In the course of human history, the myth surrounding ‘state sovereignty’ has been uncovered, and there is a growing sense of realization that it has indeed lived of its usefulness. This conclusion is only natural since the dominant discourse on state sovereignty emerged around an exclusive and narrow understanding of humanity. Evidently, the existence of state as the only exclusive political institution of sovereignty emerged at the expense of people’s aspiration. It is no wonder that monopoly and exercise of force by State to establish its legitimacy is a contradiction which belies its moral relevance and political legitimacy.
Through its hegemonizing and homogenizing characteristics, the State has ensured that the question of war and peace is a matter of State prerogative. Nonetheless, experience has shown that priority of a State is its interest to protect what it considers its national interest and to compete with other existing States. In essence, the notion of statebuilding is in direct confrontation with peoples’ aspiration to decide their own future and to live in peace. Real politik has ensured that just because a people have rights does not necessarily mean that they enjoy them.
However, absolutism of state sovereignty which dominated international politics has been critically interrogated by the forces of global events that unfolded since 1991. The idea of State and Territorial Sovereignty no longer remains absolute and unchallenged; and the emergence of new countries is a testament of this undeniable fact. Foucault says that the end of sovereignty is circular; in the sense that the end of [State] sovereignty is the exercise of [Peoples] sovereignty. This is indispensable for the rehumanization of a people which would empower ordinary people to exercise their sovereign powers to become self-determining.
The will of the people therefore is the ultimate political authority in all spheres of human life. It is the will of the people that should determine the nature of state it adopts for the pursuit and implementation of the most basic rights needed for the development of all its citizens. It is the will of the people that should decide the basis of self-governance of its own people. It is the will of the people that should decide the destiny of the land, and not the land which decides the fate of the people. Hence it is the will of the people that is the final political authority in defining and determining the social, cultural and political destiny of a people.
However very often there is no democratic space for the people to express and exercise its will. This invariably hampers the natural growth of any people and puts at risk the basic democratic principals of human co-existence. It is of absolute necessity for any government to respond to the will of the people; and failure to do so threatens its own legitimacy.
