• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Assess whether or not the United Kingdom should adopt a codified constitution?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

´╗┐Josh Cotton HRS Assess whether or not the United Kingdom should adopt a codified constitution? A constitution is a set of fundamental principles or established precedents according to which a state or other organization is governed. There are many types of constitution. Constitutions can be codified, un-codified, Unitary and Federal and they can be seen as rigid or flexible. The most common way of classifying constitutions is codified or un-codified (written and unwritten). The United Kingdom is a good example of an un-codified constitution and the United States of America is an example of a codified constitution. A codified or unwritten constitution is a constitution in which the key rules and regulations are collected within one single legal document. The terms of the constitution are said to be ?entrenched? meaning that the rules or provisions of the outlined within the constitution are hard to amend or abolish. This is why people often refer to codified constitutions as being rigid. On the other hand there are codified constitutions (which is what the United Kingdom currently has). Un-codified or unwritten constitutions do not have all of their rules and regulations composed in one single document. ...read more.

Middle

An example of elective dictatorship would be the fact that Margret Thatcher was only defeated four times in eleven years. It would also not be possible for the government to interfere and change the constitution due to the existence of higher law, which basically safeguards the constitution. This is because high court judges ensuring provisions of the constitution are properly upheld would police the constitution. For example Separation of Powers, Checks and Balances Each branch of the government work in unison to make sure that other branches do not abuse their power. My final point supporting the United Kingdom adopting a codified constitution is that codified constitutions would protect the rights of the public. Civil liberties would be securely protected by a codified constitution because it would clearly define the relationship between the citizens and the state. As a result of this, these rights will be clearly defined and will be easier to enforce than in the current British un-codified constitution. An un-codified constitution can also result in a elective dictatorship which would further restrict these rights. Along with a codified constitution comes a bill of rights that clearly defines and specifies the rights and freedoms of the individual, in turn this legally defines the extent of ones civil liberties. ...read more.

Conclusion

This is because a codified constitution would act as higher law. Therefore, a codified constitution would undermine parliamentary sovereignty, which is one of the key principles in the United Kingdom?s representative democracy. Personally I think that the United Kingdom should not adopt a codified constitution. This is for many reasons that I have outlined in my essay. These reasons include the inflexibility of a codified constitution, judicial tyranny and the undermining and eventual abolishment of parliamentary sovereignty. In my opinion, the most important reason is the inflexibility of a codified constitution. By Nature, codified constitutions are entrenched and higher law rules over statute law. In the United Kingdom, if any of our laws need to be changed then statute law can be changed easily via an act of parliament. Whereas with a codified constitution it is much harder to change and amend laws and therefore the constitution can rapidly become outdated in today?s ever changing society. Overall, both arguments are strong in their own right, but at the end of the day is better to have a flexible way of changing laws that a rigid and entrenched system. Therefore I believe that the United Kingdom should not adopt a codified constitution. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level United Kingdom section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level United Kingdom essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Explain the arguments for and against introducing a codified constitution

    3 star(s)

    For example, there have been a significant amount of changes between UK and EU relations without the holding of any referendums. The government only recently ignored the public demand for a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, and with the help of codification the constitution would gain special status.

  2. A Codified Constitution?

    As our constitution is uncodified it is seen as less fundamental and gives more power to unelected powers. The main argument of getting a written constitution is that an unwritten constitution means more manoeuvrability when it comes to law changing and instigating constitutional changes such as reform.

  1. What does it take to change the United Kingdoms constitution?

    UK does not have these problems, our constitution has produced a stable government, and a transparent democracy that provides social welfare and respects human rights. Written constitutions reflect the beliefs and political aspirations of those that wrote it, it may not be particularly reflective of the beliefs of the community, unless it is voted for in a democratic way.

  2. What, If Anything, Would Be Achieved By The United Kingdom Adopting A Codified Constitution?

    The United States declared independence from Britain in 1776 and France adopted new regimes in 1946 and 19582, which all led to their codified constitutions. Revolution, regime changes or the attainment of independence are the usually basis for a codified constitution, however, the UK has not and did not follow the revolutionary ideas that the above did.

  1. How Democratic is the New Russian Constitution?

    Has this separation of powers been effectively achieved? Considering the legislature branch in the Russian government and its powers, the removal of the CPSU paved the way for party politics. A bicameral federal assembly or parliament has been introduced through which nearly all legislation must pass by a simple majority if it is to become law.

  2. politics essay irish constitution

    the Irish nation, including both catholic and protestant, this was also the entitlement of all the people according to the law to be citizens of Ireland. Also the Irish nation cherishes its special connection with people of the Irish origin living abroad who share its cultural identity and birthright, meaning

  1. Free essay

    U.K Constitution

    Nationalist plans for independence are a recipe for weakness and isolation. The costly Labour and Liberal devolution proposals for Scotland and Wales do not intend to bring about separation, but run that risk. They could feed, but not resolve, grievances that arise in different parts of Britain.

  2. Should Britain adopt a written constitution?

    By virtue, Britain does have a constitution but it does it is simply not found in one particular document but several collection of rules which govern the governing institutions. As described by K Wheare, ?The British Constitution is the collection of legal rules which regulate the government?.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work