When looked at in comparison to an entrenched constitution it seems better as in an entrenched system, parliament would be unable to pass such reforms so easily as entrenching something makes it incredibly hard to change. On the other side of the argument, many would say that due to the UK having a constitution whereby the head of Parliament is also the Head of the executive and also with the government mostly having a majority in the House of Commons, it means that the Prime Minister can pass through any legislation that they really want to pass. This could be seen undemocratic of the UK. Moreover, due to the Parliamentary Act of 1949, the House of Lords are only able to delay legislation for one year before it becomes automatically passed. This means that the House of Lords are unable to act as the judiciary in rejecting and checking unwanted bills.
Sovereignty is used to describe the idea of the power of law making unrestricted by any legal limit, Parliamentary sovereignty is part of the uncodified constitution of the United Kingdom. It dictates that Parliament can make or unmake any laws as it is the ultimate legal authority in the UK. Parliament is still sovereign as it can make law on any matter and it has legislative supremacy. However parliamentary sovereignty can be questioned due to the membership of the European Union and the Human Rights Act. Parliament can make laws on any matter due to Dicey in ‘Law of the Constitution (1885).’ He said that ‘in theory Parliament has total power.
Britain, at best can be described as quasi-federal as opposed to unitary state or a federal state. The new legislation has created new assemblies, but retains parliamentary sovereignty and limits the powered and authority of these devolved governments. Such powers however such as foreign
This essay looks to discuss Parliamentary sovereignty as a constitutional relic and will argue that it has not been rendered obsolete by the supremacy of European law. This will be done by examining the relationship between the United Kingdom and the European Union. It will further argue that although the United Kingdom’s statutory recognition of the Human Rights Act 1998, in response to the convention of HR, may be seen to limit the supremacy of Parliament, it will prove that Parliament still reigns supreme. It will highlight that the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty is a relevant and crucial doctrine within the United Kingdom’s constitution as it is essential for parliament to enact statutory law. This essay, taking all the above arguments into consideration, will conclude that Parliamentary sovereignty is very much alive within the UK constitution.
While the US Constitution has many conservative ideas it also has several revolutionary notions that were the center of the Articles of Confederation. The House of Representatives was established to allow the common man's voice to be heard; now all citizens could give their consent in government. There were also guarantees that certain rights would never be taken away from the citizens. The Bill of Rights was written to assure the citizens that there were things that the government couldn't do and that the citizen was always protected. There were other provisions in the constitution to defend against abusing power, the system of checks and balances and having three branches in the government.
The power of the Supreme Court to declare laws unconstitutional leads some people to assume that the judicial branch will be superior to the legislative branch. Hamilton examines this argument, starting with the fact that only the constitution is fundamental law. To argue that the constitution is not superior to the laws suggest that the representative of the people are superior to the people and that the constitution is inferior to the government it gave birth to. The courts are the arbiters between the legislative branch and the people; the courts are to interpret the laws and prevent the legislative branch from exceeding the powers granted to it. The courts must not only place the constitution higher than the laws passed by congress, they must also place the intentions of the people ahead of the intentions of their representatives.
With the onset of the Second World War, the US stepped out as a world super power and the executive gained exclusive jurisdiction over foreign policy which in the 21st century now acts as a big role which the executive must be active in. Due to the fact the constitution doesn’t refer to foreign policy it has led to the president becoming very powerful in this role as the constitution bodes no constraint on it, meaning he can do ‘what he pleases’ as there is no check on the presidents over sight process. This exposes another flaw in the constitution written and devised in the 18th century, as once again it disregards some major governmental policies which have only recently come about. In addition, when the US constitution was written there were only 3 sectors in office ‘war, office and treasury’ this has now changed dramatically and the executive now has many sections – once again the constitution has not taken these into account and therefore doesn’t work on a ‘government’
According to the principle of parliamentary sovereignty, Parliament is the only body that can make law for the UK. No other body can overrule or change the laws which Parliament has made. The principle of parliamentary sovereignty however cannot be found in statute law, it is part of another source of the constitution, common law. The reason it is not part of statute law is that Parliament can pass, change, or repeal any law it likes and is not bound by laws of previous Parliaments. Therefore if parliamentary sovereignty was an Act of Parliament it would be possible for Parliament to repeal it and destroy the principle.
It is through laws that policies of government are laid down for implementation. It does however have many constitutional roles to fulfil such as the power of the purse, oversight, foreign policy and legislation. It can be argues that Congress does fulfil its constitutional roles as it may deliver effective over sighting, legislation, money bills, representation and foreign policy that may provide good checks and balances. However, most would argue that Congress may not carry its roles effectively thus leading to poor scrutiny (sometimes over scrutinising) which leads to ineffective fulfilment of constitutional roles. The principle organ of the US state is to legislate, represent and scrutinise the other, safely separated, branches of the government.
Sovereignty is in essence ultimate and unchallengeable power, the location of sovereignty in the UK in recent years has changed from one single power and devolved into many unions, treaties and nations within the UK and EU. Parliament is the only body that can make law in the UK. No other authority can overrule or change the laws which the parliament has made. This, then gives the statute law more power and priority over the other sources of the constitutions. This then allows the parliament to change or repeal any law it wants and is also not bounded by the laws made by the previous parliaments.