# data[].attributes.body
Checks and balances are necessary for an uncorrupt government, so that they don’t abuse their power and take advantage of the citizens’ trust and country’s resources. Checks and balances is the separation of power in the government which ensures, which is ensured through the establishment of different branches. Each branch has the ability to check the power of the others, maintaining a balance of power between them. Checks and balances play two key roles. First, they limit the power of the government to act without regard to the views or interests of minority. They ensure that the perspectives of those who are in the minority on a given issue are represented – for example, by guaranteeing that opposition voices are heard in the process of law-making. Second, they ensure that policy is tested. This helps to improve the quality of decision-making, and prevent behaviour which might threaten the stability of the country. An example is Pakistan which ranks very low on the democracy scale and have strong authoritarian military influence despite some democratic processes. This has resulted in distortion of priorities of the government from the welfare of citizens to Military dominance in the neighbouring countries. This has led to corrupt practices which has jeopardised the human rights and welfare of Pakistanis, economic instability and rampant poverty and violence throughout the nation. This shows the importance of checks and balances to prevent a crumbling democracy.

# data[].attributes.body
Checks on the government's power are absolutely necessary as this allows for full transparency on what occurs within the government, which is necessary to alleviate the doubts of citizens and prevent societal backlash against the government. Depending on the measures in which the checks and balances are laid out, usage of these checks and balances where appropriate ensures that the full details of new laws and government regulations will be made known to members of the general public. This grants clarity on how policies are enacted, which makes it easier to tell the exact parameters of a law and prevents exploitation of loopholes worded within the paper, especially when said policy concerns personal data of citizens. An example of lacking transparency would be in Singapore where Tracetogether GPS data (a measure implmented by the Singaporean government to regulate the spread of COVID-19 via tracking the location of citizens to aid in contact tracing) was found to legally be used by the authorities in specific cases, a clause which contradicted statements previously made by Singaporean Ministers. Such a contradicition caused certain levels of outrage within SIngaporean society. Providing such levels of transparency within the government would be able to prevent such outbursts of confusion from occuring; since the details of the to-be released policy are made known to anyone and everyone in the country, people could read and process the details for themselves and have full understanding on what is taking place. This gains the trust of the citizens and maintains a level of stability within society. Therefore these checks are necessary for good governance

# data[].attributes.body
When good governance equates to an efficient government, checks on power is not necessary as it slows down the governance process. As the ruling party has to draft legislations, a single opposing party can hold up the execution process when questioning the fairness and transparency of the legislation. This may hinder the ruling party from making major progress of new implementations for the development of a more efficient system to maintain law and order within society. In many countries, checks and balances concerning the judiciary section of power undergo levels of checks, which results in a delayed and lengthy judging process. for example, the court case of Vinod Kumar from India had dragged on for twenty two years before his family finally received closure.

# data[].attributes.body
Checks on power helps to build a corrupt-free government which is essential for good governance.
Checks on power, prevents any branch of the government from holding too much power and authority. Thus, it will be difficult for any personnel of the government from abusing their excessive power for monetary gains or other benefits. This in turn ensures fair delegation of resource for the public and in turns safeguards the wellbeing of the citizens which is crucial for a good government that prioritises their citizens. Moreover, it builds trust between the citizens and the government, and in the long run, prevents uprisings and riots that may threaten social and economic stability of the country. Therefore, checks on power ensures a corrupt-free good governance where citizens's needs are cared for and there is safety and security.

# data[].attributes.body
Check on power are not necessary for good government as it results in push back in change, resulting in lower efficiency.  The slower implementation of the changes would result in slower changes standard of living of the citizens thus slower development.

# data[].attributes.body
checks on power is necessary to ensure that the government keeps the people’s best interests at heart and are not self serving, ensuring social stability. Checks on power by the people and other government bodies, elevates the level of government transparency which keeps the government accountable to their stakeholders. Since the government voted in in a democratic society, they are expected to fulfill their promises and implement policies that benefit the people, which is a form of good governance. On the other hand, without check and balances, governments may hold excessive power and may use this and exploit their power or fail to deliver  results. For example, the British people were unhappy with Liz Truss’ budget as they fell short of her election promises. Hence, they  kept her government in check by participating in opinion polls and expressing their displeasure. This check on her power led to her resignation and ensured that the government kept the interests of people at heart and heard their concerns about costs of living. Hence, checks on power is necessary for good governance.

ling xiao and elsa

# data[].attributes.body
Checks on power are not necessary for good government especially in times of crisis when efficiency is prioritised. In times of crisis, a good government would seek for the most optimised solutions, which may come at the cost of citizen’s individual rights. This may cause citizens to be unsatisfied thus it is not possible to be implemented in the presence of checks and balances. For instance, during the start of COVID-19 pandemic, the Singapore government implemented a nationwide circuit breaker which limited the movements of Singaporeans. This displeased Singaporeans because they felt that their freedom had been infringed. Despite this, the lock down has been proved to be effective in slowing down the spread of virus, thus showing that a quick decision making process was essential in tackling the COVID-19 crisis. Hence for maximum efficiency in resolving the crisis, checks on power would only deter the government from resolving the issue smoothly and thus it is not necessary.

# data[].attributes.body
Checks on power are necessary for good governance as it helps promotes transparency and accountability of the government. Multiple stakeholders such as the judiciary, free press and the constitution serve to prevent the concentration of power in thr government. For instance, in Singapore, there are three branches of the government known as the judiciary, legislative and the executive that keep one another accountable. This prevents one branch of accumulating excessive power and the possibility of corruption. Hence, this leads to increased transparency to the citizen and subsequently earns more trust from the public. This ensures the country can be run efficiently and effectively as the public can trust the government. Thus, checks and balances are necessary for good governance.

# data[].attributes.body
checks on power ensures low level of corruption, which is necessary for good governance. other branches of power, such as opposition parties and social media, are able to question the actions of the government and improve any flaws in their measures implemented. this reduces the chances of abuse of power, so  citizens are more likely to be compliant under their governance. for instance, worker’s party leader pritam singh recently questioned the transparency of the white paper in addressing the citizens’ concerns. without such checks and balances, an issue like the one aforementioned might have been ignored and overlooked, possibly causing problems to exacerbate and stem into other issues that affects peoples’ lives.

ting en, wan xin, tiffany lim

# data[].attributes.body
When good governance equates to an efficient government, checks and power is not necessary as it slows down the governance process
Tiffany, Ting en, Wan Xin

# data[].attributes.body
Checks on power are necessary for good governance as it provides opinions, and prevent the formation of echo chambers. Governments may be biased towards the policies they push for, and may not notice or highlight its flaws, thus it is necessary for an opposing party to point out potential flaws to potentially further improve the policies being pushed for.

# data[].attributes.body
Checks on power are essential to ensure that the government's decisions successfully satisfy the people's needs. When government leaders have been democratically elected into the government by the people, it has the responsibility to fulfil its duty of care to its citizens, such as protecting their rights and welfare. Thus, checks on power serve as mechanisms to ensure accountability and transparency between the people and the government. When the ruling party makes decisions, citizens and opposition voices within the government evaluate whether these decisions are effective and most suited to address the country's needs. If the decisions made are unfavourable, mechanisms of checks and balances make leaders obligated to adjust them accordingly, since the government would need to maintain favour of the people in order to stay in power. For example, in 2021, Indian farmers protested to express outrage over the government's removal of price floors, which would have reduced their income. Consequently, the government conceded to the voices of the people and reversed the new policies. Evidently, checks on power hold government leaders accountable and limit them from acting in ways that are selfish, abusive or harmful to the nation and its people. In doing so, it ensures that the government effectively fulfils its role in meeting its people's needs.