formulate conclusions regarding the contemporary significance of the studied doctrine. The result of the research is the substantiation of the evolution of the separation of powers doctrine from the ancient class division of labor to a fundamental mechanism for the protection of human rights and ensuring popular sovereignty in the Modern Era. It is demonstrated that John Locke’s concept became a key stage in this transformation, as he not only distinguished the legislative, executive, and federative branches of power but also integrated effective mechanisms of checks and balances into this system: the fixed term of parliamentary powers, executive prerogative, and the government’s dependence on the social contract. It is established that this transition from a formal delineation of functions to a system of mutual control and balance became the foundation of modern constitutionalism, preventing the usurpation of power and guaranteeing the democratic development of the state. The research results consist of an analysis of the historical development of the separation of powers doctrine from its inception in Antiquity (Plato, Aristotle, Polybius) through the Middle Ages (Marsilius of Padua) to the Modern Era (Jean Bodin, John Lilburne, John Locke), focusing on the evolution of the system of checks and balances, sovereignty, and democracy. The topic of separation of powers has always been relevant, as humanity has long faced the problem of power concentration in the hands of a few, leading to tyranny, social inequality, and conflicts. In ancient city-states, it emerged as a response to the economic division of society into classes; in feudalism, as a counterweight to absolutism; and in the bourgeois revolutions of the 17th and 18th centuries, as an instrument for protecting natural human rights. This concept evolved from a theoretical foundation to a practical mechanism ensuring a balance between the branches of power, preventing usurpation and promoting justice. In the modern world, the topic remains extremely relevant due to global challenges to democracy. In many countries where the judiciary actively influences the executive and legislative branches, or in states with parliamentary systems of government, the separation of powers serves as a barrier against authoritarianism. Research into this topic is urgent for several reasons: first, it allows for a deeper understanding of the roots of modern constitutions, where the principle of separation of powers is enshrined as a foundation; second, in the context of geopolitical conflicts, studying the doctrine helps to analyze how power imbalances lead to aggression and instability. Finally, in scientific and educational terms, such studies foster the critical thinking necessary to counteract power manipulations in the era of globalization and AI, where new technologies can strengthen control. The conclusions state that the evolution of the separation of powers doctrine from ancient class division to a fundamental mechanism for protecting human rights reached its conceptual peak in the theory of John Locke. He substantiated the necessity of a systemic combination of legislative, executive, and federative branches with effective mechanisms of checks and balances (particularly fixed parliamentary terms and executive prerogative) to ensure popular sovereignty and prevent the usurpation of power.