Law of the Costitution - Essay Example

ental principles of Britain’s unwritten Constitution, and the role of judges within the context of those principles by stating that the indivisibility of Parliamentary power requires that all exercise of Governmental power must be authorized by Parliament, since it is the source of all valid authority.1 As a result, the British power of judicial review by the Courts would not include the power to invalidate Acts of Parliament, rather the Courts may only use their powers to constrain any abuse of powers by the other arms of Government, such as the legislative and executive branches2.

This political and legal view is based upon the absolute and indivisible sovereignty of the British Parliament3. As stated by Dicey: (a) “Parliament has the right to make or unmake any law whatever”4 and (b) no person or body may be recognized as having the legal authority to set aside or invalidate the acts of Parliament, except Parliament itself.5 Thus, the indivisibility of Parliamentary power sets it out as the source of all valid authority.6 As a result, the British power of judicial review would not include the power to invalidate Acts of Parliament, rather the Courts may only use their powers to constrain any abuse of powers by the other arms of Government.

7 Jennings has opposed Dicey’s theory by arguing for limiting of Parliamentary power by the manner and form of the process of procedural entrapment8. A piece of legislation would be deeply entrenced if amendment requires unanimous support within the Houses of Parliament. Jennings defines legal sovereignty by specifying that Parliament has power to make laws for the time being, but not to bind future Parliament. The power of Parliament to make laws is also subject to the rule of recognition that is to be recognized by the Courts, “including a rule which alters this law itself.

”9 Hence law making will be conditioned by the rule of recognition, which should limit the powers of Parliament to bind successors in an era