The Importance Of Parliamentary Sovereignty

1865 Words 8 Pages
Parliamentary sovereignty is a doctrine that gives parliament the supreme law making power within the UK, which is essential to other branches of the government to operate efficiently. The notion that the rule of law does eclipse parliamentary sovereignty, largely lacks the evidence to be upheld, and accepted by all, as much more commonly the parliamentary sovereignty is eclipsed by the other, more practical factors some of them being politics, the electorate, the majority based system, and the reasonability of the parliament itself. However such notion does have a right to exist with the little evidence that is present to suggest that, that the doctrine of rule of law, which stands to protect not only its core legal principles, but further …show more content…
The rule of law and parliamentary sovereignty however both being subjects to debate in the Britain by many academics throughout history, make it an incredibly difficult question to answer, as to which one is more important to the British constitution, and therefore which one will be the supreme over the other. It is commonly believed that an Act of parliament that is passed by legislation and assented by the Monarch, will not be a subject to the judiciary or any other body within the state proclaiming that an act is void, and the rule of law will be spreading its authority to its subject with accordance to the law passed. However many members of the judiciary do not accept this belief as the only school of thought. They do believe that the rule of law is above all, and is guided by morality, and justice, and therefore will eclipse the parliamentary supremacy if needed be. Lord Neuberger claimed that ‘without justice there is no rule of law’. He further added ‘justice in the United Kingdom is in pretty good shape, in the sense that we have a society which is governed by the rule of law’ which suggests that for the judicatory branch of the government, the rule of law is above parliamentary sovereignty in terms of importance. Such that in instances where …show more content…
The most popular belief held by the judges, is that in the extreme circumstances where the law is absurd, they will not tolerate it. However, the extent of the power held by parliament, is decided by the ultimate sovereign in the state, the electorate, and will exercise reasonability within itself in order to make relatively satisfying laws to maintain order in the country. Parliament members, in the House of Commons chamber, are elected by the electorate, who provide consent to the loss to some of their freedom in order to maintain peace and order within the state. This approach therefore gives sovereignty to the citizens to vote upon the members, gives them the power to choose their own representatives, which in term fills the House of Commons, consisting of different parties. Thus the political nature of the parliament, consisting of various parties with contrasting views, in other words disunited at times due to opposing each other, therefore may be thought of as to eclipse its own parliamentary supremacy, in practical terms, not the ability to pass or repeal a certain law, but in respect to the content of the laws that they will pass.This argument’s perspective is that the reasonability, and the rule of the majority to pass or repeal a law, does not allow the hypothetical argument to evolve into a practical one, between the importance of the

Related Documents