The parliament was given its authority by the voting system within the UK which gave the parliament legitimacy to make, amend or abolish laws. The UK then seen the 1911 and 1949 Parliament Acts that have further reduced the powers of the HOL and concentration of power in the HOL and its executive the prime minister. If the HOL introduces a law and the majority of the HOL agrees the law will be passed. The UK has an internal convention that it will go through steps to allow a royal assent of the law however this does not have to be followed as it is not law, again this shows the parliament as having absolute power/sovereignty. This change of powers sees sovereignty shift from the monarch to parliament.
This statement clearly shows the flexibility of the UK constitution.3 The United Kingdom is said to have a unitary constitution which is governed as a single unit where there is no written constitution emphasizing the powers of the UK parliament or the central government. But the constitution of the United Kingdom is better described as ‘multi-layered’ than unitary because of the devolution of powers to Scottish, Northern Ireland and welsh legislatures under the Acts of the UK parliament. UK is a constitutional monarchy. Walter Bagehot (1826-77) was one of the most important Victorian writers on the constitutional monarchy. His book ‘The English Constitution’, which was first published in 1867, provided an analysis of the role of monarchy which remains relevant today.
Although the Magna Carta does not hold any legal stand now, this crucial document is an important part of British history. It has a symbolic value on the guarantee of the citizen’s right and the concept that there should be limited legislation. Following the Glorious Revolution the bill of right 1689, which is a major significance in modern day democracy , was enacted by the parliament. It became a source of inspiration for the United States first ten Amendments, added to their Constitution in 1791. It is a landmark for the protection of the rights of individuals and the limitation of the parliament’s authority on judicial decision.
The proper and necessary clause in the Constitution is too general, and is dangerous due to the fact that it doesn't list all the powers of government in order to put clear limits on them. The executive branch is given too much power from the Constitution, and there is a probability of it becoming a monarchy soon. The Federalists could argue that a strong national government is needed to deal with problems, like trade and defense, but that does not counter the fact that they carry an army during peacetime, and it could be used to suppress the people. They might also say that a strong executive branch is necessary to to fulfill its responsibilities, this can be countered by the fact that one branch should not be stronger than the others, that was the whole point of the three branches. In conclusion, the Constitution has many errors that need mending.
Rousseau's understanding of democracy is often described as the theory of identity in the sense of the continuing identity of sovereigns with sovereigns. However, it is precisely the skepticism of Rousseau that the sovereignty of these sovereigns and the institutional connection of the legislature and the executive are so connected. Finally, the external political and geopolitical conditions must be appropriate for democracy: for Rousseau, democracy is a form of state that fits the smaller and poorer states, but as a rule these states are connected to other great states in economic and military terms. Rousseau was a republican. His ideal state - historically, the Republic of Rome and authoritatively ruled Sparta, and in the meantime, in a small space, a morally perfect republic, in particular the Corsican, as a general ideal form of government for him as the "last classical utopian" It was a republic.
This was the principle laid down in Pickin v British Railways Board . The jurisdiction of the courts is limited to interpreting and enforcing an act of Parliament. The duty of the courts is to enforce the laws passed by the Parliament. It cannot embark on an investigation as to whether correct Parliamentary procedure was adopted in enacting the law. Hence, this is to demonstrate the point that in a system of Parliamentary Democracy, the power is ultimately with the people who elected their representatives to Parliament to make laws that is in the interests of the people i.e.
The monarchy is able to coexist within the parliamentary system because it no longer serves as the head of state, rather than the head of government, which is now the role of the Prime Minister. The responsibilities of the monarchy are purely cultural, meaning its primary purpose is to unite the nation and preserve its historical significance. Not only is the Monarch barred from directly participating in government, but they are also prohibited from expressing any political opinion whatsoever, allowing the country to maintain the title of liberal democracy. Since the monarchy lost its political power, Great Britain has implemented a bicameral Parliament in which members of the House of Commons are elected by their constituents, and the House of Lords, where members have inherited their position through heredity or are appointed by the Prime
The Bundesrat must approve all laws that affect the states (including laws that require states to implement policies of the federal government), giving it an effective veto power over about one-third of all legislation.” (O’Neil, Fields, & Share 223) This hinders power of majority in passing laws without consulting other differing parties in regards to the same policies. “The Bundesrat has traditionally served as an important check on the federal government because it has very often been controlled by opposition.” (O’Neil, Fields, & Share
Another reason a representative democracy is the ideal choice is it practices the use of each individuals rights such as the freedom of speech and the freedom of the press. Other systems of government such as a monarchy give power only to those descended from the royal family. It also does not include checks and balances allowing the king or queen to rule however they would like and have unlimited authority. These rulers have power over the throne until death so if they are making poor decisions for the country they have to be forcefully removed which in my opinion may cause conflict and uprising. In the representative democracy there will be multiple parties including republican, democrat, green, and libertarian.
Procedural fairness is the ability to review or question policies, regulations or law that is considered to be wrongly formulated or unfair, which then refers to the judicial review. The way that is set up in the UK is relatively broad and might be perceived as confusing at points. Firstly, unlike many other states the UK does not have a written constitution as such but rather refers to existing statutes and precedents as such, according to which the ultimate source of law is the Parliament, which means that in the course of a term many statutes and precedents can be amended or eliminated with or without replacing them. Secondly, the constitution establishes the powers of the state, according to which all issues regarding the law shall be addressed to the courts of the UK, which essentially boils down to the fact that administrative cases are heard by the same courts . Whether or not a highly centralized court system is a benefit will be discussed further below.