The UK constitution sets out the powers and limitations of the government, as well as the rights of citizens, it is not fully codified and is generally based on conventions. This is in stark contrast to other constitutions, most notably America's, which is fully codified and available to all citizens.
There are benefits to the U.K constitution, mostly regarding it's flexibility. As it is unwritten (or uncodified), it can react quickly to reflect social change without the need for worrying about whether something is 'Constitutional' – the integration of the European Convention on Human Rights via the Human Rights Act 1998, as passed under the Blair government, serves to be a good example of this, but the Constitution's flexibility is also a point of criticism, as this means that no law is entrenched and those rights are therefore potentially at stake – this leads to many liberal arguments that the constitution should become codified to ensure the citizen's rights are completely protected, and not reliant on the government of the day's whim.
The current UK constitution has also seen multiple years of stable, if not strong and decisive government, most recently including a Conservative/Liberal Democrat coalition in 2010, demonstrating that it is, in
…show more content…
The constitution relies heavily on a multitude of unwritten conventions, such as individual ministerial responsibility - stating that the ministers are responsible for policy and should resign if there are any failures, the Salisbury Convention -stating that the House of Lords cannot reject a proposal which was contained within the winning party's previous manifesto, and the collective responsibility of Cabinet – the presence of these alone making it hard to codify the constitution, as the conventions can be easily broken. (which can either be a benefit or a detriment, as it allows for greater
One strength of the UK constitution is the flexibility that it has, for the reason that the constitution is uncodified or unwritten and is therefore not entrenched in law. Due to the fact that the UK’s constitution is uncodified or unwritten, it has an opportunity to modernise itself to the ever changing society or any other new circumstances that may arise. An example of the flexibility of the UK’s
The United States Constitution was signed in 1787, in hopes of creating a new legal system that would ensure basic human rights for all citizens. Often, the constitution evokes political discussion on whether or not there should be a constitutional convention. The article named “Re – examining the Constitution by Kenneth Jost (2012), provides the reader with an interesting analysis of the pros and cons of a constitutional convention (“Con – Con”). Citizens who oppose the Con – Con argue that changing the Constitution wouldn’t transition well because of the current political climate, and explain that it has worked fine over the years. On the other hand, citizens who are in favor of the Con – Con, state that the constitution is outdated, and suggest that reviewing it may be beneficial to better suit the citizen’s needs. A close comparison of both arguments reveals that people who support the constitutional convention have stronger reasons regarding the document and are more rational about the issues associated with it.
In this world there are many different constitutions. While many of them are long, they can be short. Many constitutions were written a long time ago, while some were just written recently or just a few years ago. The ones that were made a long time ago have even been passed down and changed for people to understand now. Even though all constitution have similarities, they all have differences between each other as well.
The Differences Betweek the UK and US Constitutions The constitution of a state, at its most basic, can be described as the fundamental principles from which it is governed, usually defining how power is split up within it and thereby constructing a framework within which it operates (www.oed.com). In this essay, I will first provide a brief summary of the UK and US constitutions and then attempt to outline the key differences and similarities between the two and discuss whether the differences really do pale in comparison with the fundamental similarities. Queen Elizabeth the 2nd once said, “The British constitution has always puzzled me” (Hennessy, 1996) and this certainly becomes
The United Kingdom can easily change their laws than most countries, which can be beneficial to new situations. Furthermore, the British Constitution does not have a set stone and it illustrate to their residents on how as well as when political power is allocated, which allows politicians and attorneys to relied on the constitutional authorities to grasp a better understanding.
Under the British constitution, parliament is sovereign. This means, amongst other things, that Parliament has a monopoly on making and amending laws. The British constitution, and the three functions of government which operate it often falls short of creating a definitive separation. Separation of powers refers to the idea that the major institutions of government should function independent of each other, in a utopian world there should aim to be a balance between the Crown and Parliament. In practice however, separation between the executive and legislature is near enough non-existent, an example being that government is made up almost entirely of MPs. Contrast this with the USA where no member of Obama’s government is equally a member of congress. However, the USA does have a codified constitution, a constitution written to delegate a clear separation of power. As we are well aware the UK doesn’t have such a constitution, the rules that
The Advantages and Disadvantages of an Unwritten Constitution in the UK The UK has an unwritten constitution unlike the U.S.A. Instead Britain's laws, policies and codes are developed through statutes, common law, convention and more recently E.U law. It is misleading to call the British constitution unwritten; a more precise form of classification would be un-codified. This means that the British constitution has no single document, which states principles and rules of a state. However, The British constitution clearly sets out how political power is allocated and where it is legally located. The British constitution is still visible and it defines composition and powers of the main offices and
Parliamentary sovereignty and the rule of law are both concepts that are key to shaping the British constitution, however there is ambiguity as to which concept is the heart of the UK’s constitutional arrangement in the recent years.
The Canadian Constitution, BNA act, Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and the Canadian Health care act are the backbone of Canada’s political system. The constitution is based upon the structure and civil rights of every Canadian inhabitant. It is a written document which states the rules that can run the federal and provincial governments and determine the responsibilities and rights of the cannadian citizens. The constitution was created so if a person has to undergo legal problems they will be treated fairly and equally.
It may also include a charter of fundamental rights. And fundamental and inalienable and inviolable right. In other words, the constitution guarantees everyone the respect of the rights: it is necessary to guarantee the fundamental rights of citizens. It poses, for example, the principle of the equality of citizens, the universal suffrage ( Voting rights granted to all citizens of age) the source of legitimacy and allows everyone to have his case heard by an independent tribunal. A constitution is an instrument that must fights against arbitrariness by allowing all citizens freedom. Thus violating the freedom of people right is legitimately unacceptable level of government action although politics
The U.S Constitution sets all the general rules and laws for the United States of America. The U.S. Constitution is very general because it is covering everything for the entire country. It gives an understanding on how the nation’s government works. Provides the framework of the proper functions, responsibilities, and what each section of the government has to provide. The U.S. Constitution is important to the country, but state constitutions are also important. State constitutions go in more depth pertaining to their states laws. Both carry the same amount of information, but each state finds their constitution more significant than the entire nations.
The UK’s unwritten constitution, formed of Acts of Parliament [AoP], Royal Prerogative [RP], Constitutional Convention [CC] and Case Law [CL], prompts much debate about the ease of which constitutional change can be introduced. A written constitution is, by definition and practice, hard to alter however it remains to be seen whether it is any easier to change an unwritten
A constitution is a set of rules which may be written or unwritten, establishes the distribution of power in a political system, the limits of government jurisdiction, the rights of citizens and the method of amending the constitution itself. An uncodified constitution is unwritten, or at least not written all in one document. The constitution in the UK is found in a variety of sources which are mainly statute and common law, conventions and traditions, European law etc. There are arguments for the UK to both retain an uncodified constitution and to change this to a codified constitution like the USA. Some of the arguments for retaining the uncodified system are that; codification produces
It is necessary for the better understanding of the topic to discuss briefly codified and uncodified constitution and give definitions for both of them. According to Heywood (2013), a codified constitution is a single legal document that is popularly known as a ‘written constitution’ and that contains key constitutional provisions. However, the traditional approach is to distinct written or codified constitutions with unwritten or unсodified constitutions. Ryan and Foster (2014) notify that unсodified constitution is made up of rules from different sources. In other words, it is not a single document. Also, Finer, Bogdanor and Rudden (1995) describe an uncodified constitution of the United Kingdom as indeterminate and indistinct. According to Garner, Ferdinand and Lawson (2009), only three liberal democracies that are Israel, New
The British constitution is flexible in nature, which has allowed for the development of this country over centuries without the need for a fully codified constitution. I