A Comparative Study of the Separation of Powers in the Japanese and ranian Legal Systems: Assessing the Optimality of the Separation of Powers Model

The idea of ​​separation of powers led to the formation of various legal systems, including the presidential, parliamentary and a mixture of semi-presidential and semi-parliamentary systems with the purpose of preventing the amassing of institutional power, and driving homogeneous issues in the legislative, executive, and judiciary areas toward specialization. Therefore, the comparative and prescriptive study for the Iranian legal system that tends to improve separation of powers and its leadership is an important issue not to be neglected. Accordingly, the current study attempted a comparative prescriptive study of the separation of powers in Iran and Japan. Japan is an Asian country that is quite successful in economics, and like Iran, uses a two-pillar executive power model. Japan’s model of the separation of powers is the monarchy-constitutional parliament, wherein the executive branch, consisting of the emperor and the cabinet, is accountable to parliament. Thus, while examining the differences and commonalities of the systems of separation of powers, the authors have utilized the descriptive-analytical method to explain that the parliamentary model in Japan, for its dominance on the government, faces much less executive tension. Moreover, because legislative and controlling authority is exercised exclusively within the framework of the National Diet[1] does not face normative, executive and even judicial divisions.