Although politicians could argue that a codified constitution could mean that the entrenchment could in effectively abolish flexibility, as the entrenchment would legally protect the constitution from modification; by making the amendment procedure significantly harder than in an uncodified constitution as it involves approval of the national legislature. The procedure itself would take a considerable amount of time to be passed in comparison to an amendment of an un-codified constitution.
Another positive attribute from having an un-codified constitution, is parliament sovereignty. This enables parliament to make, undo or amend any laws it wishes. If a codified constitution was in place it would effectively be abolished, as it would act as a higher form of law. Therefore, undermining key principles of the UK’s representative democracy, which weakens the relationship between people and the representative government and parliament.
Another advantage of an un-codified constitution is the prevention of an overpowered judiciary. An overpowered judiciary could be seen as an unfavourable decision as the judges are unelected and unrepresentative which in itself is undemocratic. This would lead to the formation of a constitutional court in which judges will adopt a role and obtain sovereignty over parliament; whom has been elected. Therefore, the British political system would lean to a dictatorship state more than democracy. This would not only weaken the relationship between the people and the parliament as representation would be dramatically affected but participation of electing political parties to run the government as the constitution court; whom are not elective representatives, could over ride our representatives.
On the other hand Britain’s constitution shows a distinctive lack of clarity due to it being un-codified; these unclear areas normally arise in convention or customs. This includes the precise role of a monarch, powers of the cabinet, powers of the prime minister, when should a minister resign or the status of the civil service. All of which would be clearly stated if Britain did obtain a codified constitution. This would therefore allow clarity and less confusion of what the constitution states. However, the fact that is hard to understand due to the complications it leaves the parliament slightly weakened as the people can’t hold the parliament accountable if they are not fully aware of what parliament should be complying with.
Britain’s un-codified constitution doesn’t protect human rights as the Human right Act 1998 is not entrenched and can be overruled at any time by an act of parliament as the parliament has the power to undo any act they wish. This therefore it only allows a certain protection of our right, and is not sustainable. However, a codified constitution on the other hand could address this issue and sustain protection of rights. Although entrenchment of human rights within a codified constitution would not make a practical difference to the current situation, however, it would ensure that human rights are safe guarded by a legal document that would be difficult to amend-giving people more security.
In conclusion the problems in which an un-codified constitution faces could be overcome via a codified constitution. It could also be argued that it would be in the interests of the people to adopt a codified constitution as it would protect their rights. However, it would make a detrimental effect to Britain’s democracy as there would be unelected representation. Although the actual formation of an uncodified constitution would be extremely difficult as there would be dispute on what should be written as each political party would have their own perspective and it would have to be agreed. It would also stop parliament from changing legislation and laws to a certain extent therefore what is written would need to apply for future generations too. Even though there are reasonable arguments for and against Britain’s un-codified constitution, it begs the question why attempt to fix something that is not broken; as the un-codified constitution simply works for Britain.
by
mariaa123 (student)
