What is meant by Sovereignty?

The word ‘sovereignty’ is a derivative form Latin word ‘superannus’, which means
the highest authority. Thus, sovereignty means the supreme power of the state.
This power separates the state from the other associations and individuals
residing in it, and bestows the state with the coercive authority over them.
According to Laski, “It is by possession of sovereignty that the state is
distinguished from all other forms of human associations.”

The concept of sovereignty is as old as the state itself. With the change in the
form of the state, the point of view regarding sovereignty also went on changing.
Because, there has been difference of opinion among the political scientists
regarding the origin and aims of the state, therefore, they have not been
unanimous about the sovereignty. Lord Bryce has said that this is the most
controversial subject in the history of Politics. In fact, sovereignty is mainly a legal
concept and it indicates the supremacy of the state from the legal point of view.
By interpreting sovereignty it has been said that this is such a special quality of
the state that no limit can be put legally on it except by its own will, nor can any
other authority limits its authority. Thus, because of sovereignty, the state has
become the supreme association, and, on the other hand, no other foreign
authority has any power to issue order to it nor to limit its authority. This is the
legal aspect of sovereignty. When various philosophers discussed political,
moral, and popular sovereignty, the main controversy rose about it. In fact, these
days, there can be any institution like the king, president or parliament for using
the sovereign authority which has the supreme authority for making the laws,
issuing me orders and taking political decisions. These orders, laws and
decisions are applicable to all citizens and associations. Not only this, if these are
disobeyed the sovereign has the unlimited power to punishment.

Though, from legal point of view, sovereignty implies a supreme “Which is used
by the sovereign in an unlimited, undivided or

unrestricted manner, yet it does not mean that it can be used arbitrarily. modern
era, no sovereign can use it without reason, against the feeling of

justice or against the traditions and custom well established in society.

The history is a witness that the sovereigns who used it.

arbitrarily, there were struggles against them and efforts were made to take it
away from them. Thus, when it is called unlimited and unrestrained authority, the
implication is its legal aspect, according to which a sovereign, while taking a
decision, issuing an order or awarding punishment, cannot be forced to consult
or know the will of any individuals. or institution. He has the power to take
decisions according to his will or discretion which all persons and institutions
have to obey. Definition of Sovereignty

Definition of Sovereignty

Different writers of Politics have defined sovereignty in different words, but all
agree on one point that sovereignty is the supreme power of the state. This is the
highest authority. Everybody has invariably to obey the orders. Where there is
lack of sovereignty, it can not really be called a state the following are some
definitions of sovereignty given by some writers.

According to Bodin “Sovereignty is the supreme power of the state over citizens
and subjects unrestrained by the laws.

Grotious says that “Sovereignly is the supreme political power vested in him
whose acts are not subject to another and whose will cannot be overridden.”

According to Burgess, “Sovereignty is that characteristics of the state by virtue of

which it cannot be bound except by its own will or limited by any other power
than itself.”

Willoughby defines that “Sovereignty is the supreme will of the state.”

According to Pollock, “Sovereignty is the power which is neither temporary, nor

delegated, nor subject to particular rules which it cannot alter nor answerable to
any other power on earth.”

Two Aspects of Sovereignty

The definitions of sovereignty given above have laid emphasis on two aspects of
it. Internally, it is above all other persons and associations and, from external
point of view, it is free from the control of any other state. Both the aspects of
sovereignty have been discussed below :

(1) Internal Sovereignty,

(2) External Sovereignty.

(1) Internal Sovereignty. Every individual and association, within the state, has to
accept the sovereign power of the state. The human society should obey, by
nature, every order of the state. Even the great one has no right to claim
superiority over the state. Similary, no association, religious, political, social or
economic has any authority to

work against the orders of the state. The power to work within their

jurisdiction is given by the state of these associations. Sovereignty itself

accepts no restrictions from any corner. Discussing the internal aspect of

sovereignty Laski says, “It issues orders to all men and all associations within its
area. It receives orders from none of them. Its will is subject to no legal limitations
of any kind.”

(2) External Sovereignty. The external aspect of sovereignty implies that it is free
from every outside control. If the policy of a country is framed because of
pressure from any other country, that country can not be called a state. The
questions like as to what should be their foreign policy and the policy regarding
war, peace, trade agreements etc., are the questions of the country concerned
decision regarding which is taken by itself, keeping its own interest in view. A
country doing like that can be called a state. It does not mean that the obedience
of international law is a limitation on sovereignty, because on the one hand, it
obeys those laws according to its own will, on the other hand, these laws are,
similarly, obeyed by all the other countries of the world also. Therefore, to
strengthen universal brotherhood these limitations have been accepted by all the
countries of their own accord. So, none restrains others.
Different Forms of Sovereignty

Though sovereignty is mainly a legal concept, yot various writers have used it in
different ways. Therefore, it is necessary for a student of politics that he should
understand every point of view which has been discussed, thus for, about
sovereignty, which influence the form and scope of the state. All these aspects
and forms of sovereignty have been discussed below :

(1) Nominal or Titular and Real Sovereignty. In the modern states, the
sovereignty resides somewhere else and seems to be somewhere else. The
nominal or titular sovereignty is with the man who is said to be having
sovereignty but can not makc use of it. But that sovereignty is used by some one
else in his name. It will be clear from the example of England. These days, in
England, constitutional monarchy prevails. There the king or queen is powerless.
She has got nominal sovereignty. She can not use this sovereignty according to
her own will,

van all work is done in her name. Meaning thereby that the Sovereignty with her
is nominal or ornamental. Even today the government of England is called Her
Majesty’s government. Every law is made in her name. In fact, she is a rubber
stamp in the hands of

the cabinet, which is used by the cabinet according to its sovereignty is used by
the cabinet and the Parliament of England so, the queen of England is a nominal
sovereign. Whereas, the cabinet and Parliament, these are real sovereign. This
division of sovereignty is available in those countries where the parliamentary
goverment, In India also, the President is the nominal head and the cabinet the
Parliament are the real sovereign.

(2) Legal and Political Sovereignty. In country, the legal sovereignty lies with the
person or institution who has the full power of framing laws. It can make laws and
can give final form of it .The lawyers admit only this sovereignty. In dictatorship,
this power is with the dictator, because he himself exercises the power of making
laws Instead of one man, this legal sovereignty may be with a group of persons.
These days, in the democratic countries, this legal sovereignty is with the
parliaments. The parliament is authorised to make laws with queen in England
and with the President in India. So, they are the legal sovereign. According to
Garner, “The legal sovereignty is, therefore, 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 divine law, the principles of morality, the
mandates of public opinion.” Thus, it can be said that in every politically
organised society, there is sovereignty which is nurses trained, unlimited,
indivisible, original and not-transferable. The command of this sovereign is law
which is necessarily obeyed by all men and associations. This command may be
even against the moral principles, divine laws or public opinion, This sovereignty
is the legal sovereignty of that society. The following are characteristics of that
sovereignty :

(i) This sovereignty is determinate and it lies in any person group of persons.

(ii) It is organised and definite and it is accepted by law.

(iii) Legally it can announce the will of the state.

(iv) It gives result to the people, but they have no right again

(v) Its disobedience is a punishable crime.

(vi) It is above divine laws, moral principle and public opinion

(vii) The lawyers and law courts accept its orders.

In addition to this legal sovereignty, there is sovereignty in the state, and that is
political sovereignty. Though this author make laws itself, nor can amend laws,
yet the legal sovereignty has to bow before it. It has always this political
sovereignty in mind.

Dicey says. “Behind the sovereign which the lawyer recognise. there is another
sovereign to whom the legal sovereign must bow that body is legally sovereign,
the will of which is ultimately obeyed by the citizens of the state.”

Defining the political sovereignty, Gilchrist writes, “The political sovereignty is

sum total of the influences in a state which lie behind law.”
Thus, political sovereignty, in democratic countries, is the will of e people. This
will is indicated by newspapers, platform and voting etc. The legal sovereign can
not ignore and political sovereignty because if the legal sovereign does not do
public welfare, people will dismiss it.

Relation between Legal and Political Sovereignty. In fact, legal and political
sovereignty are two aspects of sovereignty of the state and not two
sovereignties; these are of course, shown separately. In a good government, it is
essential that these two aspects of sovereignty must be closely related.
According to Ritchi, the problem of a good government is the problem of showing
these two aspects of sovereignty rightly related mutually. It is democratic
countries that these two aspects of parliament elected by them is legal sovereign.
This legal sovereign has to work according to the will of their electors, i.e., the
political sovereign. Till the legislature obeys the will of the people, the relations
between the two aspects are cordial and it does more public welfare. If the legal
sovereign does not behave according to the will of the people, there will be more
possibility of the establishment of a welfare state, because the legal sovereign is
elected for obeying the will of the political sovereign. If political sovereign is the
master, the legal sovereign is its servant. Establishment of cordial relations
between the two is necessary, otherwise, the people will make efforts, in the
ensuing elections, to hand over the power to some other persons, so that a
welfare state may be established.

De Facto and De Jure Sovereignty

(i) De Facto Sovereignty. The de facto and de jure sovereignty and also
differentiated. When a de jure sovereign is thrown out by force a revolution or
mutiny, and there is none to replace it as de jure sovereign, the person or
persons holding sovereignty in such

circumstances is called the de facto sovereign. It is not necessary that de facto

sovereign, is simultaneously, de jure sovereign also. Discussing the de facto
sovereign, Garner says, that a person or group of persons who has the authority

to get its orders obeyed by the people, form

some time, he is the de facto sovereign. A person who dominates a state by
force, he may be a king, self-appointed Council. military dictator Priest or
Prophet, his authority is based on physical or spiritual and not on legality. For
example, Crommwell, who established his authority by ending the long
Parliament in England, or No. established his rule in France, by ending the
Directory sovereign. Similarly in the U.S.S.R., the Bolshevik Rule revolution of
1917, the communist rule of Mao in China after the rule of Chiang-Kai-Shek, the
military rule of Ne Win in military dictatorships in countries like Pakistan are all
examples facto sovereigns. But a de facto sovereign becomes a de jure
sovereign if after, ruling for some time, it get the recognition of the constitution
though elections and after being recognised by the foreign state

(ii) De jure Sovereignty. De jure sovereignty is based on law. It is not based on

the physical force of a man or group of men when sovereign’s government is on
legal basis, he is called a de jure sovereign He has the legal right to issue orders
and to gel them obeyed. In fact for a de jure sovereign, it is essential that he
should be de facto sovereign also, because if he is dismissed he remains de
facto sovereign only Whosoever becomes the de facto sovereign in his place, he
either, after some time, becomes de jure sovereign also or he has to vacate the
seat for de jure sovereign.

In fact, de facto sovereign should be de jure sovereign also because it is in this

position that it is convenient for him to get his orders obeyed. Normally, a de facto
sovereign, after some time, being accepted by the people, becomes de jure
sovereign also. A de facto sovereign changes his sovereignty into de jure
sovereignty through elections. It gives moral right also to the sovereign to get his
orders obeyed by the people and there remains no scope of any revolution or
conspiracy by the people in favour of the previous de jure sovereign. Bryce has
said that the power which is based on force only, it is naturally opposed by the
people.

Popular Sovereignty

Popular sovereignty means that the final authority lies with the people. In fact, it
is originated as a result of the struggle of the people against che kings. Ancient
Indian political scientist also were not ignorant about popular sovereignty. The
authorities of the Roman Empire also got their power from the people. In the 16th
century, popular sovereign wme into being to oppose dictatorship. Rousseau,
through his theory

of general Will, established that the supreme power lies with the people,

This was the basis of French Revolution also. Later on, this theory was accepted
in the U.S.A. also. On the basis of this popular sovereignty, Democratic
governments were established, When all the adult persons

A country vote in the elections or make the laws themselves, the popular
sovereignty is said to be present there. According to Ritchi, During the elections,
people use their supreme power directly. According to Dr. Ashirvatham, “In actual
practice popular sovereignty seems to mean nothing more than public opinion in
time of peace and the might of revolution in the case of conflict.”