Scope of Presentation

Introduction

Origin

Definitions

Characteristics

Kinds

Theories

Challenges

Conclusion
Political science(Fundamental Concepts)
Mohammad Alauddin
MSS in Government and Politics
MPA in Governance and Public Policy
Deputy Secretary
mohammadalauddin@yahoo.co
Date:31.01.2011
Introduction
The concept of sovereignty became the main idea of modern political science. The
word sovereignty is derived from the Latin word superanus which means supremacy or
superior power. Sovereignty is in essence about the power to make laws and the ability to
rule effectively. It is one of the most written about political concepts and has been discussed,
debated and questioned throughout the history.
Origin of the Term
Although the term “sovereignty” is modern, the idea goes back to Aristotle, who spoke
of the “supreme power” of the state. The Roman jurists and the civilians throughout the
Middle Ages likewise had the idea, for they frequently employed the terms summa potestas
and plenitudo potestatis by which to designate the supreme power of the state. The modern
terms “sovereign” and “sovereignty” (souverain, souverainete) were first used by the French
jurists in the fifteenth century.
Origin of the Term
Jean Bodin (1530-1596) in the sixteenth century was the first writer to discuss at length
in his “Six Books on the Republic” the nature and characteristics of sovereignty. Originally
conceived as a personal attribute of the monarch, sovereignty came in the hands of Bodin
to be regarded as a constituent element of the state. Niccolo Machiaveli (1469-1527),
Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679), John Locke (1632-1704),and Montesquieu (1689-1755) are also
key figures in unfolding the concept of sovereignty.
Definitions
Jean Bodin the first writer to employ the term, defined it as “the supreme power of
the state over citizens and subjects, unrestrained by law”. Hugo Grotious who wrote half a
century later, defined it as “the supreme political power vested in him whose acts are not
subject to any other and whose will cannot be overridden”. Jellinek defined it as “that
characteristic of the state by virtue of which it cannot be legally bound except by its own
will, or limited by any other power than itself”.
Definitions
Duguit says that sovereignty according to the dominant theory in France is the
“commanding power of the state; it is the will of the nation organized in the state; it is the
right to give unconditional orders to all individuals in the territory of the state”. Burgess
characterizes it as “original, absolute, ultimate power over the individual subject and all
associations of objects. Again he calls it the “underived and independent power to
command and compel obedience”.
Characteristics
Permanence
D:\533561091.doc
Page 1 of 5
Permanence is the chief characteristics of sovereignty. Sovereignty lasts as long as an
independent state lasts. The death of the king , the overthrow of the government does not
affect sovereignty. Dr. Garner has beautifully summed up this idea- “sovereignty does not
cease with the death or temporary disposition of a particular bearer, or the reorganization of
the state, but shifts immediately to a new bearer, as the centre of gravity shifts from one part
of physical body to another when it undergoes external change”.
Characteristics
Universality
The state is all comprehensive and the sovereign power is universally applicable. No
association or group of individuals, however rich or powerful it may be , can resist or disobey
the sovereign authority. Every individual and every association of individual is subject to the
sovereignty of the state. Sovereignty makes no exception and grants no exemption to
anyone. It grants exemptions only in the case of foreign embassies and diplomatic
representatives of foreign countries on the reciprocal basis.
Characteristics
Exclusiveness
By exclusiveness is meant that there can not be two sovereigns in one independent
state and if two sovereigns exist in a state, the unity of that state will be destroyed. There can
not exist another sovereign state within the existing sovereign state.
Inalienability
By inalienability we mean that the state cannot part with its sovereignty. Sovereignty is
the life and soul of the state and it can not be alienated without destroying the state itself.
Characteristics
Absoluteness
Sovereignty is absolute and unlimited. There can be no legal power within the state
superior to it, and there can be no legal limit to the supreme law making power of the state.
The sovereign is entitled to do whatsoever he likes.
Originality
By originality we mean that the sovereign wields power by virtue of his own right and
not by virtue of anybody’s mercy.
Kinds of Sovereignty
Internal sovereignty
Sovereignty is normally understood as possessing two distinct aspects: internal and
external. Sovereignty within the national sphere is known as internal sovereignty. A state
which possesses internal sovereignty is one which has the authority and ability to exercise
command over its society. In this situation there are no alternative sites of authority within the
nation.
External sovereignty
External sovereignty concerns the relationship between a sovereign power and other
states. The term external sovereignty is employed by some writers to mean nothing more than
the freedom of the state from subjugation to or control by a foreign state; that is supremacy
of the state as against all foreign wills, whether of persons or state.
Kinds of Sovereignty
Nominal & Real Sovereignty
In ancient times many states had monarchies and their rulers were monarchs. They
wielded absolute power and their senates were quite powerless. At that time they exercised
D:\533561091.doc
Page 2 of 5
real sovereignty and regarded as real sovereign. For example, Kings were sovereigns and
hence were all powerful in England before fifteenth century, in USSR before the eighteenth
and nineteenth centuries and in France before 1789.
Kinds of Sovereignty
Nominal & Real Sovereignty
Now the parts are almost reversed. King is consulted but the ministers decide. The king
has now ceased to exercise any real authority; it is titular. By titular sovereignty we mean
sovereignty by the title only. In theory, he may still possess all the sovereign powers which
were once enjoyed by him, but in actual practice there is some other person or body of
persons who act on behalf of the sovereign and exercise supreme authority.
Kinds of Sovereignty
Legal Sovereignty
Legal sovereignty is the conception of sovereignty in terms of law; that is, sovereignty
as the supreme law-making authority. The legal sovereign, therefore, is that determinate
authority which is able to express in legal form the highest commands of the state-that power
which can override the prescriptions of the divine law, the principles of morality, the
mandates of public opinion etc. For instance, the parliament is the legal authority to exercise
legal sovereignty.
Kinds of Sovereignty
Political Sovereignty
Behind the sovereign which the lawyer recognizes, there is another sovereignty to
which the legal sovereign must bow. This sovereign is called political sovereignty. In a
narrower sense the electorate constitutes the political sovereign, yet in a wider sense it may
be said to be the whole mass of population, including every person who contributes to
molding of public opinion whether he is a voter or not.
Kinds of Sovereignty
Popular Sovereignty
Popular sovereignty roughly means the power of the masses as contrasted with the
power of the individual ruler of the class. It implies manhood, suffrage with each individual
having only one vote and the control of the legislature by the representatives of the people.
In popular sovereignty public is regarded as supreme. In the ancient times many writers on
Political Science used popular sovereignty as a weapon to refuse absolutism of the
monarchs.
Kinds of Sovereignty
De jure Sovereignty
De jure sovereignty is the legal sovereignty and it has foundation in law. Its attribute is
the right to govern and command obedience. As a matter of fact it may not be actual
sovereign, for it may be expelled from its rightful place or may have temporarily disappeared
through disorganization or disintegration; but, however, this may be, it has legal right on its
side and is lawfully entitled to command and exact obedience.
Kinds of Sovereignty
De facto Sovereignty
De facto (or actual) sovereignty is the sovereignty which is actually able to make its
will prevail, though it may be without legal basis. That person or body of persons who
actually exercises power, and who, for the time being, is able to enforce obedience, or to
whose commands voluntary obedience is given by the bulk of the people, is called the de
facto sovereign. The criterion of sovereignty is actual obedience to commands.
Theories of Sovereignty
Monistic Theory
D:\533561091.doc
Page 3 of 5
John Austin (1790-1859) in his famous book, ‘Lectures on Jurisprudence’, published in
1832, explained monistic theory of sovereignty. He defined sovereignty as, ‘if a determinate
human superior, not in the habit of obedience to a like superior, receives habitual obedience
from the bulk of a given society, that determinate human superior is the sovereign in that
society, and the society (including the superior) is a society political and independent.”
Monistic Theory
Few major points about this sovereignty is:
The power of the determinate human superior is sovereignty.
The determinate human has no rival of equal status in the state and nor does he obey the
order of anyone.
The determinate human superior is the only law maker. His commands are laws and without
him the state can have no laws.
The bulk of the people obey sovereign’s command as a matter of habit.
A society without sovereignty can not be called a state.
Monistic Theory: Criticism
Austin’s theory has been criticized on many grounds, which are as follows:
This theory is inconsistent with the present-day popular sovereignty-a doctrine which lies at
the basis of modern democratic state.
It ignores the power of public opinion and political sovereignty.
It ignores the great body of customary law which has grown up through usages and
interpretation, and which never had its source in the will of determinate superior.
Force is not only sanction behind laws.
This theory makes the sovereign completely absolute.
Pluralistic Theory
Duguit Harold J. Laski J. N. Figgs, Earnest Barker, Maclver are the exponents of
pluralism. According to the pluralists, sovereignty resides not with the state but it resides with
many other institutions. Sovereignty is possessed by many associations. It is not individual unit;
the state is not supreme or unlimited. Pluralists argue that state is not only the supreme
institution and no single source of authority. Sovereignty is not indivisible and exclusive they
also argued.
Pluralistic Theory: Criticism
The state is needed to control various types of institutions existing in society. It is the
sovereign state that brings about unity and regulates all the associations existing in society.
If sovereignty is divided among the various associations existing in society, this division will
lead to the destruction of sovereignty.
It is mere an illusion and not a reality that other associations are equal in status to the
state.
State is needed for protecting people from the excess of associations.
Challenges against the Idea
The idea that nation-states are able to be sovereign has been the subject of serious
challenge in recent years. Globalization continues to have an increasingly negative impact
on the sovereign rights of individual nation states. There are situations in which states have
already accepted some constraints upon their freedom to conduct themselves as they
please within their territories.
Challenges against the Idea
There exists a range of global institutions which appear to promote a particular
international economic orthodoxy and therefore allegedly force governments to pursue
particular patterns of policy. The capacity of national governments to manage their
D:\533561091.doc
Page 4 of 5
economies autonomously has been undermined by the evolution of world economy and the
appearance of authoritative global institutions such as the International Monetary Fund.
Challenges against the Idea
Nation states have become more interdependent than ever before and are
constantly developing their relationships with each other by means of treaties. In the period
from 1945 to 21 May 1996 the United Nations, to which all treaties should be notified, had
registered no less than 32516 treaties. Every such instrument affects, to a greater or lesser
extent , the freedom of the parties to the treaty. This is how national sovereignty is
compromised by international agreements.
Challenges against the Idea
Sovereignty is also challenged at the doctrine level by powerful and persuasive ideas
such as universal human rights. Declarations such as the Council of Europe's Convention for
the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (Council of Europe1950) are
premised on the view that human rights transcend national boundaries and that appropriate
definitions of rights and freedoms are not the business of national authorities. The European
Convention opens up the possibility that citizens can take their own governments to the
European Court of Human Rights.
Conclusion
Nation states still matter. They are the sources of power with which most people
readily identify. Power becomes meaningful only in reference to sovereignty. Moreover,
terms like community obligation legitimacy, authority, state government and constitution ...all
are integrated and made coherent by the concept of sovereignty. It is a unifying theory, not
a simple description. It is a doctrine which deals with facts of political life, and not fantasies.
Required Readings
Kapur, A.C.(2000), Principles of Political Science, New Delhi: Chand & Company Ltd.
Garner James Wilford (1951),Political Science and Government, Calcutta: The World
Press Private Ltd.
D:\533561091.doc
Page 5 of 5