Abstrakt
The political system of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is of interest to researchers for several reasons. One of the most important motivations certainly involves the unique construction of its Constitution, the content of which is not formulated in a single legal act of a supreme status. This unwritten Constitution encompasses at least four parts. The most important part is undoubtedly constituted by one of three principles of the political system, namely the principle of the sovereignty (omnipotence) of parliament. This principle, which is regarded as a constitutional principle by some and as a principle above the Constitution by others, constitutes the core of British constitutional law. The topic of this paper is an attempt to indicate the boundaries of this principle in the British constitutional order and to place it in relation to remaining principles. The boundaries of this principle have been considered by British constitutionalists on numerous occasions. Considerations on the relation of this principle to the remaining elements of the Constitution have been the subject of interest for courts of law, including the House of Lords, which used to function as the court of last instance in judicial proceedings prior to the 2005 reform. It is worth emphasizing that even the lords/judges frequently disagreed on the boundaries of the principle and even on whether the principle can be examined by any court. There were also views that the principle is only a virtual construct, and even if it had ever applied to the political system at all, it can no longer be referred to, given contemporary European integration processes. The complicated combination of elements of the British constitution with the presence of the United Kingdom in the structures of the European Council and European Union (preceded by the European Community) have produced a number of interpretations of the principle of the omnipotence of the parliament in the new political reality the UK has found itself in. It was the adoption of the European Communities Act 1972, followed several decades later by the adoption of the European Union Act 2011 that led to the discussion on the construction of the British Constitution and either the approval or rejection of the concept that the Constitution of the United Kingdom with its meta-principle should be interpreted anew.
Bibliografia
Barnett H., Jago R., Constitutional & Administrative Law, London 2011.
Bogdanor V., Devolution in the United Kingdom, Oxford 1999.
Bogdanor V., The New British Constitution, Oxford–Portland 2009.
Bradley A., The Sovereignty of Parliament – form or substance?, w: The Changing Constitution, red. J. Jowell, D. Oliver, Oxford 2000.
Carroll A., Constitutional and Administrative Law, Harlow 2011.
Chalmers D., The Positioning of EU Judicial Politics within the United Kingdom, „West European Politics” 2000, nr 4/23.
Dicey A. V., Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution, London 1915.
Elliot M. C., The UK Parliament: Bicameralism, Sovereignty and the Unwritten Constitution, „International Journal of Constitutional Law” 2007, nr 5.
European Union Act 2011.
Finer S. E., Bogdanor V., Rudden B., Comparing Constitutions, Oxford 1995.
Gdulewicz E., Kręcisz W., Ustrój polityczny Wielkiej Brytanii, w: Ustroje państw współczesnych, red.W. Skrzydło, t. 1, Lublin 2010.
Gebethner S., Systemy polityczne, Warszawa 1971.
Goldsworthy J., Parliamentary Sovereignty: Contemporary Debates, Cambridge 2010.
Graham J., Marques E. C., Understanding Constitutions: A Roadmap for Communities, Ottawa 2000.
Grzybowski K., Demokracja angielska, Kraków 1946.
Hood Phillips O., Jackson P., Leopold P., Constitutional and Administrative Law, London 2001.
In the Supreme Court of Judicare – Court of Appeal (Civil Division) on appeal form the Administrative Court, [2005] EWCA Civ 126, Case No: C1/2005/0201, 16 February 2005.
Jassem A., Wielka Brytania a Wspólnoty Europejskie: aspekty ustrojowo-polityczne, „Studia Europejskie” 2003, nr 25–26.
Jennings W. V., The Law and the Constitution, London 1959.
Judgments – Jackson and others (appellants) v. Her Majesty’s Attorney General (Respondent), House of Lords Session 2005-06 [2005] UKHL, 56 on appeal from: [2005] EWCA Civ 126.
Konic L., Ogólne cechy „Equity”, „Pañstwo i Prawo” 1947, nr 44.
Kubas S., Parlament Szkocki. Dewolucja – wyzwanie dla Zjednoczonego Królestwa, Warszawa 2004.
Loveland I., Parliamentary Sovereignty, „Parliamentary Affairs” 1994, nr 4.
Maitland F. W., The Constitutional History of England, Cambridge 1919.
Meszorer A., Brytyjski system parlamentarny w zarysie, Warszawa 1962.
Mullen T., Reflections on Jackson v Attorney General: questioning sovereignty, „Legal Studies” 2007, nr 1/27.
Parliament Act 1911.
Podolak M., System polityczny Wielkiej Brytanii, w: Współczesne systemy polityczne, red. M. Żmigrodzki, B. Dziemidok- Olszewska, Warszawa 2007.
Pułło A., Ustroje państw współczesnych, Warszawa 2006.
Sarnecki P. (wstęp), Ustawy ustrojowe Zjednoczonego Królestwa Wielkiej Brytanii i Irlandii Północnej,Warszawa 2010.
Sarnecki P., Ustroje konstytucyjne państw współczesnych, Warszawa 2008.
Sarnecki P., Zgromadzenie Federalne – Parlament Konfederacji Szwajcarskiej, Warszawa 2003.
Stępkowski A., Zasada proporcjonalności w europejskiej kulturze prawnej. Sądowa kontrola władzy dyskrecjonalnej w nowoczesnej Europie, Warszawa 2010.
Urbaniak K., Projekt bezpośrednich wyborów do brytyjskiej Izby Lordów, w: Prawo wyborcze i wybory. Doświadczenia dwudziestu lat procesów demokratyzacyjnych w Polsce, red. A. Stelmach, Poznań 2010.
Woodhouse D., United Kingdom The Constitutional Reform Act 2005 – defending judicial independence the English way, „Int J Constitutional Law” 2007, nr 5(1).
Woolf H., Droit Public – English Style, „Public Law” 1995.