9.6 Pluralistic Attack on Austin’s Concept of Sovereignty
9.6.1 Pluralistic View of Sovereignty - A Critique
9.7 Sovereignty and Globalisation - New Challenges
9.7.1 Sovereignty and Power-Blocs
9.7.2 Sovereignty and Global Economy
9.7.3 Sovereignty and International Organisations
9.7.4 Sovereignty and International Law
9.8 Summary
9.9 Exercises
9.1 INTRODUCTION
The notion of sovereignty is deeply intertwined with the understanding of the state's relationship to its citizens.
The state's role involves maintaining peace and security through laws, with an obligation to respect the rights provided by the constitution.
The paradox of governance arises: despite a known existence of state authority, the complexity and depth of sovereignty necessitates further examination to comprehend its implications and significance.
9.2 WHAT IS SOVEREIGNTY?
Definition: Sovereignty is a fundamental concept in political theory, derived from the Latin term Superanus, meaning supreme. It encompasses the state's absolute authority to demand obedience from its citizens, signifying both an internal and external dimension.
Internal Sovereignty: The state commands total power within its territory, subjecting all individuals and organizations to its laws, rendering it original, total, unlimited, and all-encompassing.
External Sovereignty: Each state maintains its supremacy and autonomy in the international arena, free from outside interference, except under voluntarily accepted treaties.
9.2.1 Some Definitions of Sovereignty
Bodin: Sovereignty is "the supreme power over citizens and subjects unrestrained by law."
Grotius: Describes sovereignty as "the supreme political power vested in him whose acts are not subject to any other and whose will cannot be overridden."
Blackstone: Defines it as "the supreme irresistible absolute, uncontrolled authority in which the supreme legal power resides."
Duguit: Characterizes it as "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."
Willoughby: Refers to it as "the supreme will of the state."
Solitaire: Describes it as "the exercise of final legal coercive power by the state."
Hinsley: States it is "the concept which maintains that there must be an ultimate authority within the political society for it to exist at all."
David Held: Defines it as "the political authority within a community which has the undisputed right to determine the framework of rules, regulations, and policies within a given territory and to govern accordingly."
9.2.2 Meaning Of Sovereignty
Traditional views of sovereignty emphasize several key attributes:
It is an attribute of the state.
It represents the supreme will of the state.
It embodies the legal coercive power of the state.
The sovereign entity creates laws and demands compliance from the populace.
Sovereignty rests in an individual or a collective body.
The sovereign's power is characterized as absolute and unlimited.
9.3 DEVELOPMENT OF THE CONCEPT OF SOVEREIGNTY
The idea of sovereignty emerged primarily during the rise of European nation-states, asserting powerful monarchs' authority over their territories.
Ancient Greeks, particularly Aristotle, began the discourse by identifying the state's supreme power, though he did not define sovereignty explicitly.
Aristotle suggested two perspectives:
The deliberative body should possess sovereignty.
Law should be sovereign, preferring a legal foundation for authority.
The Roman view regarded sovereignty as the fullness of state power, with recognizable laws binding citizens and fostering uniformity and citizenship concepts.
The feudal era obscured sovereignty, where the king’s power was often eclipsed by the church and local authorities.
Jean Bodin's contributions in defining sovereignty as "the supreme power unrestrained by law" pioneered modern thought, defining the necessary attributes of sovereignty as perpetual, unlimited, and indivisible.
Hobbes refined Bodin's model of sovereignty through the lens of social contract theory, promoting the notion of an absolute sovereign with overarching and undivided power, grounded in self-preservation.
In opposition to Hobbes, Rousseau framed sovereignty as the collective will of the people, termed the General Will, which is inalienable and requires the community's consent to govern.
Locke's limited government idea distinguished his perspective from both Hobbes and Rousseau, advocating for popular sovereignty and emphasizing the importance of legislative power check.
The French Revolution's emphasis on popular sovereignty marked a pivotal point, asserting people as the true sovereign, influencing the structure of modern states significantly following the Industrial Revolution.
9.4 KINDS OF SOVEREIGNTY
Sovereignty manifests in various forms within political science, complicating its comprehension. Here are key distinctions:
9.4.1 Real and Titular Sovereignty
Real Sovereignty: Refers to actual power exerted by an authority (e.g., the Crown in England).
Titular Sovereignty: The authority that is recognized without actual power (e.g., in parliamentary democracies where power resides with the cabinet).
The U.S. does not typically distinguish between the two since the president acts in both capacities.
9.4.2 Legal and Political Sovereignty
Legal Sovereignty: Defined constitutionally, identifying those who hold power legally, such as the British King-in-Parliament.
Political Sovereignty: Abstract and less tangible, it refers to the realities of influence behind legal structures, often lying with the electorate in representative democracies.
9.4.3 Dejure and Defacto Sovereignty
Dejure Sovereignty: Legally recognized authority (the rightful ruler according to law).
Defacto Sovereignty: Power held in practice without legal backing (e.g., rulers after a coup).
These can converge over time as de facto rulers establish their legitimacy.
9.4.4 Concept of Popular Sovereignty
Rooted in the principle that ultimate authority resides with the people, with Rousseau as a key proponent.
Historical foundations include Cicero's notion of state affairs belonging to the people and Althusius’s concept of corporate sovereignty.
Locke viewed governmental authority as a trust for the people's welfare, with the right of rebellion if governmental failures ensue.
Rousseau emphasized freedom, equality, and the sovereign nature of the collective populace, defining government as an agent bound to the will of the sovereign people.
Articles from the Declaration of Independence and the French Revolution capture the essence of popular sovereignty, asserting unconditional rights and recognized equality.
Critique of Popular Sovereignty: Practical implementation raises questions regarding representation, defining who constitutes 'the people', and the underlying influences on electoral decisions.
9.5 AUSTIN’S CONCEPT OF SOVEREIGNTY
John Austin's legal viewpoint suggested sovereignty is identified in a determinate superior receiving habitual obedience from society.
Essential characteristics of Austin's sovereignty include:
Necessity: Sovereignty is fundamental to state existence.
Determination: Sovereignty must reside in identifiable persons or bodies.
Supreme Power: The sovereign wields ultimate authority and commands obedience within the jurisdiction.
Habitual Obedience: Sovereign commands must receive a continuous, unbroken recognition from the populace.
Source of Law: Sovereign commands form the basis for law, with law perceived as commands from a superior.
Physical Force: Sovereign requires legitimate force to enforce commands.
Exclusivity: Sovereignty cannot be shared or divided; its integrity depends on singularity.
9.6 PLURALISTIC ATTACK ON AUSTIN’S CONCEPT OF SOVEREIGNTY
Key pluralist scholars (e.g., Laski, Figgis) challenge Austin's singular view of a determinate sovereign, promoting the notion of popular sovereignty and inherent limitations of state power.
Pluralists contend that the realities of governance reflect a complex interplay of interests where sovereignty is decentralized and subject to institutional checks.
Critiques emphasize contradictions in the pluralist perspective concerning the state's coordinating role amidst decentralization.
Laski and MacIver argue that sovereignty cannot be absolute and must acknowledge the influence of customs, groups, and societal norms which limit the sovereign's authority.
They challenge the absolutist view, highlighting historical contexts and ethical implications—calling for a recognition of multiple centers of power and collective identity among different associations.
Critique of Pluralism: Scholars argue pluralists inherently invoke state sovereignty to regulate interactions among diverse groups, leading to contradictions in advocating decentralization while expecting state coordination.
9.7 SOVEREIGNTY AND GLOBALISATION - NEW CHALLENGES
Globalisation leads to increased global interconnectedness and raises questions about the scope and autonomy of state sovereignty.
9.7.1 Sovereignty and Power-Blocs
Historical divisions post-WWII created power-blocs, challenging individual state authority.
States became influenced by the domestic and foreign policy dictates of larger alliances (e.g., NATO).
9.7.2 Sovereignty and Global Economy
The rise of multinational corporations and global financial systems diminishes individual states' control over economic policies, pushing states to adapt to global economic trends.
9.7.3 Sovereignty and International Organisations
International organizations like the UN and WTO establish norms and regulations that states must adhere to, limiting sovereign autonomy and legal decision-making.
9.7.4 Sovereignty and International Law
Modern international law subjects states to global human rights standards, affecting their internal laws and processes significantly.
9.8 SUMMARY
Sovereignty embodies the supreme power of the state, featuring legal and physical authority, although it faces limitations from various factors including global interactions and institutional checks.
9.9 EXERCISES
Explain the development of the concept of sovereignty.
Define sovereignty. What do you understand by internal and external sovereignty?
Differentiate between (a) real and titular sovereignty and (b) legal and political sovereignty.
What do you understand by dejure and defacto sovereignty? Explain the concept of popular sovereignty.
Discuss the characteristics of sovereignty as advocated by Austin.
Discuss the pluralist critique of Austin’s concept of sovereignty.
Discuss the extent to which the pluralists' criticism of Austin's concept of sovereignty is justified. Do power alliances limit the sovereignty of a state?
Do you think that world economy, international organisations and international law have really affected state sovereignty?