Universality or All-Comprehensiveness of Sovereignty

Sovereignty is also characterized by its universality or all-comprehensiveness. This quality refers to the universality of sovereign power over the territorial limits of the state. Thus, sovereignty is all-comprehensive and all-pervasive and its power extends over all persons, associations, and things within the territorial limits. We may recall how Hobbes made his sovereign all-pervasive by denying the right to resistance to individuals and an independent existence to organizations and associations. All-pervasiveness of the General Will speaks louder when Rousseau wants the General Will to force individuals to be free. As an exception, however, state grants concessions and immunity in terms of diplomatic immunity to officials and representatives of foreign governments and certain international organizations as part of their external relations, by free consent. We generally come across cases where States declare a particular person/representative/official or body as persona non-grata meaning thereby that the same has been declared as ‘non-acceptable’ to the host state in the officiating capacity. However, this universality does not get relaxed in terms of many international organizations and associations, which continue to be subject to the sovereignty of the host States and follow their rules and laws. In the context of the operation of multinational corporations, we can say that they are subject to the rules and laws prevailing in the host countries. It is the operation of the characteristic of universality that we see in the form of diplomatic immunity, double taxation avoidance treaties, extradition treaties, immigration laws, political asylums, etc.

We may add that these characteristics are specifically formulated in the context of legal sovereignty and do not correspond in their entirety in a modern nation-state. Three exceptions can be cited that may not fully corroborate these characteristics. First, in a democratic, federal and constitutional setup, these characteristics may not fully apply. Second, as pluralist critics have pointed out, political pluralism does not give credence to monist notions of sovereignty and its characteristics. Third, globalization, issues of global concerns like human rights, terrorism, inter-continental missiles, nuclear warheads and political and humanitarian interventions have challenged the traditional notion of sovereignty and its characteristics.