POLITICAL SCIENCE AND PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

POLITICAL SCIENCE

INTRODUCTION TO POLITICAL SCIENCE

PLSC 100

LECTURER: PROF .M.A ONI

WEEK12:SOVEREIGNTY&WEEK 13:POLITICAL PARTIES AND PRESSURE GROUPS

NAME: KUSEJU MOYOSOREOLUWA OPEMIPO-140106

 SOVEREIGNTY

Sovereignty is a term that denotes the supreme and legal authority in decision making process of the
state to govern and maintain order ,above and beyond which no further legal power exists.
Sovereignty has two dimensions:internal supremacy within the territory of the state and external
independence from direct political control by other states.
The concept of sovereignty was believed to have been first used by Jean Boding in 1576 in his books
Six books concerning the state.He developed the theory that sovereignty in an essential of the
state,and that the legislate holder of power,(in this case,the king)has absolute supremacy that is not
to be shared with others.However,he admitted that the sovereign’s power was subject to the laws of
God and of nature.
Other political thinkers,like Thomas Hobbes and Austin ,argue that sovereignty is characterised by
absoluteness,comprehensiveness,permanence and indivisiblity:in reality ,however,there is nothing
like unrestricted,unlimited and absolute sovereignty.Political scientist identified the types of
sovereignty.

TYPES OF SOVEREIGNTY
The five different kinds of sovereignty are as follows:
(1)Nominal arid real sovereignty : In ancient times many states had monarchies and their rulers were
monarchs. They wielded absolute power and their senates and parliaments were quite powerless. At
that time they exercised real sovereignty.
(2) Legal sovereignty :legal sovereignty is that authority of the state which has the legal power to
issue final commands. It is also the legislative power and authority of the state to whose directions
the law of the State attributes final legal force. In every independent and ordered state there are
some laws which must be obeyed by the people and there must be a power to issue and enforce
these laws
(3) Political sovereignty According to Professor Gilchrist, “The political sovereign means the sum-
total of influences in a State which lie behind the law. In modern representative government we
might define it roughly as the power of the people”. In other words by political sovereign in the
representative democracies, we mean the whole mass of the people or the electorate or the public
opinion. But at the same time, it cannot be emphatically asserted that political sovereignty can
definitely be identified with the whole mass of the people, the electorate or public opinion.
(4) Popular sovereignty : Popular sovereignty roughly means the power of the masses as contrasted
with the Power of the individual ruler of the class. It implies manhood, suffrage, with each individual
having only one vote and the control of the legislature by the representatives of the people. At any
moment in time,immediate power belongs to the government which alone can enforce obedience to
his will.in the long run ,however ,a parliament which legislates in a manner contrary to the
constitution and will of the people will be thrown out by the people excersising their power of
political sovereignty or popular sovereignty.Thus means ultimate power belongs to the nation.
(5) De facto and De jure. Sovereignty: When a legitimate sovereign has been overthrown in a
coup,or a revelation,the person or those who can enforce obedience to his will is called the de facto
sovereign.if the power is excersised successfully over a considerable period of time,de facto may be
recognised as a legitimate sovereign.
De jure sovereignty is based on law rather than on physical power.it is the legitimate or legal exercise
of power in a state .Extrnal sovereignty denotes independence of a state.Each nation’s authority
over its own area and people is exclusive and no nation has a right to interfere in the affairs of any
nation.There are opponents of a classical theory of sovereignty.they have tired to reassess the
doctrine of the state sovereignty .
Austin’s theory of sovereignty
The Juristic analysis of sovereignty has a history stretching back to the Roman empire. The Roman
jurists worked out a theory of Imperium and found the source of law in the will of the prince.
In modem times the development of the theory of sovereignty coincided roughly with the growth of
the State in power, functions and prestige.
From Bodin, through Hobbes and Bentham, this juristic idea reached its climax in John Austin as
contained in his lectures on Jurisprudence, published in 1832. Austin endeavoured to build up an
exact juristic terminology and to present a clear outline of the organisation of a government’s legal
power.
The theory of sovereignty, as enunciated by Austin, depends mainly upon his view of the nature of
law. Law, according to Austin, is a “command given by a superior to an inferior.The critics believe
that sovereignty may be divided or limited .First,they point out that political life has changed
radically since the concept of sovereignty was first developed .second ,they formulate new theories
(based on present realities) which take cognisance of the vast powers excersied by other
organisations.
One of the school of thoughts ,the pluralists, states that the state is but one association among
several associations in society,and therefore,it cannot claim absolute supremacy over all others .The
family,the church ,labour unions farmers association,and others ,are as important as the state.The
state must limit its activities to those which concern all people alike,for example,the maintenance of
law and order.in matters which concern lesser groups ,the state has no business to interfere.A
second group of critics ,the internationalists ,holds that the state is not really free to do as it pleases
because it’s behaviour is restrained by internationally accepted standards on human rights and the
growing interdependence of nations .Thus,According to Hans Morgenthaus ,national sovereignty is a
legal concept only,not a description of actual relations among nations .sovereignty a formal standard
of how nations should treat one another ,not a specific description of how they treat one another.
it is important to note that such varied political units as “municipals,”provinces”,”regions”and
“state”(as in Nigeria and the United States federations)are not states because they lack
sovereignty:that is ,they are not centres of supreme authority .they are political and administrative
units and are not recognised ,in the international community as independent sovereign states.This is
true of the 36 components states of the federation of Nigeria
Limitations to sovereignty
Constitutional limitations to sovereignty
The constitution is the basic law of a country .Every law made by the legislature must be in
conformity with the constitution otherwise such a law will be null and void .
Natural limitations
The Sovereign cannot do certain things, which .are naturally impossible i.e. the sovereign cannot
order the sun to rise in the west or cannot change the cycle of seasons. If a sovereign would claim to
do that, he will be sent to the lunatic asylum.
Moral limitations
In theory the state can do anything. The star can make any kind of law. It can declare legal things to
be illegal and vice versa. But in practice there seems to be difficulties. For example the parliament
can pass a law saying that all blue eyed babies should be killed. Legally this is unchallengeable but in
practice the government will find it very difficult to implement it because the government will not be
in a position to face the public opinion which is based on morality.
Human limitations
There are limits to one’s mental and physical faculties. A person may be able to do certain work for a
certain period of time. It is not possible for him to continue to do the same thing for an unlimited
and indefinite period. A sovereign has to take into consideration these limitations. If he over-steps
these limitations, people will not cooperate with him. Sovereign can make a law ordering the people
to sleep during day and to work at night. People will obey such a law but for a very short period
because following such a law means overstepping physical limitations of human beings.
Limitations of international law
Every state has to have relations with other states. These are regulated by a law known as
International Law. Under normal circumstances every state is expected to obey international law.
Non-observance of International Law would result in chaos and confusion in international field.

G
Political parties
A political party is a group of persons bonded in policy and opinion in support of a general political
cause,which essentially is the pursuit,capture and retention for as long as democratically feasible ,of
government and its offices.In other words ,”a political party is a group that seeks to elect candidates
to public office by supplying them with a label - aparty identification' - by which they are known to
the electorate".Apolitical party is, theretore, at least three things to its members and on-lookers:
It is a label in the minds of its members and the wider public, especially the
electorate.It is an organisation that recruits and campaigns for candidates seeking
election and selection into public political office;It is a set of leaders who try to organize and control
the legislative and executive branches of government.
A political party, theretore, is a group of people and an organisation like anyother group or
organisations, except it is distinguished from any other group or organisation by Its unique Objective
Which, in a democratic setting, is seekingcontrol of government through nominating Its candidates
and presenting its
programmes for endorsement via the electoral process in competition with other
parties. As will be clear shortly, it can, for this reason, also qualify to be called a
pressure group but a special one in the sense that the pressure it exerts is ultimately
not for the purpose of influencing government but tor taking over government, for
providing the people and ideas to run government itself.
In democracies therefore, a political party is a more or less permanent
institution with the goal of aggregating interests, presenting candidates for
elections with the purpose of controlling governments, and representing such
interests in government. It is thus a major vehicle for enhancing participation in
governance. in the literature, there is a general agreement that an organisation requires
the following in order to qualify as a political party:
 continuity in organisation;
 manifest and permanent organisation at the local level;
 self-conscious determination at both local and national levels to capture and hold the
power of decision-making alone or in a coalition others ;and
 the organisation is expected to seek followers at the polls or in some manner (strive) for
popular support.
Functions of political parties

Although political parties are defined by a central function (the filling of political
Parties and the wielding of governmental power), their impact on the political
system IS substantially broader and more complex. There are dangers mm
generalizing about the functions of political parties, nevertheless, a number of
general unctions of parties can be identified. The main functions are as follows:
 representation
 elite formation and recruitment
 Goal formulation
 interest articulation and aggregation
 socialisation and mobilisation
 organisation of government
Representation
This refers to the capacity of parties to respond to and articulate the views of
both members and the voters. In the language of systems theory, political parties
are major "inputting" devises that ensure that government heeds the needs and
wishes of the larger society.
Elite formation and recruitment
Parties of all kinds are responsible for providing democratic states with their
political leaders. In most cases, parties provide a training ground for politicians,
equipping them with skills, knowledge and experience which may be found useful
in governance.
Goal formation
Parties have traditionally been one of the means through which societies set
collective goals. They play this role, because, in the process of seeking power, they
formulate programmes of government (through conferences, conventions,
elections manifestos and so on) with a view to attracting popular support.
Interest articulation and aggregation
In the process of developing collective goals, parties also help to articulate
(express) and aggregate (combine) the various interests found in society. Parties,
indeed, often develop as vehicles though which business, labour, religious, ethnic
or other groups advance or defend their various interests. The fact that national
parties invariably articulate the demands of a multitude of groups forces them to
aggregate these interests by drawing them together into a coherent whole,
balancing competing interests against each other.
Socialisation and mobilisation
Through internal debate and discussion, as well as campaigning and electoral
competition, parties engage in political education and socialization. The issues
parties choose to focus on help to set the political agenda, and the values and
attitudes that they articulate become part of the larger political culture.
Organisation of government
It is often argued that complex modern societies would be ungovernable without
political parties. Parties help in the formation of government (hence we refer to
party government in the parliamentary system). Parties give government a
degree of stability and coherence, especially if the members of the government
are drawn from a single party.
Party system
A Party system is a network of relationships through which parties interact and
influence the political process. The most popular way of distinguishing
between different types of party system is the reference to number of parties
competing for power. On this basis, Duverger distinguished between 'one-
party' and 'multiparty systems. In one-party system, a 'ruling' party effectively
functions as a permanent government. In two-party system, power alternates
between two 'major' parties. In dominant - party systems, a single 'major' party
retains power for a prolonged period. In multi-party systems, no party is large
enough to rule alone, leading to a system of coalition government.
Pressure groups
political parties can in a broad sense be called pressure groups
in the sense that they do exert pressure, not, as is usual, for the purpose of
influencing government but in fact to constitutionally take over government.
therefore, a pressure group in a democracy is any group of persons
which tries to get the government or other bodies to take notice of certain things
or do something by bringing pressure to bear on such government or body. Thus,
any organised group in a democratic system that tries to or exerts influence or
lobbies for the benefit of its members is a pressure group. Here, the group is not
presenting itself as a potential replacement for the existing government. Rather,
it usually only seeks to pressurize government into taking a desired line of
action. It is possible in certain cases, however, for a frustrated but powerful
pressure group to seek to replace a party in power with another more sympathetic
to its cause.
A related concept is the concept of interest group organised around a
particular interest for the purpose of influencing public policy in regard of their
interest.'
When battery manufacturers come together to seek to convince
government to ban the importation of batteries made outside the country, they
become an interest group seeking to influence public policy in the area of
intemational trade, The difference between pressure group and interest group
could be little more than a semantic one since pressure groups do form around
one interest or the other while interest groups often need to exert pressure in
order to influence government.
At least four factors can help to explain the formation and vibrancy of
pressure groups in a democracy. These include:
 Changesin the economy, society, politics and in the international
environment, which can create new interests, and redefine or strengthen old ones;
 Government policy itself;
 The presence of the required leadership outside government willing and
able to use the facilities of the democratic system to found and organize
groups for the purpose of seeking to pressurize government in a desired
direction and;
 The level of activism of government, in the sense that the more active a
government is, the greater is the probability that more pressure groups will be formed
around such activities.

Pressure group activity in a democracy is bound to be complex, not

necessarily mutually reinforcing or complementary. For instance, it is possible
to have two pressure groups opposing one another on the same issue. For
example, local battery manufacturers opposed to battery importation could be
confronted by local merchants who derive their livelihood from importing
batteries. In such a situation, if the two pressure groups have comparable
political clout, it might be difficult to get a political party or government to play a
major role in the resolution of such a conflict. Such party or governmental
involvement is more easily secured when the issue at hand corresponds to party
divisions and does not crosscut such divisions or is perceived as something
unimportant to take a public position on by the parties or the goyernment they
control.
Second, pressure groups are not necessarily organised around a single issue,
event or problem. Some can be organised around a basket of issues that are not
necessarily complementary, and such groups have to engage in internal dialogue
as much as they engage in dialogue, if not more, with bodies external to them
Third, as has implicitly been stated earlier, pressure groups do not
necessarily seek to directly influence parties or goyernments in their country all

of the time. They could seek to do so indirectly through other pressure groups,
the mass media, the judiciary, or even through putting pressure on the
international community.
Fourth, pressure group activity does not necessarily end with the group's
success or failure in the form of initial endorsement or lack thereof by parties or
governments. Often, such activity continues through the public bureaucracy,
the judiciary, and the mass media.
Fifth, pressure group activity can throw up two contradictory tendencies in
the political process. When such activity leads to a policy that benefits a very
small but well organised group whereas the costs are widely distributed over
the public at large, the result is what is called client politics. Political parties
tend to play very little role in this, for fear of losing wide electoral support. The
emergence of client politics occasionally generates its opposite number, called
entrepreneurial politics. This involves the emergence of individuals who
become the focal point for battling the "real or imagined threats to public well-
being" arising from client politics.
In a nutshell, it has been shown that the idea, practice and system of
democracy involving popular participation through representation is kept alive
by such institutions and groups as political parties and pressure groups. The
role of such groups is, however, complex, involving at least two-way and
multiple lines of influence that include such other institutions and centres as the
judiciary, the mass media and even the international environment,
Types of pressure groups
Groups can nevertheless be classified into four types:
Communal groups
Communal groups are embedded in the social fabric, in the sense that
membership is based on birth, rather than recruitment. Examples ofsuch groups are
ramilies, tribes, castes and ethnic groups.
Institutional group
Institutional groups are groups that are
part of the machinery of government and attempt to exert influence in and InTOURn
that machinery. They differ from interest groups in that they enjoy no measure of
autonomy or independence. Examples are bureaucracies and the military.
Associational group
Associational groups are ones that are formed by people who come together to
pursue shared, but limited goals. Groups as associations are characterised by
voluntary action and the existence of common interests, aspirations or attitudes.
The most obvious examples of associational groups are what are commonly called
interest groups or pressure groups. David Truman refers to them as 'political
interest groups' which he defines as "a shared attitude group that makes certain
claims upon other groups in the society" by acting "through or upon any of the
institutions of government"
Amoebic groups
anemic groups are that they often emerge spontaneously
in response to an issue and usually disperse after the matter is resolved. Examples
of this type of pressure groups include demonstrators, rioters and mob.
Parties and pressure groups in different democracies
so far, this chapter has shown how democracy requires political parties and
pressure groups in order to survive and thrive. The point has been made that the
openness, plurality and restraint that a competitive party system and pressure
groups bring into democracies are like the life-supporting supplies of oxygen
that keep the human body alive." Nevertheless, it is the case that the role of
political parties and pressure groups differs from one democracy to the other,
depending on the nature of the political system, its history, and the structure of
government, among others.
For instance, although American political parties are the oldest in the
contemporary democratic world, the sense of party identification in the United
States is very weak compared to that in Europe. As Wilson has shown, "the sense
of being a party member and the inclination to vote the party ticket are greater in
France, Italy or Sweden than in the United States". His words
Parties in the United States are relatively weak today, not
because they are old but because the laws and rules under
which they operate have taken away much of their power at
the same time that many voters have lost their sense of
commitment to party identification, This weakening has
proceeded unevenly, however, because our constitutional
system has produced a decentralized governmental system,
with the result that parties in some places are strong and in
other places almost non-existent."
Thus, Europe tends to record higher voter turnout than the United States
With European parties being more effective at mobilizing voters than American
parties. The other side of the coin, however, is that pressure group activity is
Very common in the United States, thanks in part to the greater variety of
cleavages in American society, the weakness of political parties and the
American constitutional system which provides a multiplicity of points at
Which pressure groups can seek to apply pressure on government. Thus, Wilson has
argued that "where parties are strong, interests work through the parties; where
parties are weak, interests operate directly on the government'
in a nation such as Great Britain where most political authority is lodged in a
single official, such as the Prime Minister, there are only a few places where
important decisions are made and thus only a few opportunities for affecting those
decisions. But when political authority is shared by the President, the courts, and
Congress (and within Congress, among two houses and countless committees and
subcommittees) there are plenty of places where one can argue one's case and the
more chances there are to influence policy, the more organisations there will be that
seek to exercise that influence."
Even within Europe, there are important administrative and historical
differences of import for the matter at hand. Administratively, the United Kingdom
is a unitary state with a fusion of powers (compared with America's federal state
with its separation of powers). The parliament in the United Kingdom has supreme
legislative, executive and judicial authority and the country operates a two-party
dominant party system with regional variations, all of which limit the scope for
pressure group activity.
On the other hand, France, while equally being a unitary state operates a dual
executive system with a seven-year term (renewable once) the President and a
Prime Minister (usually leader of majority coalition in the National Assembly, and
responsible to that Assembly) is appointed by the President. It operates a
multiparty system, the principal parties including the Rally for the Republic
(RPR), Union for French Democracy (UDF) and the Socialist Party (PS), along
with such minor parties as the Communist Party (PCF), National Front (FIN) and
Green Party.
Nigeria will begin its journey into a fully democratic Fourth
Republic in which the cause and course of individual liberty, group and individual
rights, including the right to choose between meaningful alternatives, openness,
tolerance, restraint, transparency, the hallmarks of democracy, can be consolidated
and all its citizens; female and male, old and young, can start to enjoy, on à
sustainable basis, the fruits of democracy beyond the wildest of their dreams.
REFERENCES
Remi Anifowose and Francis Enemuo”Elements of politics”(2nd edition )p.195,p.197
P.89

https://www.ramauniversity.ac.in/online-study-material/law/ballb/isemester/politicalscience-i/
lecture-18.pdf

http://studylecturenotes.com/