Why Accountability Mechanisms Failed
From Separation of Powers to Corporate Capture: How Constitutional Accountability Was Dismantled
After Article 61 was removed from Magna Carta, the struggle for accountability continued. The American Constitution attempted to solve the accountability problem through separation of powers and impeachment. Modern law attempted to solve it through qualified immunity and Section 1983 lawsuits. But all of these mechanisms have failed.
This article explores why accountability mechanisms have failed and what this failure reveals about the current state of constitutional government.
The Constitutional Accountability Mechanisms
The American Constitution created three mechanisms designed to hold government officials accountable:
The Constitution divides power among three branches: legislative, executive, and judicial. Each branch is supposed to check the power of the others. Congress passes laws and controls the budget. The President enforces laws. The courts interpret laws and protect constitutional rights.
The theory is that no single branch can become too powerful because the other branches will check it. But this mechanism has failed because the branches have learned to cooperate with each other rather than check each other.
The Constitution provides that the House of Representatives can impeach (accuse) the President or other officials of "high crimes and misdemeanors." The Senate then holds a trial and can remove the official from office if two-thirds of senators vote to convict.
Impeachment is supposed to be the ultimate accountability mechanism for the most powerful officials. But it has almost never succeeded. Only two presidents have been impeached, and neither was convicted. Impeachment has become a partisan tool rather than a genuine accountability mechanism.
The courts have the power to declare government actions unconstitutional and void them. This is supposed to prevent government from violating the Constitution.
But judicial review has become limited by doctrines like qualified immunity, which protect government officials from liability even when they violate constitutional rights. Courts have also become reluctant to challenge government actions, especially in national security matters.
Real-World Failures: When Accountability Mechanisms Don't Work
The following cases demonstrate how accountability mechanisms have failed in practice:
Why Accountability Mechanisms Fail
Accountability mechanisms are controlled by the same people they're supposed to hold accountable. Congress impeaches the President, but Congress is controlled by politicians who benefit from executive power. The courts protect constitutional rights, but judges are appointed by the President and Senate.
This creates a fundamental conflict of interest. Those with power are not motivated to enforce accountability against themselves.
Courts have created doctrines like qualified immunity that make it nearly impossible to hold government officials accountable. These doctrines say that officials are only liable if they violated a "clearly established" right. But courts interpret this requirement so narrowly that officials are almost never held accountable.
These doctrines were created by judges to protect government officials, not to protect constitutional rights.
Accountability mechanisms have become partisan tools. Impeachment is used not to hold officials accountable for genuine violations, but to attack political opponents. Investigations are used to damage political enemies rather than to enforce the law.
When accountability becomes partisan, it loses legitimacy and effectiveness. People see it as a political attack rather than genuine enforcement of the law.
The entire system is captured by corporate interests. Government officials are influenced by campaign donations, revolving-door employment, and other forms of corruption. When the system itself is corrupt, accountability mechanisms can't function.
This is the deepest problem: it's not just that individual accountability mechanisms have failed. The entire system that's supposed to enforce accountability has been captured by those with power.
The Pattern: From Accountability to Impunity
The history of accountability mechanisms reveals a clear pattern:
- 1.A new accountability mechanism is created (Article 61, impeachment, qualified immunity doctrine)
- 2.Those with power realize the mechanism could be used against them
- 3.They systematically weaken or capture the mechanism (remove Article 61, make impeachment partisan, create doctrines like qualified immunity)
- 4.The mechanism becomes ineffective, and impunity becomes the norm
What Comes Next?
Understanding why accountability mechanisms have failed is the first step toward restoring them. To explore how accountability can be restored through constitutional enforcement and prerequisites to office, read our comprehensive modules:
References & Further Reading
- Iran-Contra Affair: Congressional investigations and reports (1987-1988)
- CIA Torture Program: Senate Intelligence Committee report (2014)
- 2008 Financial Crisis: Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission report (2011)
- Qualified Immunity: US Supreme Court cases (Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 1982; qualified immunity doctrine)
- Impeachment: US Constitution, Article II, Section 4
- Separation of Powers: US Constitution, Articles I-III