The Doctrine of Parliamentary Supremacy

By

The Doctrine of Parliamentary Supremacy

There are some contentions applicable to the context of the constitution of the United Kingdom (UK); the result of the UK constitution not being created of in writing or codified rules, the doctrine of rule of law as put ahead by Professor Albert Venn Dicey in 'The Law of the Constitution' 1 and the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty and the consequences of the new Labour government's support of devolution, connecting of the European Union (EU) and suggested restructure of the House of Lords thereon.

The doctrine that 'Parliament can do anything except join its successor', which is the authorized ideology of the British constitution. Acts are not subject to judicial reconsider, neither is constitutional or other legislation 'entrenched' (made more tough to change than commonplace legislation) because to do so would be to join the sovereignty of future parliaments. One inquisitive but ordered outcome is that assurances enshrined in Acts of Parliament are worthless.  (Elliott 2004, 545-627)

The Ireland Act 1949, s.1(2), states that 'It is hereby declared that Northern Ireland continues part of…the United Kingdom and… in no happening will… any part thereof stop to be part of…the United Kingdom without the permission of the Parliament of Northern Ireland'. But as there is no entrenchment, this could easily be cancelled should a future UK government desire to cede Northern Ireland to the Republic of Ireland. Defenders of parliamentary sovereignty contend that it is absolutely crucial to be clear where sovereignty lies, and that it should lie with voted into agency political leaders, not unelected referees or boss officers. Critics contend variously:

that parliamentary sovereignty has become a cover for boss despotism, because assembly neither can neither desires to scrutinize boss activities purportedly done in its name;

that parliamentary power was ceded with the appointment ...