Contitutional Law Essay Example
“I myself would consider there were advantages in making it clear that ultimately there are even limits on the supremacy of Parliament which it is the courts’ inalienable responsibility to identify and uphold” (Lord Woolf MR, ‘Droit Public – English Style [1995] Public Law 57,69)
Discuss
1. Introduction
The above extra judicial argument of Lord Woolf is the spark but not the essence of discussion within the light of this essay as his democratic criticism has more to do with political constraints on the power of Parliament to legislate as it pleases and less to do with legal limitations to Parliament‘s legislative authority.
For example, Lord Woolf has contended that ultimately, the rule of law could validly limit the so-called absolute power of Parliament to legislate as it pleases. “… if Parliament did the unthinkable, then I would say that the courts would also be required to act in a manner which would be without precedent.”
All that can be said of Lord Woolf‘s criticism of the Diceyan view of parliamentary sovereignty is that it is based on an unrealistic scenario and is thus unsupportive. His Lordship himself indicated that in refusing to obey an Act of Parliament on grounds of the rule of law, the courts would be acting without precedent.
What is of essence to this essay is the recent constitutional changes that common law declarations pose for the sovereignty of the parliament i.e the extent that the courts, in pursuance of their interpretative obligations, debunk from a position of absolute judicial obedience to primary legislation as demanded by the traditional concept of parliamentary sovereignty, to a position that appears to challenge the traditional concept.
The first constitutional development is the enactment of the European Communities Act of 1972. Section 2(1) and (4) of the Act imposes an obligation on the courts to construe all legislation in a manner that accords priority to directly effective Community law over any
Discuss
1. Introduction
The above extra judicial argument of Lord Woolf is the spark but not the essence of discussion within the light of this essay as his democratic criticism has more to do with political constraints on the power of Parliament to legislate as it pleases and less to do with legal limitations to Parliament‘s legislative authority.
For example, Lord Woolf has contended that ultimately, the rule of law could validly limit the so-called absolute power of Parliament to legislate as it pleases. “… if Parliament did the unthinkable, then I would say that the courts would also be required to act in a manner which would be without precedent.”
All that can be said of Lord Woolf‘s criticism of the Diceyan view of parliamentary sovereignty is that it is based on an unrealistic scenario and is thus unsupportive. His Lordship himself indicated that in refusing to obey an Act of Parliament on grounds of the rule of law, the courts would be acting without precedent.
What is of essence to this essay is the recent constitutional changes that common law declarations pose for the sovereignty of the parliament i.e the extent that the courts, in pursuance of their interpretative obligations, debunk from a position of absolute judicial obedience to primary legislation as demanded by the traditional concept of parliamentary sovereignty, to a position that appears to challenge the traditional concept.
The first constitutional development is the enactment of the European Communities Act of 1972. Section 2(1) and (4) of the Act imposes an obligation on the courts to construe all legislation in a manner that accords priority to directly effective Community law over any