Public law parliamentary sovereignty PDF

Preview

Summary

Download Public law parliamentary sovereignty PDF

Description

Fahad aftab Assess the view that in light of the many challenges which have been made to the Sovereignty of Parliament, the concept is now outdated and no longer represents the foundation of the United Kingdom's Constitution" In Uk where, there is uncodified constitution parliament have more importance in governing the country.in a democratic country the rules are by the people and for the people, general public gave the authority to state for governing country and protecting their rights. Weather a country have codified or uncodified constitution a ultimate supreme authority should be in country over all power in state despite of Brexit EU law which was superior was overruled by sovereign parliament and embark supremacy of parliament ,in absence of codified constitution, the authority is given to parliament consequent to the Bill of Rights Act 1689.despite of many challenges to parliament, Parliamentary supremacy is a cluster of rules about the legislative competence in Uk there is no ultimate power.so sovereign parliament have this previlage of supermacy

Body

Parliamentary sovereignty is the 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 legislation and no Parliament can pass laws that future Parliaments cannot change. Parliamentary sovereignty is the most important part of the UK constitution. According to av dicey 1885, three main principles of Parliamentary Supremacy:1. Parliament is the supreme law making body and can legislate laws on any subject matter 2. Parliament cannot bind its successor 3. No court of law can question the validity of Parliaments legislation Parliament can enact laws on any subject matter, but politically not be possible. For example, it might be politically impossible to legislate, which requires women and men to own property as necessary for voting. Parliament has enacted retrospective legislation which affects acts which

occurred prior to the passage of the Act. Article 7 European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950 ECHR prohibits retrospective legislation that leads to criminal sanction. Parliament has also enacted legislation, which operates extraterritorially, such as the War Crimes Act 1991, and the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008. In the view of Jennings and Heuston Parliament may entrench legislation under some circumstances so as to bind future parliaments. Heuston's understanding of parliamentary supremacy makes it possible for Parliament to change the way that legislation is enacted although some of acts of parliament should be entrenched for sake of country interest. Jennings challenging dicey theory state that Parliamentary Supremacy is a legal concept, which tells relationship between Parliament and courts. Courts are not infer in parliamentary supremacy they have role of interpreting the statutes only although they can only invalid the law which contradicts with another act .latest will be follow and previous will invalid by term of implied repeal also 'means that the courts will always recognize as law the rules which Parliament makes as legislation' but in the cases of British Railways Board v. Pickincourts and Jackson v. Her Majesty’s Attorney General accept parliamentary supremacy Parliament may also legislate with retrospective effect, War Damage Act 1965. The War Damage Act effectively overruled the decision of the House of Lords in Burma Oil Company. In 1942, The House of Lords held that compensation was payable by the Crown for the destruction of property caused by the exercise of the prerogative power in relation to war. The government immediately introduced into Parliament the War Damage Bill to nullify the effect of the decision. Parliament may legislate with extraterritorial effect, that is to say, it may enact laws affecting the rights and duties of citizens and non-citizens outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United Kingdom. The Hijacking Act 1971, gave effect to Suppression of the Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft. Section 1 of the Aviation Security Act 1982, provides that crime of hijacking is committed when a person on board an aircraft in flight unlawfully seizes control of the aircraft and exercises control over it by the use of force or by threats. The jurisdiction of the United Kingdom courts, with limited exceptions, extends to an act of hijacking, wherever it occurs, and irrespective of the nationality of the hijacker. Parliament can legislate to kill blue eye babies also they can convert man into women but this authority is limited to legally not politically, When looking in hra with respect to parliamentary supremacy

The government Uk is reviewing the Human Rights Act 1998 and have claimed that they will repeal it but the Scottish National Party however, stated they will block any such attempt to repeal it they are not in interest of public We can say that parliament fail to provide a sound justification for the repeal of the HRA, which is designed in such a way that it can be neatly reconciled with parliamentary sovereignty by respecting the UK’s ultimate law-making power. The court’s remedial capacity to depart from legislative intention may only be exercised for good measure The issue in Ghaidan turned on whether a homosexual man could succeed as a statutory tenant on the death of his partner under the Rent Act 1977 Parliament was left with two further options to re-write the law using close ended language or, if the court went ahead and declared the legislation incompatible, to ignore the declaration. Parliament would do neither of the two, as both would tarnish its reputation for upholding human rights standards. What is clear however is that the court in this case had no power to neither stop Parliament’s law making abilities nor impose on its sovereign powers.

Parliament does recognize some limits on its supremacy, but it is arguable that these are political limitations. In instances when statutes contradict a provision of international law, in the UK 'dualist' system such provisions are not binding on Parliament unless Parliament enacts a statute to bring it into effect. Thoburn v Sunderland City Council, Lord Justice Laws held that certain statutes of constitutional importance including Magna Carta and the European Communities Act 1972 could not be repealed by the doctrine of implied repeal. This, as well , limits Parliamentary Sovereignty but Theoretically, the Parliament remains almost entirely sovereign and the doctrine of Parliamentary Sovereignty remains untouched. In particular, the legislative supremacy of the Parliament has not been affected. It can therefore be said that legal sovereignty is not lost, as the Parliament maintains its powers based on the doctrine of Parliamentary Supremacy. Conclusion Theoretically, the Parliament remains almost entirely sovereign and the doctrine of Parliamentary Sovereignty remains untouched. In particular, the legislative supremacy of the Parliament has not been affected. It can

therefore be said that legal sovereignty is not lost, as the Parliament maintains its powers based on the doctrine of Parliamentary Supremacy. However, although it is well within the Parliament’s capabilities to simply leave the European Union as well as abolish the devolved government, it is clear that it is highly unlikely that such an event would happen due to obvious political restrictions in the modern world. Conclusively, A.V Dicey’s doctrine of Parliamentary Sovereignty, though still intact, pure and absolute in terms of the Parliament’s legal sovereignty, is otherwise limited in terms of political sovereignty....