Skip to main content

Popular Sovereignty

 The principle of popular sovereignty denotes that the source of governmental power or the sovereignty

lies with the people. The concept of the social contract is the base of this principle as it believes that the

government should work for the benefit of the people governed. The English philosopher Thomas

Hobbes in his book The Leviathan wrote that in the 'state of nature' people were selfish and brutish,

thus in order to survive they gave over their rights to a ruler who in turn provides them with protection

and security.


This theory laid down the first basis of popular sovereignty. The idea of popular sovereignty can even be

found in Rome way back in 45BCE where Julius Caesar was said to derive his authority from general

public. In the modern period the concept of popular sovereignty has been adopted by the French

philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau according to whom, people willingly gave legitimate authority to the

government in the form of social contract for reciprocated preservation.


A group of citizens must make the laws, while their selected government guarantees their daily

implementation. Thus, the people act as a sovereign, protecting the common welfare as opposed to the

desires of an individual. Therefore, it may be said that popular sovereignty is the core basis for a

democratic government. The standard understanding of democracy dictates that the people must enjoy

equal representation and adequate opportunities in the participation for the process of law making,

revision or abolition.


The idea of popular sovereignty denotes that, the subjects of the state i.e the people must be equally

represented in the rule making body; failure of which would not amount to popular sovereignty but

perhaps a hybrid with majoritarianism in some form. Additionally, for the people to be truly sovereign

they themselves must 'determine the constitutional form, the juridical and political identity, and the

governmental structure of a community in its entirety'.[1]


Thus, it is necessary that the rule by the people must predate the legal system as a whole. Accordingly

the people must have had equal opportunity of representation, to be present and participating during

the conception of the legal system.


The Indian Constitution

A constitution is understood to be a body of fundamental principles to which the state is to be governed

and it acts as a norm for all other laws to abide by, due to which it is also often referred to as

Grundnorm. So, one may say that the equal representation of the people, in the making of the

constitution of a state is the first crucial step to implementing the principle of sovereignty into a legal

framework as a whole.


The constitution, being a text without any authors or many authors represents the voice of the people,

crystallised and codified the aspiration behind various movements and struggles for freedom from the

British prior to the constitutional making process. In the Indian scenario, the preamble of the Indian

constitution states that 'We the People of India, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a

Sovereign Socialist Secular Democratic Republic��'[2] thus implying that the people are sovereign as the

governing body derives its legitimacy from the people itself.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more