sovereignty lie Flashcards
what kind of sovereignty does parliament have
-parliamentary sovereignty is de jure legal sovereignty, a.v. dicey parliament cannot bind its successor or be bound by its predecessor
popular sovereignty
-power is vested in the people
the executive have sovereignty, ‘elective dictatorship’ (4)
-since 1945 the government has won 99% of all divisions
-government controls parliamentary agenda (standing order 14)
-henry viii powers, to amend primary legislation via secondary legislation, bypassing the usual route of scrutiny through both the houses, e.g. coronavirus act did this heavily
-retained eu law act post brexit means laws amended by secondary legislation so executive has power, not parliament
what standing order grants the executive power over the timetable
14
executive doesn’t have sovereignty (4)
-lords increasingly challenging,
*19-21 114 defeats
*21-22 128 defeats
-20 opposition days
-miller I, sc affirms parliament > executive
-motions of no confidence, mechanism to defeat, though last one was callaghan 311-310 they can pressure pm to resign even if they win e.g. johnson
the lords are becoming increasingly rebellious
-19-21 114 defeats
-21-22 128 defeats
sovereignty lies with the judiciary (3)
-miller i and ii, judiciary have made the government change their course of action
-can quash (strike down) secondary legislation e.g. there are rules linking entitlements to student loans and being a uk resident, 2015 these were quashed bc hra incompatibility
-declarations of incompatibility have de facto political sovereignty, the government will always either legislate or act, except in hirst v uk 2005
judiciary doesn’t have sovereignty (parliament does)
-de jure legally can’t strike down primary legislation, but only issue DOIs, e.g. hirst vs uk 2005 says blanket ban of prisoners votes against article 3 protocol 1 of the echr (copy pasted into uk law as hra)
-could also legislate around doi e.g. safety of rwanda bill 2024
-a v home sec 2004 (belmarsh) led to terrorism prevention act 2005
-ahmed v treasury 2009 led to terrorist asset freezing act four days later
-not immune to pressure from the media (uk1 alert). e.g. mail ‘enemies of the people’
devolved bodies have some power (3)
-scotland act 2016 ensures holyrood can’t be abolished without a referendum
-de facto political pressure to let scotland do what they want e.g. different tuition fee status
-trend of increasing power fro, 1998 to 2016 scotland acts
devolved bodies don’t have power bc parliament retained sovereignty (4)
-there was no loss of sovereignty, which remains in westminster, this isn’t a federal system, parliament retains sovereignty
-westminster veto of gender recognition bill 2022 by section 35 of the 2016 scotland act, as it violates equality act 2010
-sewel convention (motion of consent required from devolved bodies in laws affecting them) has been ignored in times when it really mattes e.g. brexit
sovereignty lies with the people (popular sovereignty)
-people make the big decisions e.g. wales got 50.3 yes v scotland 74 yes, hence wales lags behind in devolution matters, brexit
-push away from trustee model of representation, e.g. before the referendum only 24% were leave, but we ended up leaving (would have required a majority otherwise)
