From Legislative Sovereignty To Popular Sovereignty

The development of Jeremy Bentham’s doctrine of sovereignty canbe divided into two different stages. In the earlier stage, he argues for adoctrine of legislative sovereignty, and in later stage, he argues a doctrineof popular sovereignty, Then what’s the difference between these doctrines?Is it a theoretical development or a theoretical change? If it is adevelopment, what makes it possible? What kind of concept of power canwe found in this development? It is important to understand these issues inorder to comprehend Bentham’s doctrine of sovereignty.In the earlier stage, Jeremy Bentham makes a critique of SirBlackstone’s absolute concept of sovereignty, and holds the point that thesovereignty can be limited by the express convention. Jeremy Benthamputs forward a doctrine of legislative sovereignty, which insists that themost important capability of power is to make law, the foundation ofsovereignty is the habit of obedience and the disposition of obedience, andthe legislative power is a kind of imperative power. In later stage, JeremyBentham puts forward a a doctrine of popular sovereignty, which insiststhat the sovereignty is in the people and the sovereignty is exercised through location and dislocation. His doctrine of popular sovereignty is ofa relational structure, in which the people are the political sovereign, andthe legislature are the legal sovereign, sovereignty is just in therelationship of the two bodies, Bentham’s doctrine of sovereignty is of arelational nature. That means his legislative sovereignty fits into hispopular sovereignty, that is to say, Bentham develops his legislativesovereignty actually. We can found his viewpoint of power behind thisdevelopment, which insists that power is a concept of two dimensionsincluding force and legitimacy, and this is to say, power can not become aright until it fulfills some conditions. As for Bentham’s doctrine ofsovereignty, the condition which make power legitimate are principle ofutility, sovereignty will be limited, and a government of representativedemocracy.The dissertation consists six chapters in addition to the epilogue:In chapter1"Introduction", I put forward the issue of this dissertationas so well as the research method; In chapter2"The critique ofBlackstone’s theory of sovereignty: the origin of Jeremy Bentham’sdoctrine of sovereignty", it provides an analysis of Bentham’s critique ofBlackstone in order to give a new reading of Jeremy Bentham’s AFragment on Government, in witch Jeremy Bentham’s view onsovereignty will be discussed.The chapter3discusses the structure of the legislative sovereignty and its foundation, which makes it possible to study the question ofwhether there is a general obligation of obedience. Moreover, this chapteralso discuses the nature of the legislative sovereignty, in my view, thelegislative sovereignty is a power of imperation;The chaper4examines the meaning of Jeremy Bentham’s popularsovereignty, and points out that there is a relational structure in thisconception, which means that it consists two elements of politicalsovereignty and legal sovereignty. Formally, the sovereignty lies in thepeople as well as the legislature, but substantially in the relation of the two.Besides, this relational popular sovereignty consists of three constitutiveprinciples, which include the universal interest, the identity of will as wellas the political liberty;The chapter5discuses the operation mode of the popular sovereignty.It is argued that the popular sovereignty can exist in three form as follows,it can exist as the political constitutive authority, it can exist as the legaloperative power, and as the social public opinion tribunal. It is also pointout that popular sovereignty needs two requirements, which include a kindof representative democracy and publicity, in wich the former is theinstitutional foundation and the later is a inner security. Accordingly, thepopular sovereignty can be practiced through the interaction of politicalsovereignty and legal sovereignty.The chapter6discuses the location of his doctrine of the popular sovereignty in the history of thought, and analyzes the concept ofsovereignty in terms of power. In Bentham’s theory of sovereignty, poweris a two-dimensional concept, which combines the factual dimension andthe rightful (or normative) dimension. It is pointed out that the legislativesovereignty and the popular sovereignty are two different forms of thesame concept of power, they are of the same nature in essence, that thereis a theoretical continuation between the legislative sovereignty and thepopular sovereignty.