parliamentary sovereignty essay a level politics

Live revision! Join us for our free exam revision livestreams Watch now →

Reference Library

Collections

• See what's new
• All Resources
• Student Resources
• Assessment Resources
• Teaching Resources
• CPD Courses
• Livestreams

Study notes, videos, interactive activities and more!

Politics news, insights and enrichment

Currated collections of free resources

Browse resources by topic

• All Politics Resources

Resource Selections

Currated lists of resources

Parliamentary sovereignty

Parliamentary sovereignty is a principle of the UK constitution. It makes Parliament the supreme legal authority in the UK, which can create or end any law. Generally, the courts cannot overrule its legislation and no Parliament can pass laws that future Parliaments cannot change

• Share on Facebook
• Share on Twitter
• Share by Email

New Kahoot! quiz from tutor2u Politics: The Nature & Sources of the UK Constitution

20th October 2023

Have events surrounding Johnson's resignation highlighted weaknesses in our part-codified constitution?

12th July 2022

Resources on the UK executive and legislature

27th May 2022

Is Britain drifting towards some sort of Orwellian dystopia?

8th December 2021

Sovereignty

Study Notes

Is there sufficient parliamentary scrutiny of the government's Covid strategy?

21st September 2020

Would the Overseas Operations Bill be incompatible with the Human Rights Act and ECHR?

23rd September 2020

Brexit: "Taking back control"?

27th January 2021

An update on a key British Politics topic

14th January 2021

Breaking the Law (A Little Bit)? Brandon Lewis and Northern Ireland Trading

9th September 2020

Environmental pressure groups celebrate as Court of Appeal declares Heathrow third runway illegal

28th February 2020

How effective is Parliament in controlling UK government and representing citizens?

30th December 2017

How parliament matters more than people think

19th December 2017

Sources of the UK's Constitution - Statute Law

Topic Videos

A Level Politics: Study Note Listing - UK Government

Where do parties stand on Syria?

24th November 2015

Cameron on the UK's membership of the EU

12th November 2015

Our subjects

• › Criminology
• › Economics
• › Geography
• › Health & Social Care
• › Psychology
• › Sociology
• › Teaching & learning resources
• › Student revision workshops
• › Online student courses
• › CPD for teachers
• › Livestreams
• › Teaching jobs

Boston House, 214 High Street, Boston Spa, West Yorkshire, LS23 6AD Tel: 01937 848885

• › Contact us
• › Terms of use
• › Privacy & cookies

© 2002-2024 Tutor2u Limited. Company Reg no: 04489574. VAT reg no 816865400.

Has sovereignty moved between different branches of government?

The following factors can be considered when thinking about whether sovereignty has moved in the UK:

• Due to the dominance of the executive over Parliament, the executive maybe where real sovereignty lies. Although, the executive governs because it has the confidence of Parliament. Recent general election results have seen small (or no) majorities, which potentially makes Parliament more able to challenge the government
• The Supreme Court can challenge parliamentary legislation, and it replaced the Law Lords as the UK’s final court of appeal. Although, the court was established by an Act of Parliament, so could be abolished (or have its powers reduced) by Parliament. Also, the court cannot strike down laws- it is up to Parliament to do this
• Devolution has transferred power away from Parliament, and devolved institutions are not going to have their powers taken away due to the public backlash that this would cause. More powers have been given away in recent years. However, these powers are granted to devolved bodies by Parliament, which retains overall sovereignty
• Referendums have been used more in recent years, which transfers sovereignty to the people, away from Parliament. Although they are advisory rather than binding, Parliament is, in reality, compelled to respect and enact the result. In theory, Parliament does retain sovereignty in deciding whether to respect the outcome of an advisory referendum
• The Human Rights Act has given more power to judges to check the actions of Parliament, as they can issue declarations of incompatibility, meaning Parliament should amend laws. Although, the Human Rights Act is not fully entrenched, therefore Parliament could replace it with something else or set aside its provisions (as some Conservatives wished to do by creating a new ‘British Bill of Rights’)
• EU membership has impacted on parliamentary sovereignty, as EU laws can impact on UK laws. The Factortame case in __1991 __established the primacy of EU law over UK statute law. Cases such as these are cited by those who claim that sovereignty has been lost, and that the only way to reclaim it is to leave the EU. Although, EU supporters suggest that sovereignty has been ‘pooled’, and that all EU member states agree to share aspects of sovereignty in exchange for the benefits that being in the EU brings. In addition, the UK is a member of the EU because Parliament allows it to be, so in this sense Parliament retains sovereignty

Where does sovereignty lie in the UK?

The following arguments can be used to suggest the Parliament is still sovereign:

• Parliament retains legal sovereignty in the UK- statute law outranks all other UK laws, and decisions by other institutions
• Parliament allows for the creation of devolved bodies, and grants them powers, but retains control over them (it could take powers back if it wished)
• Judges can recommend changes to laws using judicial review and other means, but this can be ignored by Parliament (for example, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that banning prisoners from voting was against their human rights, however nothing has been done to change this)
• The Human Rights Act can be used by judges to challenge Parliament, but this can be amended by Parliament if it wishes
• Referendums tend to be advisory rather than binding, so Parliament is not compelled to respect the result
• Parliament makes the decision to be part of the EU, and be subject to EU laws, and can decide to leave the EU. The importance of Parliament in this process was highlighted by the Supreme Court decision that Parliament must be consulted before the triggering of Article 50

The following arguments can be used to suggest that Parliament is no longer sovereign:

• Parliament’s legal sovereignty rests on the political sovereignty of the electorate- ultimately, power lies with the people
• The executive has grown in power and influence to such an extent that it can dominate Parliament, so real power lies with the executive
• Judges have successfully challenged legislation using judicial review and the Human Rights Act
• Parliament has given away powers to devolved bodies, and, despite the fact that legally speaking Parliament could reverse this process, in reality these powers are not going to be taken back (due to the consequences that would follow)
• Although referendums are advisory, in reality Parliament cannot ignore the result (for example, many MPs who did not want Britain to leave the EU voted to trigger Article 50, respecting the wishes of their constituents)
• It could be argued that a nation having complete sovereignty over its affairs is unrealistic in a modern, globalised society, so ‘pooling’ sovereignty is one of the natural consequences of this

• TOP CATEGORIES
• AS and A Level
• University Degree
• International Baccalaureate
• Uncategorised
• 5 Star Essays
• Study Tools
• Study Guides
• Meet the Team
• United Kingdom

Is the Parliament still sovereign in the UK?

Khushal Ashani

The Parliament in the United Kingdom has developed over more than 900 years during which the House of Commons and the House of Lords raised and evolved. King Henry V in the 15th century placed the House of Commons and Lords on the same level. In 1689 with the establishment of the Bill of Rights it was ensured that Parliament had authority over the monarch and would be in charge of legislating and abolishing laws. The Act of Union of the British Parliament with Scotland and Ireland in 1707 and 1800 respectively which dissolved their Parliaments and made their MPs and Lords became part of Westminster followed. Nearly a century later, the Parliament Acts of 1911 and 1949 put a stop to the amending powers of the Lords regarding monetary Bills and also reduced the time limit within which they could delay a Bill. Today Parliament comprises of the House of Commons which consists of elected Members of Parliament, the House of Lords with its peers, Lords and the Crown.

Is parliament sovereign?

Parliament remains completely sovereign. The devolved assemblies exist at the behest of Parliament; the Human Rights Act only works so far as Parliament chooses to enforce it; and it has complete freedom to withdraw from the EU, plus every EU law must be enforced through Parliament before it has effect. However beyond the legal sense Parliament's powers are limited, though this isn't new. The existence of the devolved assemblies and the Human Rights Act can indeed be undone, but to do so would be deeply unpopular moves which Parliament would be insane to attempt, unless public opinion were behind them. Withdrawal from the EU is also entirely possible but really it is whether that is economically wise and really necessary.

This is a preview of the whole essay

Parliament is sovereign and it can make any laws it likes. In other countries, Parliaments are not allowed to act so freely, e.g. some countries with written constitutions do not give rights to Parliament to override some constitutional articles without a referendum, whilst some articles cannot be repealed at all such as in the Russian constitution. The UK has nothing like this, whether the article in question is a human right or simply a secondary relatively unimportant regulation, the law can be repealed by the 652 MPs collectively. Hence, Parliament may do whatever it likes, this is one reason why it is the policy of parliamentary sovereignty is important to UK and not, governing bodies such as the monarch, the prime minister or any other ruler.

Also, no Parliament can bind future Parliaments, save in a few situations. Parliament is sovereign at any time that is present, so whatever the earlier Parliament said does not necessarily bind the current Parliament and what Parliament says now, does not bind the future Parliament. Even if current Parliament wanted to bind the future Parliament and presented it as expressly as possible, the law could easily be repealed.

Is parliament not sovereign?

The UK joined the European Union in 1973 by signing the European Communities Act 1972. The European Community law has to be given primacy over domestic UK law under requirements of the European Community Law.

The institutions within the European Community are allowed to make laws which the UK has to apply in its courts as long as it affects the UK regardless of whether Parliament wishes it or not. However, as previous Parliaments decisions do not bind future Parliaments the UK can withdraw from the European Community if they so wish it and the political parties have often use the European Community as a tool to win elections promising the electorate referendums. But this would fare drastically mostly for the economy, which is the back bone of every country.

The Bill of Rights in 1689 did not as much lay out rights of the people in the UK but restricted the rights of the monarch. The UK have negative rights which means than instead of having a ‘Bill of Rights' that tell us what we can do we have statutes and common law that proclaim what we cannot do. The Human Rights Act 1998 incorporated into British law is a first of its kind and is derived from the European Convention of Human Rights that had to be adopted by all the member states of the European Community. Thus it is harder for Parliament to exercise its sovereignty in such situations where the political and civil rights may be infringed by legislation being proposed.

However the Human Rights Act 1998 is not entrenched so it can be repealed through Parliamentary sovereignty although again with a caveat of consequences.

Devolution and establishment of the Northern Ireland Assembly, the Scottish Parliament and the Welsh Assembly does perhaps affect the sovereignty of the Parliament at Westminster. It would be difficult for Parliament to get rid of laws that these devolved powers have made within their legal jurisdictions short of dissolving the devolved powers altogether. But many see devolution as a good system of government because the participation level of the electorate within these devolved governments in their communities could be higher as they are much more local than Westminster.

Another general threat to Parliamentary sovereignty is the purposive approach that judges have started to adopt in the interpretation of statues. The courts had to implement this approach in interpreting European Community Law under the European Communities Act of 1972. Hence, judges focus not mainly on the strict view of law but interpret it keeping in mind what legislators would have intended.

Taking into account the loss of Parliamentary sovereignty through the membership of the European Community, the incorporation of the Humans Act into the British Legal system, devolution and the purposive approach, Parliamentary sovereignty is indeed declining but perhaps the idea that Parliament was ever completely Sovereign is questionable as the Members of Parliament have been accountable to the electorate in every general election. But because of majority that the government has in the House of Commons it becomes easier for them to pass a Bill once the party whip indicates to the rest of the MPs within the party which way the Party leadership would like them to vote such as in the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005.

In conclusion, although lack of Parliamentary sovereignty can appear to be both progressive and illiberal, the former perhaps has a stronger case as we exist in a globalised world where combining forces for the progression of trade and economy is more essential than debating fading domestic sovereignty.

Document Details

• Word Count 1098
• Page Count 2
• Level AS and A Level
• Subject Politics

Related Essays

According to British constitutional theory Parliament is sovereign. How far...

How effective is Parliament in controlling the executive?

How effective is Parliament in controlling the Executive?

Is Parliament representative?

• Security Council

Absent Political Progress, Ongoing Violence Putting Syria, Global Community at ‘Terrible Risks’, Special Envoy for Syria Warns Security Council

With absent political progress, ongoing violence and a worsening humanitarian situation in Syria, terrible risks could be on the horizon for that beleaguered country and the global community, the Secretary-General's Special Envoy warned the Security Council, as he called for a de-escalation of hostilities, starting in Gaza, and a comprehensive engagement among all stakeholders to arrive at a lasting solution to the 14-year Syrian conflict.

Geir O. Pedersen, noting the absence of a clear political path to implement Security Council resolution 2254 (2015) in Syria, warned: “This is not just tragic — it is dangerous.”  Without a comprehensive political process, festering negative trends are presenting “terrible risks for Syrians and the broader international community”. Detailing ongoing hostilities, he urged regional de-escalation efforts, starting with a humanitarian ceasefire in Gaza.

Calling for the resumption of the Constitutional Committee meetings, he underscored the need for serious engagement among the Syrian Government and the opposition, Syrian civil society, as well as of key international actors.  A comprehensive approach must meet Syrians’ legitimate aspirations and restore Syria’s sovereignty, unity, independence and territorial integrity, he said, appealing to all to “engage and work with us on this way forward”.

Martin Griffiths, Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator, briefing the Council in-person for the last time before stepping down from his duties, stated:  “As I prepare to step down, it pains me that the suffering of the people of Syria grinds on,” he told the 15-nation organ.  Syria remains a “protection crisis” with more than 7 million people displaced — a figure surpassed only by Sudan — and millions living as refugees in neighbouring countries.  He welcomed the recent decision to extend permission for the use of Bab al-Salam and Al Ra’ee border crossings until 13 August, and expressed hope that the use of Bab al-Hawa will also be extended.

Also voicing concern about the steady reduction in funding for the Humanitarian Response Plan, he stressed:  “It has never been this bad and the needs have never been this large.”  Nonetheless, the humanitarian response, although essential to saving lives, cannot provide a solution to the crisis; the only sustainable solution is a set-out Syrian-led political process, he emphasized.

As Council members took the floor, many speakers, commending the Under Secretary-General for his service, echoed the Special Envoy’s calls for a genuine political process towards a political solution in Syria, in line with resolution 2254 (2015), and joined him in his concern about the ongoing violence and dire humanitarian situation.

The representative of Algeria, also speaking for Guyana, Mozambique and Sierra Leone, called on all parties to engage in finding a political solution to guarantee Syria’s unity, sovereignty and territorial integrity, and on all parties to the conflict to commit to re-convening the Constitutional Committee.  Reiterating a call for a Syrian-owned and -led political process, he expressed support to the Special Envoy’s confidence-building initiative.

A nationwide ceasefire, underscored Switzerland’s representative, is more necessary than ever and Syrian territory must be protected from the spread of the Middle East conflict.  At the May Brussels Conference, Switzerland pledged over $65 million for the current year to help people in need in Syria and in the region, she said, noting, however, that the international community's response must not be limited to emergency humanitarian aid.

Calling for guaranteed, unconditional humanitarian access through the Bab al-Hawa, Bab al-Salam and Al-Ra'ee crossings, Ecuador’s representative expressed concern about the millions of Syrian people who have been forcibly displaced.  The work of the Independent Institution on Missing Persons in Syria must forge ahead to provide answers on the fate of over 100,000 missing persons, he stated.

Still, a stark division on the matter remained among Council members, with the representative of the Russian Federation declaring that the illegal military presence of the United States armed forces in Syria, “under the pretext of fighting terrorism”, is having a destabilizing effect. Further, the United States-created network of detention facilities east of the Euphrates holds 56,000 people, including 29,000 children — the highest number of minors held in detention in the world.

Refuting those comments, the representative of the United States assailed the Russian Federation for speaking about peace in Syria, while carrying out an unprovoked war in Ukraine.  She also underscored the untenable political situation in the country and the need to return to the Constitutional Committee, also noting that “absent authentic and enduring progress toward a political solution of the conflict, we cannot consider lifting U.S. [United States] sanctions”.

Nonetheless, China’s delegate condemned unilateral sanctions and the plundering of resources and called for the end of the illegal presence of foreign forces in Syria.  In addition, he expressed his deep concern over Israel’s continued air strikes on Syrian territory, urging all parties to exercise restraint and avoid aggravating tensions.  To that end, other Powers should play a constructive role in “cooling down the situation in the region”, he said.

Representatives of other countries in the region also illustrated the division on the matter, with Iran’s representative stating:  “Western countries have ignored the dire situation on the ground and continue to pursue their political agenda at all costs.”

However, the representative of Türkiye called on the Syrian regime to change its attitude and initiate a process of genuine national reconciliation.  As heard throughout the debate, he underscored that the only sustainable solution to the conflict is through a political process that meets the Syrian people’s legitimate aspirations.

Taking the floor, Syria’s representative detailed, among other things, his country’s constructive collaboration with the United Nations on humanitarian access.  While noting that pledges had made at the May Brussels Conference, including by three of the permanent Council members, he remarked that such commitments are “mainly only for PR [public relations] work”.  Further, those three permanent Council members, while highlighting their pledges in the meeting today, did not talk about the damage their illegal coalition has caused the Syrian economy and its people, estimated at billions of dollars. He reaffirmed his country’s commitment to a Syrian-led and owned political process without any foreign intervention and called out other actors for impeding the efforts to resume the Constitutional Committee’s ninth round of meetings in Baghdad.

THE SITUATION IN THE MIDDLE EAST

GEIR O. PEDERSEN, Special Envoy of the Secretary-General for Syria , noting the absence of a clear political path to implement Council resolution 2254 (2015) in Syria, warned:  “This is not just tragic — it is dangerous.”  Without a comprehensive political process, festering negative trends are presenting “terrible risks for Syrians and the broader international community”.  On the security front, local and international actors and listed terrorist groups remain engaged in conflict, he said, detailing hostilities, including further reports of Israeli air strikes inside Syria, as well as rocket and drone attacks from Syrian territory towards the Israeli-Occupied Syrian Golan and Israel. He pointed to active front lines across the entire north of the country, including clashes and exchanges of shelling involving pro-Government forces, Security Council-listed terrorist group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, armed opposition groups and Syrian Democratic Forces.

Security tensions are not just between areas of control, but also within them, he pointed out, citing incidents involving Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham and Syrian Democratic Forces, as well the constant threat of Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), also known as Da’esh, whose attacks have increased this last month, particularly in the north-east. “If these dynamics simply continue, we will inevitably see even more civilian suffering.  And we could also see major escalations and further instability radiating across the region,” he warned, urging regional de-escalation efforts, starting with a humanitarian ceasefire in Gaza.  He also voiced concern about a second generation of children deprived of continued access to education, or subject to entirely different curricula, threatening their futures and fuelling the potential for radicalism all at the same time.

The parliamentary elections in Government-controlled areas conducted pursuant to the current Constitution, as well as local elections for de facto authorities in areas in the north-east outside Government control, are expected in the coming months, he said.  However, these are no substitute for an inclusive political process leading to a new, inclusive Syrian Constitution.  “Syrians themselves are sounding the alarm bell on the risks of this entrenched division and the absence of genuine political process,” he said, recalling his meeting in Brussels this month with diverse participants in the Civil Society Support Room, who called for, among other things, a genuine political process that ensures security and peace, lays the foundations for Syria's recovery, and brings an end to bloodshed and societal divisions.

He also called for the urgent early disbursement of pledges made at the 27 May Brussels Conference and the maintenance of cross-border and crossline humanitarian access.  Further, any adverse effects of sanctions on ordinary Syrians must be mitigated and avoided, particularly by sanctioning States.  Underscoring the need to resume the meetings of the Constitutional Committee, he reaffirmed his openness to any alternative venue to Geneva that secures the consensus of both Syrian parties and the host, while appealing for sessions to resume in Geneva as a bridging option and for the parties to prepare on substance.

Warning against the current piecemeal approach, he stressed: “Deep and complex conflicts cannot be simply managed or contained in perpetuity — there must be a political horizon for resolving them too.”  A new and more comprehensive approach is needed with the engagement of the Syrian Government and the opposition, and the broad voices of Syrian civil society, as well as of key international actors — Iran, Russia, Türkiye, the United States, the Arabs, the Europeans and the Security Council.   Underscoring the need for serious engagement on a comprehensive approach that meets Syrians’ legitimate aspirations; restores Syria’s sovereignty, unity, independence and territorial integrity; and addresses key stakeholders’ concerns, in line with resolution 2254 (2015), he appealed to all to “engage and work with us on this way forward”.

Martin Griffiths, Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator , noting that the meeting would be his last in-person briefing to the Security Council before stepping down from his duties, recalled that, during his time in office, he visited Syria four times — more than in any other crisis.  “As I prepare to step down, it pains me that the suffering of the people of Syria grinds on,” he told the 15-nation organ.  Syria remains a “protection crisis” with more than 7 million people displaced — a figure surpassed only by Sudan — and millions living as refugees in neighbouring countries.  Recalling that, since 2014, the cross-border operation from Türkiye has provided a lifeline to millions of people in north-west Syria, he said that following the lapse of the Security Council’s authorization for the operation, it continues to function under the consent of Syria’s Government.  Welcoming the recent decision to extend permission for the use of Bab al-Salam and Al Ra’ee  border crossings until 13 August, he expressed hope that the use of Bab al-Hawa will also be extended.

Noting the absence of crossline deliveries to the country’s north-west for nearly a year, he said the missions could restart in the coming days. Furthermore, the cross-line assessment mission to the Alouk water station took place on 21 May, he reported, recalling that the station has been out of operation since 5 October following airstrikes that damaged electricity network.  As the main water source for more than 610,000 people in Al-Hasakeh Governorate, it is critical that its operation is restored ahead of the coming summer months.  While noting that the level of hostilities has subsided from its peak, he observed that daily fighting — at its fiercest in north-west Syria — continues to harm humanitarian response.

He went on to say that although underfunding for the humanitarian response remains one of the biggest concerns, early recover efforts have a key role in maximizing its impact and sustainability.  “But we cannot do so without adequate funding,” he stressed, pointing to the steady reduction in funding for the Humanitarian Response Plan — from 55 per cent funded in 2021 to 39 per cent in 2023 and only 9 per cent in 2024.  “It has never been this bad and the needs have never been this large,” he stated.  Nonetheless, while the humanitarian response is essential to saving lives and alleviating suffering, it cannot provide a solution to the crisis, he pointed out, noting that the only sustainable solution is a set-out Syrian-led political process.

He also recalled that, following the earthquake in 2023, the Governments of Syria and Türkiye adopted emergency measures; sanctions measures were eased and the Flash Appeal was fully funded.  “I think it was a stand-out achievement,” he observed. “But we cannot wait for the next appalling cataclysm to make genuine progress towards ending this catastrophe” as the economic crisis deepens and as regional tensions from the war in Gaza threaten to spill across the region, he emphasized.  To that end, he urged Council members to support the Special Envoy’s work “on behalf of all of us and on behalf of Syrian people”.

The representative of the Russian Federation said that, with the escalation of hostilities in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict now in its eighth month, the risk of region-wide confrontation remains high. He called on Israel to refrain from military action on the territory of Syria and its neighbours, which is putting the entire region, already destabilized because of the incessant bloodshed in the Gaza Strip and the projection of tensions into the West Bank and Lebanon, at risk of extremely dangerous consequences.  “The illegal military presence of the United States armed forces in Syria, under the pretext of fighting terrorism, is having a destabilizing effect,” he added, pointing out that the United States-created network of detention facilities east of the Euphrates holds 56,000 people. Among them are 29,000 children, most under the age of 12, which is the highest number of minors held in detention in the world, he reported.

The representative of the United States said her country pledged $593 million at the 27 May Brussels Conference for humanitarian assistance in Syria.  The Syrian regime must allow long-term UN access through the Bab al-Hawa crossing long before the six-month authorization in July.  It must also immediately consent to the UN’s request for access and stop blocking aid for the thousands of civilians in Rukban.  Calling on Council members to press the regime to take concrete actions to implement resolution 2254 (2015), she voiced scepticism that the League of Arab States’ engagement with the Syrian regime will accomplish the resolution’s objectives and, in that regard, urged those engaging with the regime to do so in pursuit of the resolution’s objectives. Underscoring the untenable political situation in the country and the need to return to the Constitutional Committee, she stressed that “absent authentic and enduring progress toward a political solution of the conflict, we cannot consider lifting U.S. [United States] sanctions”.  She assailed Iran for seeking to advance its own destabilizing agenda and the Russian Federation for speaking about peace in Syria, while carrying out an unprovoked war in Ukraine.

The representative of Switzerland expressed concern about the lack of progress towards a political solution in Syria, particularly regarding the implementation of resolution 2254 (2015) and the step-by-step approach proposed by the Special Envoy.  A nationwide ceasefire is more necessary than ever, she said, adding that Syrian territory must also be protected from the spread of the Middle East conflict.  Noting the increase of violence and the deterioration of the humanitarian situation over the past year, she called on all parties to respect their obligations under international humanitarian law.  “As financial resources dwindle and needs increase across Syria, the international community's response must not be limited to emergency humanitarian aid,” she added, stressing that more sustainable humanitarian action is essential and highlighting that, at the Brussels Conference, Switzerland pledged over $65 million for the current year to help people in need in Syria and in the region.

The representative of Algeria , also speaking for Guyana , Mozambique and Sierra Leone , addressed Mr. Griffiths, saying:  “The international community needs talented people like you, dedicated to the cause of humanity.”  Turning to the matter at hand, he stressed that the parties to the conflict must commit to re-convening the Constitutional Committee and that the agreement to hold its ninth session must be fulfilled.  He called on all parties to engage in finding a political solution to guarantee Syria’s unity, sovereignty and territorial integrity.  He also urged all refugees-hosting countries to respect international refugees’ law and create conditions to facilitate the safe return of Syrian refugees and internally displaced people to their homes. Reiterating a call for a Syrian-owned and -led political process, he and expressed support to the Special Envoy’s confidence-building initiative.

However, he voiced concern over the “escalation and miscalculation” of the Gaza conflict and its impact on the regional stability.  Noting that the humanitarian needs of Syrians are growing due to economic recession and unilateral sanctions, he expressed regret that the 2023 Humanitarian Response Plan is currently only 21 per cent funded.  “The lack of adequate funding has disrupted humanitarian activities,” he emphasized.  Welcoming the eighth Brussels Conference  on 27 May, he urged all donors to fulfil their commitments.  He also underscored the importance of the Early Recovery Vision of the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs.  “The Syrian economy must also recover.  Syrians cannot rely solely on the generosity of donors and humanitarian assistance”, he said, emphasizing that economic sanctions must be lifted. “It is our duty to the Syrians after years of suffering,” he added.

The representative of France , underscoring that the international community stands ready to explore with the Syrian regime all prospects likely to restore stability in the country, called on Damascus to reconsider its policy of obstruction of the political process envisaged in Council resolution 2254 (2015).  A just and lasting peace in Syria requires a political solution based on the implementation of that resolution, he emphasized, adding that only with tangible progress on that front can sanctions be lifted and reconstruction financed.  He voiced support for the countries that are hosting Syrian refugees and stressed that Syrian refugees must be protected wherever they are.  Refugees who wish to return to Syria must be able to do so in safe and dignified conditions. To that end, his country will continue to work with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) to prompt the Syrian regime to create the conditions for such a return. Following the 27 May Brussels Conference, his country has announced an additional contribution of €3 million to alleviate the suffering in Syria.

The representative of the Republic of Korea expressed regret over the lack of progress in the political and security process in Syria. External factors, such as the catastrophe in Gaza and tensions along the Blue Line, can further deteriorate the security situation in Syria.  “Above all, no country in the region is safe from the possibility of spillover until the conflict in Gaza is resolved,” he said.  The economic and humanitarian situation in Syria is getting worse, but Syria is heavily underfunded in terms of humanitarian assistance.  “It is the current political situation in Syria that restricts humanitarian access and poses ongoing risks to humanitarian workers,” he emphasized, adding that keeping cross-border operations open should not be hampered by political dynamics.  Transcending this vicious cycle is both urgent and necessary, he said, urging pragmatism and tolerance on all sides.

The representative of Malta , observing that hunger continues to stalk millions and the Syrian economy is in free fall, underscored that the 14 years of conflict have also made the population more vulnerable to climate shocks.  “Syria remains a grave protection crisis,” he said, adding the conflict is being acutely felt by women, children and older people.  He reiterated that facilitating life-saving humanitarian aid must never form part of political negotiations and welcomed the outcome of the Brussels Conference.  “We remain deeply disappointed, however, by the lack of engagement from Damascus,” he said, adding that progress on the missing and those arbitrarily detained will showcase goodwill and a good faith effort to draw this conflict to a resolution. Demonstrating progress in ensuring the protection and safety of returnees is also critical, he added.

The representative of Slovenia , urging all actors to re-launch Syrian-led and -owned political process, underlined the importance of Syrian women’s participation.  While there is no military solution to that conflict, a resumption of the political process is essential for reversing the spiral of humanitarian and economic decline.  Noting that Syria provides a “demonstration of the link between climate and the humanitarian-development nexus”, she said that strengthening resilience to extreme weather events is critical.  To that end, the European Union pledged €2.12 billion for 2024 and 2025 at the eighth Brussels Conference on “Supporting the future of Syria and the region”.  Urging the Syrian Government to create conditions for the return of refugees, she commended the neighbouring countries for hosting these people for over a decade. “People of Syria have suffered enough. A ‘status quo’ is not in the interest of people of Syria,” she declared.

The representative of China expressed support for the measures being taken by the Syrian Government to combat terrorism and called on the international community to combat all forms of terrorism in Syria with zero tolerance.  Expressing his deep concern over Israel’s continued air strikes on Syrian territory, he said:  “Parties have to exercise restraint and avoid aggravating tensions.”  To that end, he urged other Powers to play a constructive role in “cooling down the situation in the region”.  Underlining the gravity of the humanitarian situation in Syria, he stressed that the international community should increase its assistance and ensure adequate, non-earmarked financial support for early-recovery projects. Noting the smooth communication between the UN and the Syrian Government over the past year, he encouraged the parties to actively cooperate.  Further, condemning unilateral sanctions and the plundering resources, he called for the end of the illegal presence of foreign forces in Syria.

The representative of Ecuador emphasized that the ideal of a prosperous, stable and peaceful Syria, in accordance with resolution 2254 (2015), can only be achieved with a genuine intention to de-escalate the conflict, restore trust and resume the path of dialogue and political negotiation. As such, the Special Envoy should continue his efforts to resume the meetings of the Constitutional Committee and to establish confidence-building measures, or to set in place other initiatives to achieve a lasting political solution.  Voicing concern about the millions of Syrian people who have been forcibly displaced, he said the work of the Independent Institution on Missing Persons in Syria must forge ahead to provide answers on the fate of over 100,000 missing persons.  He urged stepped-up efforts in the fight against terrorism and violent extremism, as well as guaranteed, unconditional humanitarian access through the Bab al-Hawa, Bab al-Salam and Al-Ra'ee crossings.

The representative of Japan underscored the importance of advancing the political process in accordance with resolution 2254 (2015), fostering an environment conducive to the return of refugees and strengthening cooperation with the international community.  Stressing that the political process is in serious jeopardy, she argued that a fundamental problem is the lack of trust between the Syrian Government and other key stakeholders.  “The Syrian Government should engage more constructively toward the resumption of the Constitutional Committee,” she said.  Noting the growing dissatisfaction with Syrian refugees in neighbouring countries, she welcomed the progress in discussions between the Syrian Government and UNHCR on this matter.  The Syrian Government must take further steps, including in the political process, for the international community to further strengthen its support, she added, noting that Japan will provide additional early recovery assistance totalling approximately $25 million this year.

The representative of the United Kingdom said that one year on since Syria’s readmission to the League of Arab States, there has been no change in the regime’s behaviour on human rights violations, the safety of civilians and on creating the conditions for the return of refugees. In addition, Captagon flows have continued to increase and Da’esh attacks are on the rise.  This week, his country and other donors met in Brussels to pledge support to the Syrian people, he reported, noting that his Government has committed up to $264 million in humanitarian assistance in 2024, bringing the total funding to over $5 billion since the crisis began.  This aid includes $43.7 million for early recovery and will be delivered to communities across Syria.  Calling on the regime to grant cross-border access, he added:  “The three remaining UN border crossing points are a critical lifeline.”

The representative of the Russian Federation , talking the floor a second time, responded to the United States representative by noting that the destruction of Syria was brought about by the occupying armed forces that are on the Syrian territory illegally.  He emphasized that the forces of the Russian Federation are there at the invitation of Damascus and that the Russian Federation is providing humanitarian assistance to this long-suffering country through both bilateral and multilateral channels.  “When providing assistance, it’s important to take the priorities of the recipient of that assistance into account,” he said, adding that, among other things, thanks to efforts of the Russian Federation in cooperation with the Syrian authorities, more than 2 million Syrians have been able to return to their homes.

The representative of Syria , noting his country’s constructive collaboration with the United Nations, said his Government has approved the request of the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs to extend authorization to use the Bab al-Salam and Al Ra'ee crossings for three additional months, expiring on 13 August. Noting that five crossings — three cross-border and two cross-line — are operating, he stressed that all humanitarian access must be directed to Syrian civilians and not terrorist entities or their affiliates.  Although the Government has also approved assistance convoys across the lines from Halab to Sarmadā, terrorist organizations are preventing the convoy from accessing the area.  Regarding students residing in terrorist-controlled areas in north-west and north-east Syria, his Government has worked to enable those students to leave and take their final examinations.  Meanwhile, terrorist organizations in Idlib prevented the exit of thousands of students being held hostage as human shields.

He also noted his Government’s continued cooperation with Lebanon to facilitate the voluntary return of Syrian refugees.  However, recalling the recent Brussels Conference, he said that although pledges were made, not many will be fulfilled as they are “mainly only for PR [public relations] work”.  As well, the Conference adopted a very strange position calling for the non-return of refugees although the enabling environment is ready.  He urged the release, being prevented by Western countries, of the study reviewing the impact of unilateral coercive measures on Syria.  He reaffirmed his country’s commitment to a Syrian-led and owned political process without any foreign intervention and called out other actors for impeding the efforts to resume the Constitutional Committee’s ninth round of meetings in Baghdad.  Further, the UN and the Council must put an end to the massacre perpetrated by Israel against the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank and its expanding aggression in the region.

Noting that the United States voiced concern about the situation in the Rukban internally displaced persons camp, he pointed out that its administration is providing weapons and support to terrorists.  He urged an end to that country’s unilateral coercive measures and its economic terrorism against the Syrian people, as well as its looting of oil and natural resources.  While three permanent Council members noted their pledges at the Brussels Conference, they did not talk about the damage their illegal coalition has caused the Syrian economy and its people, estimated at billions of dollars. “So what aid are you talking about?” he asked.

The representative of Iran said that the “destructive policy” of unilateral sanctions exacerbates the plight of the most vulnerable segments of society and prolongs the crisis in Syria.  “Western countries have ignored the dire situation on the ground and continue to pursue their political agenda at all costs,” he stressed, noting that they utilize sanctions as a tool to achieve their objectives “even at the expense of ordinary people”.  Given the burden that neighbouring countries — in particular, Lebanon — have carried during the crisi s, he emphasized that the return of refugees and internally displaced people should not be politicized.  Calling the resumption of the Constitutional Committee’s meetings “an effective mechanism” for advancing the political process, he reiterated Iran’s commitment — along with its Astana Format partners — to that country’s normalization.

Condemning Israel’s “provocative actions” in Syria, he said that following the Rafah attack on 26 May, that country has crossed all red lines.  “All these violations were carried out with full impunity and fully supported by the United States,” he observed, calling on the Security Council to abandon its “policy of appeasement” and take decisive and urgent action to hold Israel accountable.  Strongly rejecting the United States’ allegations at this meeting, he said that Washington, D.C. tried to deny its responsibility for the current situation in Syria and the region by falsely blaming Iran.  “Iran has always been a positive part of regional developments, treading the path of stabilizing peace and lasting security, including the fight against terrorism in the region,” he stated.

The representative of Türkiye said the only sustainable solution to the conflict is through a political process that should meet the legitimate aspirations of the Syrian people.  “The rise of other, large-scale crises should not diminish our attention to Syria,” he said.  Calling on the Syrian regime to change its attitude and initiate a process of genuine national reconciliation, he said it was clear that nothing will move in a positive direction without the revitalization of the political process based on resolution 2254 (2015).  The voluntary, safe and dignified return of Syrians should be part of all efforts to resolve the crisis, he said.  “The disruptive agenda of the terrorist organization, namely PKK-YPGSDF  [Kurdistan Workers’ Party], as well as its grave violations, repressions and attacks against the local population continues unabated in Syria,” he said, emphasizing that the group has no place in Syria’s future and urging all sides to disengage from this terrorist and separatist organization.

The representative of the United States , taking the floor a second time and referring to “falsehoods” in the Russian Federation’s statements, stressed that his country has a military presence in Syria for one reason only, and that is to fight ISIL.  The charge that the United States is looting Syrian property and oil resources is out of the Syrian playbook and is absolute nonsense.  Syria has killed thousands of its own people since the war began in 2013, he emphasized, adding:  “The regime continues to carry out a war against its own people.  That is why Syrians don’t want to return home. No propaganda can change that reality.”

The representative of Syria , taking the floor a second time, said that following “eight months of genocide in Gaza”, the United States’ position — including its use of the veto five times — shielding Israel can “uncover the true face” of this Administration’s practices and its approach to the Middle East.  “It is always completely and blindly biased towards Israel,” he observed, noting that Washington, D.C. has no “red lines in the service of Israel”.  He recalled that the United States called resolution 2728 (2024) “non-binding”, also stating that it “does not include any additional commitments on the parties”.  “This is the position of the United States Administration”, he stressed, also noting that Washington, D.C. takes problematic resolutions out of the history books.  “All other allegations set forth by the representative of the United States Administration” are of no value,” he added.

The representative of the United States , taking the floor for the third time, said:  “I believe this session is supposed to be about the situation in Syria, correct? That’s all I wanted to know.”

Facebook Twitter Email Print LinkedIn

The Politics Shed- A Free Text Book for all students of Politics.

The Impact of Devolution

The British Constitution has changed from a unitary framework to one that has been termed ‘quasi- federal’. This means that it combines elements of both a unitary state and a federal state. The UK remains unitary since ultimate sovereignty still lies with Westminster — in theory, the UK parliament could repeal all the devolution Acts and abolish the regional assemblies.  However, the UK does have characteristics  of a federal state, since policy in many key domestic areas is now decided in the devolved bodies outside of Westminster, unless it concerns England.

Case study The Gender Recognition Bill and Devolution  

 Also, it would be very difficult and unlikely for the parliamentary Acts enabling devolution to be repealed. Parliamentary sovereignty, of the Westminster variety at least, has been significantly reduced outside England. The Scotland Act 2016 established that Westminster cannot legislate in devolved matters without consent, therefore effectively acknowledging that the devolved institutions are permanent not temporary political fixtures.

Laboratories of policy: Devolution has led to policy variation, which inevitably means inequality, across the UK. It has considerably reduced the control Westminster has on domestic policy beyond England. University tuition fees, hospital car parking, parental use of corporal punishment (banned in Scotland in October 2019) or income tax rates, there are now considerable differences  across the UK. A significant example of variations within the four constituent parts of the UK can be seen in how the four parts of the UK handled lockdown during the COVID-19 crisis 

Devolution and the Pandemic  

Devolution meant that alternative voting systems besides FPTP are now used in the UK. This has usually resulted in minority or coalition governments. This means  more stalemate as well as greater cross-party cooperation.  What cannot be disputed is the impact it has had on the balance of power in the devolved assemblies — multiparty governance is now the norm not the exception in the regions.

Different Voting Systems used in the UK  

Devolution has had consequences for how and where pressure groups operate, for example when the Scottish Parliament debated and subsequently passed the law banning the smacking of children north of the border. The consultation document was sent out to 12 charities, seven equality organisations, 12 police, legal and human rights bodies, and 20 medical and care profession organisations. Most of these responded and contributed their views. Children’s charities such as Children 1st (previously known as the Royal Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children) were particularly involved in lobbying for the passing of the law. Pressure groups will focus their energies on where policy is made, and so they increasingly lobby the devolved bodies and not just Westminster.

Are pressure groups becoming more significant?