📚 Where Sovereignty Can Now Be Said to Lie in the UK | 主权如今在英国可被认为归于何处
The question of where sovereignty lies in the United Kingdom has long been central to A-level Politics. Traditionally, the answer was simple: Parliament is sovereign. However, devolution, EU membership, human rights law, referendums and judicial review have all complicated that picture. This article examines the competing claims to sovereignty in the modern UK.
主权在英国归于何处这一问题，长期以来一直是 A-level 政治课程的核心。传统上答案很简单：议会拥有主权。然而，权力下放、欧盟成员身份、人权法、公投和司法审查都使这一图景变得更加复杂。本文探讨现代英国各种相互竞争的主权主张。
1. The Traditional Doctrine of Parliamentary Sovereignty | 议会主权的传统学说
The doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty holds that the UK Parliament at Westminster has the legal right to make or unmake any law whatsoever. No person or body, including the courts, can override or set aside an Act of Parliament. This principle was famously set out by A.V. Dicey in the late nineteenth century and has often been called the cornerstone of the UK constitution.
议会主权学说认为，位于威斯敏斯特的英国议会有合法权利制定或废除任何法律。任何个人或机构，包括法院，都不能推翻或搁置议会法案。这一原则由 A.V. 戴雪在 19 世纪末提出，常被称为英国宪法的基石。
As a result, legal sovereignty has traditionally been located in the Westminster Parliament, not in the monarch, the government or the people. The absence of a codified constitution means there is no higher law against which Acts of Parliament can be tested.
因此，传统的法律主权一直归属于威斯敏斯特议会，而非君主、政府或人民。由于没有成文宪法，也就不存在可以据此审查议会法案的更高法律。
2. Dicey’s Legal Sovereignty | 戴雪的法定主权
Dicey distinguished between legal sovereignty and political sovereignty. Legal sovereignty refers to the body that has the final legal authority, which in the UK is Parliament. Political sovereignty, by contrast, rests with the electorate, because MPs must ultimately answer to voters at general elections.
戴雪区分了法律主权与政治主权。法律主权指拥有最终法律权力的机构，在英国就是议会。相比之下，政治主权属于选民，因为议员最终必须在普选中向选民负责。
This distinction helps explain why Parliament can pass unpopular laws legally, yet in practice it is constrained by public opinion. Legal sovereignty remains with Parliament, but political sovereignty has always been diffused through the democratic process.
这一区分有助于解释为什么议会可以在法律上通过不受欢迎的法律，但在实践中却受到民意制约。法律主权仍属议会，但政治主权一直通过民主程序分散。
3. The Impact of EU Membership | 欧盟成员身份的影响
From 1973 to 2020, the UK’s membership of the European Communities and later the European Union placed significant limits on parliamentary sovereignty. The European Communities Act 1972 gave direct effect to EU law, and EU law took precedence over conflicting UK statutes, as shown in the Factortame case (1991). This meant Parliament could not freely legislate in areas covered by EU law.
从 1973 年到 2020 年，英国在欧洲共同体及后来的欧盟中的成员身份对议会主权构成了重大限制。《1972 年欧洲共同体法》赋予欧盟法直接效力，欧盟法优先于与之冲突的英国法律，正如 Factortame 案（1991 年）所示。这意味着议会不能在欧盟法涵盖的领域自由立法。
Although Parliament could theoretically repeal the 1972 Act and leave the EU, as it eventually did, membership created a period of pooled sovereignty. Legal sovereignty was partially transferred to supranational institutions, challenging the traditional Diceyan view.
尽管议会理论上可以废除 1972 年法案并退出欧盟——它最终也这样做了——但成员身份造成了一段主权共享的时期。法律主权被部分转移给超国家机构，挑战了传统的戴雪式观点。
4. Devolution and Shared Sovereignty | 权力下放与主权共享
The devolution settlements of the late 1990s created the Scottish Parliament, the Welsh Senedd and the Northern Ireland Assembly. These bodies can pass laws on devolved matters such as health, education and transport. In these areas, the Westminster Parliament has conventionally agreed not to legislate without consent, a practice known as the Sewel convention.
20 世纪 90 年代末的权力下放安排设立了苏格兰议会、威尔士议会和北爱尔兰议会。这些机构可以在卫生、教育和交通等权力下放事务上制定法律。在这些领域，威斯敏斯特议会通常同意未经同意不立法，这一惯例被称为苏厄尔公约。
However, legal sovereignty remains with Westminster, because devolution is not federalism. An Act of Parliament could in theory abolish the devolved institutions. Yet politically, it would be almost impossible to do so without a referendum, showing that real power has shifted.
然而，法律主权仍属于威斯敏斯特，因为权力下放不是联邦制。理论上，一项议会法案可以废除这些权力下放机构。但在政治上，未经公投几乎不可能这样做，这表明实际权力已经转移。
5. The Human Rights Act and Judicial Power | 人权法案与司法权
The Human Rights Act 1998 incorporated the European Convention on Human Rights into UK law. Courts can issue a declaration of incompatibility if an Act of Parliament breaches Convention rights. However, such a declaration does not invalidate the Act; Parliament retains the formal power to ignore it or amend the law.
《1998 年人权法案》将《欧洲人权公约》纳入英国法律。如果议会法案违反公约权利，法院可以发布不兼容声明。但该声明并不会使法案无效；议会保留正式权力，可以不予理会或修改法律。
Even so, pressure to comply with declarations has increased judicial influence. Judges now engage in more robust interpretation of statutes to protect rights, and governments usually act to remedy incompatibilities. This has led some to argue that sovereignty is now shared with the judiciary.
即便如此，要求遵守不兼容声明的压力增强了司法影响力。法官现在对法规进行更强有力的解释以保护权利，政府通常也会采取行动纠正不兼容之处。这使得一些人认为主权现在与司法机关共享。
6. Referendums and Popular Sovereignty | 公投与人民主权
Referendums have become a major feature of UK constitutional practice, even though they are not legally binding unless the enabling legislation says so. The 2016 EU referendum and the 2014 Scottish independence referendum both expressed the will of the people directly. Politically, such results are regarded as binding mandates that Parliament cannot easily ignore.
公投已成为英国宪法实践的一大特色，尽管除非授权立法规定其具有约束力，否则公投在法律上没有约束力。2016 年脱欧公投和 2014 年苏格兰独立公投都直接表达了人民意志。在政治上，这些结果被视为议会不能轻易忽视的约束性授权。
The concept of popular sovereignty suggests that ultimate authority resides with the people, who can be consulted on major constitutional issues. After the 2016 referendum, Parliament legislated to trigger Article 50, even though many MPs personally voted Remain, showing the powerful political force of direct democracy.
人民主权概念表明，最终权威属于人民，重大宪法问题可征求人民意见。2016 年公投后，尽管许多议员个人投票支持留欧，议会仍立法触发第 50 条，这表明直接民主具有强大的政治力量。
7. The Supreme Court and the Miller Cases | 最高法院与米勒案
The UK Supreme Court has played a decisive role in recent constitutional disputes. In R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union (2017), the court ruled that the government could not use prerogative powers to trigger Article 50 without parliamentary approval. This reaffirmed the principle that major constitutional changes require an Act of Parliament.
英国最高法院在近年宪法争端中发挥了决定性作用。在 R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union（2017 年）案中，法院裁定政府不能在未经议会批准的情况下使用特权权力触发第 50 条。这重申了重大宪法变革需要议会法案的原则。
In Miller/Cherry (2019), the Supreme Court held that the Prime Minister’s advice to prorogue Parliament was unlawful because it had the effect of frustrating Parliament’s constitutional role. These cases show that courts can limit executive power and protect parliamentary sovereignty, while also asserting their own role in the constitution.
在 Miller/Cherry（2019 年）案中，最高法院裁定首相建议议会休会的做法非法，因为其效果是阻碍议会行使宪法职能。这些案件表明，法院可以限制行政权力并保护议会主权，同时也在宪法中维护自身角色。
8. Brexit and the Reassertion of Parliament | 脱欧与议会主权的重申
Brexit has been presented by some as a restoration of parliamentary sovereignty. The European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 repealed the European Communities Act 1972 and ended the supremacy of EU law in the UK. Since 1 January 2021, the Westminster Parliament is once again the supreme legal authority, no longer bound by EU directives or regulations.
一些人将脱欧描述为议会主权的恢复。《2018 年欧洲联盟（退出）法案》废除了《1972 年欧洲共同体法》，结束了欧盟法在英国的至高地位。自 2021 年 1 月 1 日起，威斯敏斯特议会再次成为最高法律权威，不再受欧盟指令或条例约束。
In strict legal terms, Parliament has regained full legislative supremacy. However, the political reality is more complex. The UK still has international obligations, a devolved structure and a population that has asserted direct say through referendum. Sovereignty may be legally restored but is politically constrained.
从严格法律意义上讲，议会的立法至高地位已经恢复。但政治现实更为复杂。英国仍有国际义务、权力下放结构，以及通过公投直接发声的人民。主权在法律上可能恢复了，但在政治上仍受到制约。
9. Political vs Legal Sovereignty | 政治主权与法律主权
The
Published by TutorHao | A-Level Mathematics Revision Series | aleveler.com
更多咨询请联系16621398022（同微信）
屏轩国际教育cambridge primary/secondary checkpoint, cat4, ukiset,ukcat,igcse,alevel,PAT,STEP,MAT, ibdp,ap,ssat,sat,sat2课程辅导，国外大学本科硕士研究生博士课程论文辅导Cancel reply