Compare and contrast the British and Indian approaches to Parliamentary sovereignty.

Question

Ghissu Editorial · Accepted Answer

Britain's Parliament is legally sovereign under an unwritten constitution, while India's Parliament works within a supreme written Constitution, judicial review and a federal division of powers. Kesavananda Bharati (1973) bars India's Parliament from altering the basic structure.

**Introduction**

Dicey's Britain lets Parliament "make or unmake any law whatever", while India's Parliament, after Kesavananda Bharati (1973), cannot touch the Constitution's basic structure. Both share Westminster roots but rest on different foundations.

**Contrasting British and Indian Sovereignty**

SKETCH: comparison | Parliamentary Sovereignty
a: Britain
b: India
- Unwritten constitution :: Written, supreme constitution
- Acts not struck down :: Judicial review (Art. 13)
- Unitary, devolution revocable :: Federal division (Art. 246)
- No entrenched limits :: Basic structure limit

1. **Source of supremacy**: Britain's Parliament is the highest legal authority, whereas India's Parliament is a creation of a supreme, written Constitution.
2. **Judicial review**: British courts can only declare incompatibility under the Human Rights Act, 1998; India's Supreme Court struck down the NJAC amendment in 2015.
3. **Federal limits**: Westminster may legislate on any subject despite devolution to Scotland, while India's Parliament is bound by the Seventh Schedule except under Article 249 or an emergency.
4. **Entrenchment**: No British Parliament binds its successor, but Article 368 needs special majorities, and Minerva Mills (1980) made limited amending power a basic feature.

**Where the Two Approaches Converge**

1. **Control of the executive**: Miller (2017) required an Act of Parliament to start Brexit, and Article 75(3) makes Indian ministers collectively responsible to the Lok Sabha.
2. **Privileges**: Article 105 originally tied Indian privileges to those of the House of Commons, so both legislatures guard their own proceedings.
3. **Narrowing gap**: EU law, as in Factortame (1990), and devolution conventions limited British sovereignty in practice, bringing it closer to India's model until Brexit restored formal supremacy.

**Conclusion**

India blends British parliamentary sovereignty with American-style judicial review, protecting rights and federalism. Both systems show that legislative power endures best within constitutional limits.

Compare and contrast the British and Indian approaches to Parliamentary sovereignty.

Model answer

Practise this question

Parliament — Powers & Functioning4 questions

Ghissu