What are the different types of sovereignty and how do they influence governance? Sovereignty encompasses various types that define how authority and power are exercised within a state. De jure sovereignty refers to the legally recognized authority to govern, while de facto sovereignty describes the actual power exercised, often without legal validation. Political sovereignty involves the influence behind legal authority, such as public opinion and electoral power, that shapes and guides legal sovereignty. Lastly, popular sovereignty emphasizes the power of the masses, as opposed to individual rulers or elites, with the public’s will expressed through democratic means. Each type highlights different aspects of how sovereignty is manifested and understood in governance.
De jure and de facto sovereignty
De jure and de facto sovereignty are two distinct types of sovereignty. De jure sovereignty refers to the type of sovereignty recognized by law. A de jure sovereign possesses the legal right to govern and demand obedience. On the other hand, de facto sovereignty refers to a situation where authority is exercised without a legal basis. This type of sovereignty can arise when a person or a group temporarily displaces the de jure sovereign, such as through a revolution, and enforces obedience for a period. Historical examples of de facto sovereignty include Oliver Cromwell, who became a de facto sovereign after dissolving the Long Parliament, Napoleon following his overthrow of the Directory, and President Ayub after his military coup in Pakistan. Additionally, de facto sovereignty may occur when a foreign army occupies part of a state’s territory, displaces the legitimate authority, and compels obedience from the local population.
Strictly speaking, distinguishing between de jure and de facto types of sovereignty is considered unscientific and illogical. By definition, sovereignty is a legal concept, implying that there can only be one legal sovereign in the state. In this context, the de jure sovereign alone is truly sovereign. As it has been said, “An unlawful sovereignty is a contradiction in terms.” In times of revolution, conflicts may arise between de jure and de facto sovereignty, leading to one being displaced or both merging. A new government might overthrow the old government by force and take on full sovereign powers, but until it gains legal status through the consent of the people and recognition by foreign governments, it cannot exercise sovereign powers in a legal sense. Thus, the terms de facto and de jure are more applicable to governments than to types of sovereignty.
Political Sovereignty
Political sovereignty is a concept that recognizes a type of sovereignty beyond the one acknowledged by legal frameworks. Dicey argues that “behind the sovereign which the lawyer recognizes, there is another sovereign to whom the legal sovereign must bow.” This other type of sovereignty is known as political sovereignty. In any organized state, the legal sovereign must consider the will of the political sovereign. According to Professor Gilchrist, “The political sovereign means the sum-total of influences in a state which lie behind the law. In modern representative government, we might define it roughly as the power of the people.” In democracies, political sovereignty typically refers to the entire mass of people, the electorate, or public opinion. However, it’s important to note that political sovereignty cannot always be precisely equated with the entire populace, the electorate, or public opinion. This type of sovereignty is a vague and indeterminate term, existing within the class of people who influence the larger population.
Political sovereignty can be found within the electorate, public opinion, and all other influences in the state that shape and mold public sentiment. As Professor R.N. Gilchrist states, “Political sovereignty manifests itself by voting, by the press, by speeches, and in many other ways not easy to describe or define. It is, however, not organized and it can become effective only when organized.” Once political sovereignty is organized, it leads to legal sovereignty. These two types of sovereignty—legal and political—are both aspects of a single sovereignty of the state, yet they stand in stark contrast to each other. Legal sovereignty is the law-making authority in formal legal terms, while political sovereignty operates behind the scenes. The legal sovereign can articulate its will in clear, legal language, whereas the political sovereign lacks such formal expression. Legal sovereignty is determinate, definite, and visible, whereas political sovereignty is indeterminate and less defined.
Legal sovereignty is recognized by the law and vested in institutions such as the electorate and public opinion. In contrast, political sovereignty is not as formally recognized by legal professionals. Despite this, the legal sovereign cannot act against the will of the political sovereign. While political sovereignty may not hold legal power, it ultimately controls the legal sovereign. The concept of legal sovereignty is clear and structured, while political sovereignty remains more ambiguous. Legal sovereignty is derived from the political sovereign, which is essentially the people or the electorate. These distinctions highlight the differences between the types of sovereignty that exist within a state: legal sovereignty and political sovereignty.
Popular Sovereignty
Popular sovereignty is one of the key types of sovereignty, characterized by the power held by the masses rather than by an individual ruler or a specific class. It embodies the principle of manhood suffrage, where each individual has only one vote, and the collective will is expressed through elected representatives. In this type of sovereignty, the public is considered supreme. Historically, many political thinkers used the idea of popular sovereignty to challenge and counter the absolutism of monarchs.
Dr. Garner explains this type of sovereignty by stating, “Sovereignty of the people, therefore, can mean nothing more than the power of the majority of the electorate, in a country where a system of approximate universal suffrage prevails, acting through legally established channels to express their will and make it prevail.” Thus, among the various types of sovereignty, popular sovereignty stands out for emphasizing the role of the general populace in governing and decision-making processes.