What is sovereignty?

The head of sovereignty is the idea of someone holding unequivocal power. For example in the United Kingdom we father parliamentary sovereignty. This means that parliament holds despotic power in the land with no coldnesss. However sovereignty is unnatural and controlled by certain things such as public opinion and extracurricular influences including the media etc. That is why although sovereignty gives supreme power to the bearer it cigarette sometimes be restricted by uncontrollable means.However ultimately, if accept all other influences and theories, sovereignty is the word used to describe something that is condition to someone or something to hold supreme power, and this power should technically be un-unquestionable, that is the idea of sovereignty.Where is sovereignty located in the UK?The milkweed furtherterfly originally continuously held sovereignty. However in 1649 after the English civil war sovereignty in the UK was handed over to parliament after the exec ution of Charles I, and the caterpillar track of the country became a dictatorship under Oliver Cromwell. Ever since then, although the monarch is all the same head of state, parliament has al panaches held supreme power in the land. The monarch still holds theoretical powers such as the command of the army just in perpetrate these powers belong to the executive and ultimately the Prime Minister. dissimilar the Ameri mess presidential system where the President numbers only one trine of the three areas of power, the British system relies on a mass to form the government. This push aside sometimes be a problem as the majority party holds all powers because the house of commons makes legislation and the house of lords nooky only block legislation for so long. The only person in theory that can stop a law being passed is the coffin nail but this would be very unpopular so in practice is non done.Although the House of Commons and ultimately the executive hold supreme power, w hilst we are a part of the European Union we must keep an eye on the laws and guidelines bent by them. This was shown when be introduced the Human Rights Act after the EU had made it law. So although in theory the UK could leave the EU if it very disagreed with something, in practice this would not be economically or politically viable and so we are bound by their laws.So although sovereignty ultimately rests with the executive, the monarch still has to agree to laws and the monarch still holds armament powers but these are never used in practice. The only constraint to sovereignty is the EU that we could technically leave at anytime. So often sovereignty in the UK is located within the government but in theory the EU can say no to our legislation. This is where sovereignty is located in the UK.Why has the UKs un- systematize war paint been criticised?Over the years the UKs un-written or un- systematize constitution has been criticised. This blame has not only come from count ries with a codified constitution but also within the UK as well. Although the UK constitution is un-codified it has however been around long-lasting than any constitution in the entire world. This says that that fact that it has never been full written down means that it has had a chance to evolve and so last for a long period of time.Some may wall that the American codified constitution was a necessity, as after the American war of independence the Americans needed a quick constitution right away away in order to run the country. There is no way that a country could have been set up without a codified constitution. The utility of a codified constitution is that all of the information is in that respect and cannot be removed unless two thirds of the government/senate agree. Acts can only be amended. This could also pose as a dis benefit as a law that needed to be passed quickly would take at least(prenominal) a week to go through all of the houses to be added to the constitut ion.The advantage of an un-codified constitution is that not everything is in black and white. This is where we get conventions and wooing law. As not everything in the constitution is set in stone, if something were to be enigmatical then it could be taken to court for a ruling. Also we have conventions that are things that we do but are not written down. The advantage of having an un-codified constitution is that in an emergency and act or law can be added pr removed completely within twenty-four hours as no government can bind another government.So basically there are both advantages and discriminates of both systems. With an un-codified constitution not everything is set in stone so things can be adjusted from case to case and also it is very quick and easy to change. The disadvantage to this is that this gives a lot of power to the executive and in theory they could run a dictatorship with no one to stop them. This is an advantage of a codified constitution because it is no t very easily change and so does not give a lot of power to a few people. The disadvantage of this system is that things take a long time to change and can never be completely removed. Despite both the advantages and disadvantages of both of the systems, all(prenominal) system works best for the country that uses it. So all the UKs constitution has been criticised it obviously works because it has lasted for such a long period of time.