The concepts of parliamentary sovereignty and judicial supremacy represent two different approaches to governance, with parliamentary sovereignty emphasizing the power of the legislature and judicial supremacy emphasizing the power of the judiciary.
Parliamentary sovereignty is the principle that the legislative body (parliament) is supreme and has ultimate authority over all other branches of government, including the judiciary. This means that parliament can make, amend, or repeal any law and that no other body can overrule its decisions.
Judicial supremacy, on the other hand, is the principle that the judiciary has the final say in interpreting and applying the law, and that its decisions are binding on all other branches of government, including the legislature. This means that the judiciary can declare laws passed by the legislature to be unconstitutional or invalid.
A synthesis of these two principles could involve recognizing the supremacy of the constitution over all branches of government, while also acknowledging that the legislature and judiciary have their respective roles to play in interpreting and applying the law. This would require a careful balance between the powers of the two branches, with each being subject to appropriate checks and balances to ensure that neither becomes too powerful.
In practice, this might involve the judiciary having the power to declare laws unconstitutional, but only in cases where they clearly violate the constitution. At the same time, parliament would retain its power to make laws and set policy, but within the constraints of the constitution and subject to the oversight of the judiciary.
