Monistic Theory of Sovereignty
The Monistic Theory of Sovereignty, primarily associated with the political philosopher Jean
Bodin and later developed by thinkers like John Austin, asserts that sovereignty is absolute,
indivisible, and resides in a single authority within the state. This theory emphasizes the
unity of power and rejects the division or sharing of sovereignty.
Features of Monistic Theory:
1. Sovereignty is an integral part of every state. In every independent political
community there exists a Supreme authority exercised by one person or a group
of persons who wields absolute power.
2. Sovereignty is a single, unified power and cannot be divided among multiple
authorities without weakening or destroying its essence. For example, in a state,
there cannot be two competing sovereigns.
3. Sovereign always resides in the determinate human superior or in a body of
persons. It does not reside in the vast number of electorates since they cannot
formulate their will in the form of law. The determinate human superior is the
ultimate source of power.
4. The sovereign possesses supreme power, unrestricted by external forces or
internal divisions. Their commands must be obeyed by all individuals or groups
within the state. The sovereign may not be obeyed by all but this does not diminish
or impair their sovereignty. What is needed is obedience by a bulk or a large
majority of people.
5. Sovereignty cannot be transferred or given away, as it is fundamental to the
existence and functioning of the state.
6. The theory holds that sovereignty resides in a specific authority, such as the
monarch (in absolute monarchies) or the legislature (in democratic systems).
7. John Austin emphasized that sovereignty is the power of issuing final legal
commands, making law the central instrument of sovereignty.
8. The determinate human superior is the only law-maker. His commands are laws
and without him the state can have no laws. He does not obey any other authority.
He has no rival of equal status in the state. He exerts his supreme will over all
persons and associations living in the state. He is not subjected to the control of
anyone.
Criticism of the Monistic Theory:
1. Neglect of Pluralism: Critics argue that this theory ignores the reality of pluralistic
societies where power is often shared among various institutions and groups.
1. Rigid and Unrealistic: In modern states, sovereignty is often divided among federal,
state, and local governments, as well as international bodies, contradicting the
theory's emphasis on indivisibility.
2. Ignores Popular Sovereignty: The monistic theory focuses on the legal authority of
the state but neglects the democratic principle that sovereignty ultimately resides
with the people.
3. Globalization and International Influence: The increasing influence of
international laws, organizations, and treaties undermines the notion of absolute,
indivisible sovereignty.
Conclusion:
The Monistic Theory of Sovereignty laid the foundation for understanding state power in
traditional political thought. While it provides valuable insights into the nature of authority,
its rigid and absolutist approach has been challenged by modern realities, such as federalism,
democracy, and globalization. Today, sovereignty is understood as a more flexible and
shared concept, reflecting the complexities of contemporary governance.
