Draft:International erosion of separation of powers in Western democracies
 | Review waiting, please be patient.
This may take 8 weeks or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 2,842 pending submissions waiting for review.
Where to get help
How to improve a draft
You can also browse Wikipedia:Featured articles and Wikipedia:Good articles to find examples of Wikipedia's best writing on topics similar to your proposed article. Improving your odds of a speedy review To improve your odds of a faster review, tag your draft with relevant WikiProject tags using the button below. This will let reviewers know a new draft has been submitted in their area of interest. For instance, if you wrote about a female astronomer, you would want to add the Biography, Astronomy, and Women scientists tags. Editor resources
Reviewer tools
|
Comment: This article is a good start but it needs a bit more work before it's ready for mainspace. Some suggestions:*You mention "authors" and "studies": specify which authors and which studies, by whom were the studies done etc*In general, writing things out in paragraph form is better for Wikipedia than in bullet-point form.*More specific examples and backstory are needed. For example, you mention Brazil having "debates on presidential emergency powers". What powers? Why did this debate come into play?Also see WP:Writing better articles. Consider asking if anyone wants to help or collaborate on WikiProject Politics as well.Good luck! Shocksingularity (talk) 00:21, 24 September 2025 (UTC)
| Part of a series on |
| Politics |
|---|
_(cropped).svg) |
 Politics portal |
International erosion of separation of powers in Western democracies refers to a comparative political phenomenon where institutional checks and balances (separation of powers among executive, legislative, and judicial branches) are perceived to weaken across several established democracies. Scholars link this trend to global democratic backsliding and, in part, to the influence of U.S. patterns of executive aggrandizement.[1][2]
Background
[edit]The separation of powers principle was articulated by Locke and Montesquieu and constitutionalized in the U.S. (Virginia Declaration of Rights, 1776; Constitution, 1787). The U.S. model influenced many Western democracies in the 19th and 20th centuries. Recent scholarship highlights how its erosion in the United States has coincided with similar processes elsewhere.[3]
Evidence of spread
[edit]Comparative research documents the weakening of checks and balances in a range of democracies:
- Hungary — constitutional amendments centralizing power and limiting judicial independence.[2]
- Poland — reforms affecting judicial oversight and separation of institutions.[4]
- Mexico — presidential initiatives reducing independent oversight bodies.[5]
- Brazil — debates on presidential emergency powers and judicial limits.[6]
Mechanisms
[edit]Studies identify recurring mechanisms:
- reliance on emergency powers and broad statutory delegations;
- judicial weakening through court-packing, disciplinary measures, or non-compliance;
- centralization of authority over independent agencies;
- erosion of informal norms sustaining checks and balances;
- populist rhetoric framing institutions as obstacles to "the people".[2][3]
Scholarly interpretations
[edit]Nancy Bermeo identified "executive aggrandizement" as a common mode of democratic backsliding.[1] Comparative indices (V-Dem, Freedom House, Carnegie Endowment) track patterns of institutional weakening across democracies.[4] Legal scholars note that the U.S. trajectory has symbolic and practical influence abroad, reinforcing trends of concentrated executive authority.[3]
Criticism and debate
[edit]Some authors emphasize institutional resilience, pointing to judicial pushback, legislative resistance, EU oversight in European cases, and the continued salience of elections as counterweights. They caution against overgeneralization and highlight the diversity of outcomes across countries.[6]
See also
[edit]References
[edit]- ^ a b Bermeo, Nancy (2016). "On Democratic Backsliding". Journal of Democracy. 27 (1): 5–19. doi:10.1353/jod.2016.0012.
- ^ a b c "Executive Aggrandizement and its Outcomes" (PDF). V-Dem Institute. 2023. Retrieved September 15, 2025.
- ^ a b c "Democratic erosion: The role of executive aggrandizement". Brookings Institution. 2023. Retrieved September 15, 2025.
- ^ a b "Understanding and Responding to Global Democratic Backsliding". Carnegie Endowment. 2022. Retrieved September 15, 2025.
- ^ "An Uncertain Future: Democratic Backsliding through Executive Aggrandizement under AMLO". CSIS. 2024. Retrieved September 15, 2025.
- ^ a b "Populism and support for executive aggrandizement". Comparative Political Studies. SAGE. 2023. doi:10.1177/00104140231223738.