Page 167 - DPOL201_WESTERN_POLITICAL_THOUGHT_ENGLISH

Unit 9: Jeremy Bentham

authority”, i.e. the electorate. The task of a sovereign was to harmonize different individual interests Notes
and promote social cooperation through legislation in form of punishment, rewards, encouragement
and incentives.
In his Constitutional Code, Bentham granted the power to the people to select and dismiss their
rulers, and to ensure that the interests of the rulers were closely linked with those of the people.
Towards this, he recommended the abolition of monarchy and the House of Lords, checks on
legislative authority, unicameralism, secret ballot, annual elections, equal electoral districts, annual
parliaments and election of the prime minister by the parliament. He also recommended the need
for central inspection, a public prosecutor, recruitment of the young in the government, and
competitive civil service examinations.
The idea behind annual elections was to maximize aptitude and minimize expenses, in order to
ensure high-quality officials and representatives. The threat of dismissal would ensure
accountability and responsibility. Unlike James Mill, Bentham insisted on a code of penal sanctions,
and attached considerable importance to public opinion. Bentham accepted that democracies would
also be subject to the “iron law of oligarchy”, and that government would always be that of the
many by the few, but there was nothing negative about this, for it ensured representation and
expertise.
Bentham viewed representative government as a solution to the problem that Plato raised, namely
finding experts to rule. He accepted that all individuals could be corrupted. The only precaution
was to give power to the people, for that would ensure the greatest happiness of the greatest
number. Like Plato, he accepted that governing was a skill, and that all were not capable of ruling,
which was why representatives were needed. Democracy ensured good rule and control of
governors.
Bentham rejected the idea of mixed or balanced constitutions representing interests, which was
central to the Whig view as exemplified by Burke. This was because interests change, and with it
representation would also change. The Utilitarians proposed representation of the people. Everyone
as an individual had the right to be represented, and therefore should have the right to vote. In A
Fragment on Government, Bentham used the criterion of circumstances to distinguish between a
free and a despotic government. Free government depended:
... on the manner in which that whole mass of power, which taken together, is supreme,
is in a free state, distributed among the several ranks of persons that are sharers in it:
on the source from whence their titles to it are successively derived: on the frequent
and easy changes of condition between governors and governed; whereby the interests
of one class are more or less indistinguishably blended with those of the other: on the
responsibility of the governors; or the right which a subject has of having the reasons
publicly assigned and canvassed of every act of power that is exerted over him: on the
liberty of press; or the security with which every man, be he of the one class or the
other, may make known his complaints and remonstrances to the whole community:
on the liberty of public association; or the security with which malcontents may
communicate their sentiments, construct their plans, and practice every mode of
opposition short of actual revolt, before the executive power can be legally justified in
disturbing them (Bentham 1977: 485).
Interestingly, Bentham opposed the concept of division of powers for three reasons. First, he
argued that if the rulers were already accountable to the people, there was no need for additional
checks. Division of power by itself did not secure and protect constitutional liberty. Second, even
with the division of power, it was possible to replace majority rule with that of a minority. This
was because divisions would give the minorities the right to veto legislation. He could foresee evil
consequences in the displacement of majority rule. Third, he argued that in the absence of effective
opposition, division of power would be redundant. He emphasized the importance of accountability

LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY 161