The doctrine of the social contract and the sovereignty of the people was the basis of the first bourgeois constitutional act. The end of the 18th century brought new developments in the concepts of sovereignty. State sovereignty is transformed into national sovereignty, the attributes of sovereignty are transferred from the monarch to the nation and the people. The expression of this development is eloquently illustrated by the declaration of independence of the American States (1776) and by the Declaration of Human and Citizen Rights, as well as by the Constitutions of France during the revolution (1991-1793) (Miga-Beételiu, 1998, p. 85). Article 3 of the Declaration of Human and Citizen Rights will for the first time express the idea of national sovereignty: “The source of all sovereignty lies essentially in the nation. No one, no one can blackmail the authority that is not explicitly. The principle of national sovereignty was taken up by the French Constitution of 1791 which, in Article 1, declared that sovereignty is indivisible, inalienable and inevitable. Sovereignty belongs to the nation; No group of people, no one should take the example of sovereignty. Scholars in international relations can be divided into two different practices, realistic and pluralistic, of what they believe to be the ontological state of the state. Realists believe that the world is one of the only states and that intergovernmental relations and the identity of the state are defined before international relations with other states. On the other hand, pluralists believe that the state is not the only player in international relations and that interactions between states and the state compete with many other actors.  60 Political and legal sovereignty have always been closely linked in the history of the concept; Most theories derive either from legal sovereignty by political sovereignty or vice versa, while others consider both dimensions to be irreducable.
The paradox of the power and power of the constitution or sovereign sovereignty and sovereignty is inseparable from the modern claim to sovereignty. The priority between political sovereignty and legal sovereignty has been taken into account over the centuries and has helped to perpetuate the centrality of the concept of sovereignty. Some authors have even argued that this paradox and reciprocal claim is a testimony to the conceptual inconsistency of sovereignty. 140 This understanding of the relationship between human rights sovereignty also has the advantage of making it clear that (the borders) of legitimate internal authority should not be mixed with (the limits) of national sovereignty in international law. 50 This development explains, for example, why it is wrong to oppose human rights in the second part of the 20th century to sovereignty; Without sovereignty, many human rights developments, such as decolonization, would not have taken place and, without the role that human rights would have played in their creation, many of today`s sovereign states would not exist.