...Parliamentary sovereignty, once the dominant principle of the UK Constitution, is now under considerable pressure. Discuss this statement with reference to the UK’s membership of the EU, the devolution acts of 1998, the Human Rights Act 1998 and recent judicial comments on the Rule of Law. "Certainly we want to see Europe more united… but it must be in a way which preserves the different traditions, parliamentary powers, and sense of pride in one's own country." Margaret Thatcher Over the course of the years many prominent figures such as politicians and academic writers have been concerned with the diminishing of Parliamentary sovereignty. “Parliamentary sovereignty is a principle of the UK constitution. It makes Parliament the supreme legal authority in the UK, which can create or end any law. Generally, the courts cannot overrule its legislation and no Parliament can pass laws that future Parliaments cannot change. Parliamentary sovereignty is the most important part of the UK constitution.” Historically, due to the lack of a single codified constitution in the UK, the Westminster Parliament is the most powerful and influencing factor on the British political frontier. As opposed to America where the constitution dominates US politics, and legislation can be deemed unconstitutional and revoked by the US judiciary. However, since further integration into Europe incorporating The European Communities Act 1972, The Human Rights Act 1998, European Conventions on Human Rights...
Words: 1911 - Pages: 8
...INTRODUCTION According to Erskine May, "Parliamentary privilege is the sum of the peculiar rights enjoyed by each House collectively... and by members of each House individually, without which they could not discharge their functions, and which exceed those possessed by other bodies or individuals. Thus, privilege, though part of the law of the land, is to certain extent an exemption from the general law. Certain rights and immunities such as freedom from arrest or freedom of speech belong primarily to individual members of each House and exist because the House cannot perform its functions without unimpeded use of the services of its members. Other such rights and immunities such as the power to punish for contempt and the power to regulate its own constitution belong primarily to each House as a collective body, for the protection of its members and the vindication of its own authority and dignity. Fundamentally, however, it is only as a means to the effective discharge of the collective functions of the House that the individual privileges are enjoyed by members. "When any of these rights and immunities is disregarded or attacked, the offence is called a breach of privilege and is punishable under the law of Parliament. Each House also claims the right to punish as contempt actions which, while not breaches of any specific privilege, obstruct or impede it in the performance of its functions, or are offences against its authority or dignity, such as disobedience to its legitimate...
Words: 529 - Pages: 3
...One of the largest differences between these two forms of government is that parliamentary government involves the fusion of the powers of the parliament and the government, whilst presidential government involves the separation of the executive judicial and legislative. One example of the fusion of powers in the UK is that until 2005 the Lord Chancellor was both the head of the judiciary, a speaker in the House of Lords, and he also ran the Lord Chancellors department. An example of the separation of powers in the US government is that they are all separately elected whilst in the UK all bodies are elected simultaneously. Another difference is that most parliamentary systems use a cabinet government whilst most presidential have a president separate to the legislative portion of the government. One major difference this causes is that the president can be from a different party to the majority of Congress whilst in the UK the Prime minister is the leader of the party that got the majority in the previous election. A Final difference is that in a Parliamentary system the government can be removed by legislature whilst in a Presidential system. This means that in a Parliamentary system the Government can dissolve parliament at any time making a more flexible electoral period although this has been restricted with the introduction of 5 year terms. An example of this is the February 1974 election which leads to a hung parliament and when a coalition wasn’t formed Parliament...
Words: 302 - Pages: 2
...How far do you agree that Germany was a parliamentary democracy by 1914? During the first fourteen years of the 20th century, Germany's political system went through radical modernisation, adopting many features that are commonly associated with parliamentary democracies. The Encyclopaedia Britannica definition of a parliamentary democracy is a form of government in which the party (or a coalition of parties) with the greatest representation in the parliament (legislature) forms the government, its leader becoming the prime minister or chancellor. Executive functions are exercised by members of the parliament appointed by the prime minister to the cabinet. The parties in minority serve in opposition to the majority and have the duty to challenge it regularly. The prime minister may be removed from power whenever he loses the confidence of a majority of the ruling party or of the parliament. This form of governance originated in Britain and spread across the globe. Parliamentary democracy is different to direct democracy in that the former is a system in which citizens vote for representatives (politicians) to make decisions on their behalf, whereas in a direct democracy policy initiatives and laws would be decided on via votes/referendums involving eligible and willing to vote. Arguably the most notable condition present in the German political system in 1914 that supports the notion of Germany being a democracy was universal male suffrage, which had been upheld since Otto...
Words: 584 - Pages: 3
...To: The Parliamentarians From: SDPD Date: 06/06/2012 Subject: Empowering the Parliamentary Oversight on issues related to Foreign Policy Summary A dire need exists to increase the involvement of Parliamentarians in the realm of Foreign Policy as advisory participants, which had been previously dominated exclusively by the Executive on the pretext of National Sovereignty. Despite the presence of noteworthy members on the Board of National Assembly’s Standing Committee on Foreign Policy, little progress has been made to advance the real aims of this Committee. Its failure can be attributed to multiple factors ranging from inherent institutional weakness to unavailability of adequate research facilities, leading to a prevalence of greater disinterest among the Board members, marked by low attendance, being witnessed during the meeting sessions of the Committee. Hence, an urgent call of action is required for maximum engagement of Parliamentary role in Foreign Policy formulation. Context The domain of foreign policy holds critical value for a country like Pakistan which is located at the crossroads of Great Powers like Russia & China. In addition, it also provides a route to Central Asian states which are endowed with massive reserves of oil & natural gas, providing significant economic incentives. Being a key ally of US in the on-going ‘War on Terrorism’ also enhances its strategic significance. As stated earlier, the Parliament’s role in the field of Foreign...
Words: 686 - Pages: 3
...Albert Venn Dicey stated that “The principle of parliamentary sovereignty means neither more nor less than this: namely that parliament […] has under the English constitution the right to make or unmake any law whatever; and further, that no person or body is recognised by the law of England as having the right to override or set aside the legislation of Parliament. […] The principle of parliamentary sovereignty may, looked at from its positive side, be thus described: Any Act of Parliament, or any part of an Act of Parliament, which makes new law, or repeals or modifies an existing law, will be obeyed by the courts. The same principle, looked at from its negative side, may be thus stated: There is no person or body of persons who can, under the English constitution, make rules which override or derogate from an Act of Parliament, or...
Words: 1144 - Pages: 5
...countries. Egypt has to determine in the new constitution the identity of its governance system. The ruling systems in the international arena can be divided into two categories the first is the presidential system, the closest example being the American system; the second is the parliamentary system, with examples being the United Kingdom. A Political system is a system of politics and government. It's a complete set of institutions, interest groups, political parties, trade unions, lobby groups. It's composed of members of social organization and it ensures the maintaining of order and sanity in the society. Among the political systems are presidential and parliamentary is the parliamentary type of democratic government. The leader of the parliamentary form of government is noted to become more dynamic and responsive to all the need of its people. The parliamentary form is capable of reducing or preventing legislative. Since the power is given to the Prime Minister the possibility of having problems regarding legislative congestion is prevented. It can also be said that parliamentary is more flexible and it has larger capacity to ensure continuity and stability in governance. In a parliamentary system there is always the potential for coalition forming that make parties toe the line and line become too extreme so as to keep all options open, which is not so in a presidential...
Words: 285 - Pages: 2
...is different from them, and can be generally defined on a spectrum from left, i.e. communism and socialism to the right, i.e. fascism. Linz’s argument is on the description of Totalitarian and Authoritarian Regimes, which brings the main and important argument of explaining both Presidential and Parliamentary systems. Another important author whose thoughts were referred to political institutions is Seymour Martin Lipset. His argument emphasizes on political cultural-cultural factors rather than political systems. The last individual whose main arguments refer to politics and political institutions is Donald Horowitz. He describes that Linz claims are not sustainable because it is regionally skewed and highly selective sample. According to all three professors Seymour Martin Lipset, Juan Linz, Donald Horowitz, they are strongly suggesting their main politically argument based on the concept of presidential and parliamentary system. The stability of presidential system is that two-candidate races in multiparty systems produce coalitions including extremist parties. The balance between branches varies and with fixed term in office comes the risk of ‘vouloir conclure’. The parliamentary system’s stability describes that it has superior historical performance to presidential system. This is especially in societies with political cleavages-multiple parties. The continuity of this party is power and there is duration of coalition. The articles point out the adaptability between the...
Words: 1351 - Pages: 6
...complex political systems in the world that consists of the US “Washington” model and British “Westminster” model. In terms of accountability, it is related to responsibilities, answerability and storytelling between the accountable party and to whom he is accountable to (Noble 2010). Before 1901, the Australia continent was divided into six British colonies which were partly self-governing, but subject to the law-making power of the British Parliament. When the Australian federal system was developing during the 1890s, it took some of its features from British Parliamentary model which was very influential. This impact can be seen in many aspects of the appearance and function of the two chambers of the Australian Parliament. The idea of responsible government that a government elected by the people and accountable to the Parliament is a significant British contribution, which reflects the principle of parliamentary accountability. Moreover, the separation of powers between legislature, executive and judiciary in order to prevent oppressive government owes much to the British model(The Australian System of Government 2010). In Australia, the government is chosen according to the majority support of the low house and it is accountable to the lower house of parliament. If there is a loss of confidence of the lower house, the government is obliged to resign and this could also cause the dissolution of the house and a general election(Australian Federal Democracy: a Chart 2016)...
Words: 613 - Pages: 3
...The Parliament of the United Kingdom possesses the singular ability to impose law through the creation of legislation. However, the Parliament’s law making power can be delegated or permitted to the other organisations .In the current legal background delegated legislation is of major significance .Compared to the definitive and common Acts of Parliament, which try to set provisions which are considered to be meticulous, the contemporary forms of legislation has a more enabling nature in which the goals of the act and the main objectives are clearly established. The purpose of these acts is to lay down a basic foundation while delegating to ministers to accomplish those goals by creating thorough provision. Thus, law created by a particular person, or body, to whom the Parliaments general law making power has been delegated to, is delegated legislation (Rush & Ottley 2006). Statistically, one can say that the Acts of Parliament is less vital compared to delegated legislation. This is because, in any year, the production of delegated legislation will always surpass the Acts of Parliament. Since majority of delegated legislations are in the form of Statutory Instruments (SIs), the government has the ability to effect changes without referring to the Parliament. The delegated legislation is important for a number of reasons. Firstly, the Parliament does not have time to scrutinize each act that has been amended. To save parliament time, delegated legislation is created to...
Words: 1928 - Pages: 8
...Parliamentary Sovereignty is the notion that Parliament is the highest power in the land and therefore supreme to even the Royal Prerogative. A.V. Dicey, a jurist professor explained it as: ‘The principle of Parliamentary Sovereignty means neither more nor less than this, namely, that Parliament thus defined has, under the English constitution, the right to make or unmake any law whatever, and further, that no person or body is recognised by the law of England as having a right to override or set aside the legislation of Parliament.’ Legislative supremacy involves not only the right to change the law but also that no one else should have that right, however, Parliament has, on occasion fettered itself in order to limit its own powers, for example, devolution to Scottish Parliament and Welsh...
Words: 1046 - Pages: 5
...What is the purpose and use of parliamentary procedures? The purpose of parliamentary procedures is that they are a system of maintaining order in organizations. It provides a uniform method of conducting meetings in a fair and orderly manner. The use of parliamentary procedures is a respect for the law and a clear willingness to practice a specific method of procedure to follow the will of the majority, to protect the rights of the minority, and to protect the interests of those absent. The use of parliamentary procedures however, does not insure that these ideals will be met. Everyone involved with an organization must also work to create an atmosphere of trust, mutual respect, and shared purpose. General Henry M. Robert's (Robert's Rules of Order) work is still regarded as the basic authority on the subject of parliamentary law. It is the accepted authority for almost all organizations today. What are the objectives in parliamentary procedures? The 4 main objectives in parliamentary procedures are to; 1. Expedite business 2. Maintain order 3. Insure justice and equality to all 4. Accomplish the purpose for which the group organized What are the steps in handling a motion? Business may be introduced by an individual member or by a committee. Business is always introduced in the form of a motion. After a motion has been made another member, without rising and obtaining the floor, may second the motion. A second implies that that person...
Words: 487 - Pages: 2
...Introduction This paper will demonstrate the most prominent features of both Presidentialism and Parliamentarism, thus distinguish between their most contrasting features. I will be tackling this paper from different perspectives, in order to ultimately to suggest a better structure of government. Features such as the efficiency of each system in implementing government policies needs to be considered. Furthermore, factors such as political stability and order needs to be considered in suggesting a better form of government. Political stability refers to the frequency at which the government changes, where as political order refers to level of civil obedience every time there is a change to the political system. Parliamentary system In a political system run by a parliamentary system, the executive power of the government resides with the Prime Minster and her/her cabinet, which is voted by a democratically voted legislature. The party which holds the majority of the support, is said to have the 'confidence' of the cabinet. In the case where there is no majority party in the cabinet, decisions and actions of the government are decided through a series of bargains and debates between the different parties in the cabinet (British parliament backs hybrid embryos, 2008). There isn't a fixed term for a party to be in charge of a parliament; the prime minister and his political party hold office as long as they command the majority of the confidence in the legislature. As soon as the...
Words: 1988 - Pages: 8
...(A) What is a government? The word "government" is defined by the oxford English dictionary like: “the group of people with the authority to govern a country or state; a particular ministry in office”. A government is a very useful tool for organize the human society, because we need an orden system that manages all the efforts of the same for their own benefit and prosperity. The origin of the government lies in the State. In the beginnings, the human’s societies were small and were governed by the law of the stronger. If you could protect your properties, or even rob other, which would be fine because that was the normative. This is the state of nature, or what we call "Natural Law", where people organize themselves around self-sufficiency and self-interest, as well as self-survival. But, when the societies grew, became intolerable this type of behaviors. In a scenario where there is a government, people are organized in a society with rules or laws which govern their conduct. The state was created to protect the physical and material integrity of the members of a society. (B) Utility and functions of a government organized. In the human history, have existed many types of government, and some have been better than others, regarding the division of property and justice among different social strata comprising citizens who form the state, but all have been "organized" in one way or another. From my perspective, an organized government works as a social regulator, handing...
Words: 909 - Pages: 4
...To what extent have the UK prime ministers become more ‘presidential’? ( 25 ) T he theory that prime ministers are becoming more presidential can come under the term ‘presidentialism’. This is the notion that the British prime minister has outgrown the parliamentary system. This suggests that UK prime ministers increasingly resemble presidents such as Wilson, Thatcher and Blair usually being seen as key examples. Evidence that shows the growth of presidentialism is that some prime ministers tend to distance themselves from their parties and governments by representing themselves as outsiders or even developing personal ideological stance for example ‘Thatcherism’ or ‘Blarism’. Another piece of evidence is that prime ministers have personalized election campaigns which means the mass media increasingly portrays elections as personalized battles between the prime minister and the leader of the opposition. Party leaders thus become the ‘brand image’ of their parties or government which means that personality and image have become major determinants of political success or failure. Furthermore, prime ministers have a strengthened cabinet office. The size and administrative resources available to the cabinet office have grown, turning it into a small-scale prime ministers department responsible for coordinating the rest of Whitehall. Also, prime ministers are using a wider range of special advisors as they are relying increasingly on hand-picked political advisors rather than...
Words: 456 - Pages: 2
