Absoluteness or Illimitability of Sovereignty

Theorists like Bodin, Hobbes, Rousseau and Austin have emphasized the absoluteness or illimitability of sovereignty. Absoluteness refers to power which is not restricted or limited by any consideration or authority internally and also externally. The sovereign cannot be limited or restricted by any law, moral or social considerations, customs and historical traditions, the law of nature, natural rights or other kinds of authority. Though the sovereign may pay its respect to these limitations, the sovereign is not restricted by them. As discussed, Bodin defines sovereignty as ‘supreme power over citizens and subjects, unrestrained by law’ and as ‘absolute and perpetual power of commanding in the state.’ Hobbes’s concept of absolute power in the State puts the sovereign beyond resistance and makes it creator and custodian of all rights and justice. Moreover, Hobbes also removes Bodin’s limitations in the forms of law of God and fundamental laws. He sub-ordinates all associations (including the Church) to the sovereignty of the Leviathan. Thus, Hobbes put forward a clear doctrine of the absoluteness of sovereignty. Rousseau’s General Will is so absolute that it can force individuals to be free. Austin also put forward a concept of legal absoluteness of sovereignty whereby the sovereign is supreme and the sole source of positive law.

We can say that the absoluteness or illimitability of sovereignty flows from its legal superiority. By virtue of this quality there is only one sovereign/supreme power in the State legally entitled to the obedience of the inhabitants. Thus, absoluteness also means exclusiveness of sovereignty and unity of the State. Furthermore, the absoluteness of sovereignty also emerges from the conceptualization of the sovereign as an integral part of the ‘political community’ or ‘common-wealth’. Both for Hobbes and Austin, the existence of a political and independent community, i.e., the State, is predicated on the existence of the sovereign. In his Lectures on Jurisprudence, Austin says, ‘The State is usually synonymous with “the sovereign”.’³¹ For Austin, a community is political and independent when a determinate human superior is there. For Hobbes the absence of a sovereign amounts to the dissolution of the State itself. Externally, the obligation to international law is voluntary. Given the iniquitous distribution of resources and other capabilities of states in the international arena, the equality of States in international law gets distorted in practical situations. However, we may infer that this absoluteness exists in a legal sense and would not be equally applicable to political and other aspects.