Abstract

Is still the Diceyan sovereignty of Parliament, as stated in the "Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution" and supported by so many constitutional lawyers a working principle? Does it really explain the real essence of a supreme power? Or even ought it to be considered as an old fashioned and actually obsolescent dogmatic idea in the context of a flexible constitution seeking new milestones? A lot of things are changing in Britain under the long-standing pressure of the political command of the Executive and its actual law-making, the strain of new parliamentary bodies under an asymmetrical devolution of power to sub-statal areas, the clash between English traditional rule of law and the European rights as incorporated by the HRA 1998. Moreover, the rising hindrance of a populistic direct democracy and the Brexit affaire are worsening the identity of a fading, even ghostly constitutional idea.