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

Should the UK constitution remain uncodified?

Extracts from this document...


´╗┐Should the UK constitution remain uncodified? The UK operates under an uncodified constitution. A constitution is a set of rules that seek to establish the duties, powers and functions of the various institutions of the government, and define the relationship between the state and the individual. There are many types of constitutions, constitutions can be codified or uncodified, unitary or federal and seen as rigid or flexible. The UK would be an example of an uncodified constitution whereas in America, the constitution is codified. There are several arguments for and against having the constitution remain in an uncodified state, some of those are: rigidity, judicial tyranny, legalism, clear rules, limited government, neutral interpretation, education, protecting rights and political bias, yet we will only focus on some of them, but before that, we need to define what an uncodified constitution is. An uncodified constitution is a constitution that is made up of rules that are found in a variety of sources, in the absence of a single legal document or written constitution. ...read more.


A codified constitution would also allow for neutral interpretation. A codified constitution would be policed by senior judges. This makes sure that the provisions of the constitution are properly upheld by other public bodies. Judges act as neutral and impartial constitutional arbiters, as if they are above politics. A Codified constitution also has educational value. A codified constitution highlights the central values and overall goals of the political system. This strengthens citizenship as it creates a political identity which is very important in a multicultural society. individuals liberty be more protected by a codified constitution because it would define the relationship between the nation and citizens. Rights would be more clearly defined and they would be easier to enforce than the current uncodified constitution that UK possesses. The bill of rights is a good example of this. A bill of rights is a document that specifies the rights and freedoms of the individual, and so defines the legal extent of civil liberty. ...read more.


Under a codified constitution judges would be the people policing the constitution. A codified constitution would be interpreted in a way that is not subject to public accountability. Another point that is usually spoken against a codified constitution is that Parliamentary sovereignty would be abolished. The principle of parliamentary sovereignty states that parliament can make unmake and amend any laws. With a codified constitution this would not be possible due to the existence of the constitution and potentially a bill of rights. The reason behind this, is because a codified constitution would act as a form of higher law. This would stand against against representative democracy. In conclusion, by looking at some of the points for and against a codified constitution, I would say that neither of the choices are right and none of them are wrong, its about what points are the most important to each individual. Personally I would prefer a codified constitution, as I place a big value on the Bill of rights, and individual liberty would be more securely protected in a codified constitution, rights would be clearly more defined. ...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

    How effective is the British Constitution in protecting the rights of its citizens?

    3 star(s)

    However the ability of these bills to influence decisions is questionable since they are not to include the use of public money and only 20 bills are seen each year, of which only half a dozen have any chance of succeeding due to a lack of time.

  2. Should the UK constitution remain un-codified?

    near impossible as it is clearly entangled and entrenched in the heart of the American constitution, and so cannot theoretically be removed. In essence, this allows for a stronger government, who can effectively manage the country in a truly democratic way, under instruction from the masses.

  1. To what extent are judges neutral and independent?

    Also, the Belmarsh case said that the government could not detain terrorist suspects without trial. This shows that judges are defending citizens' rights rather than siding with the government - and shows both judicial independence and neutrality as they choose to side with citizens and the protection of individual rights rather than the government and its intervention.

  2. Should Britain adopt a written constitution?

    that any of their proposed amendments to the constitution must receive 2/3 majority supporting the proposal in both houses and ¾ of the individuals states must also agree to the amendment, [9]therefore these amendment would not be easy to put install.

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

    This is a major flaw to codified constitutions. In addition, another argument against adopting a codified constitution is judicial tyranny and democratic rule in the United Kingdom. The United Kingdom?s long period of unbroken democratic rule is seen as a strength of the un codified constitution. In the United Kingdom?s un codified constitution constitutional authority is in the hands of the house of commons.

  2. Should the UKs constitution remain uncodified?

    Because a ?written? constitution only contains a single legal document, they are more clearly defined as rules and are much more clear than the numerous documents involved in an ?unwritten? constitution. Since most of the U.K?s current constitution is unwritten, it is unknowable and results in the citizen having to

  1. The Benefits of an Uncodified UK Constitution

    An uncodified constitution allowed for the Human Rights Act of 1998 to be passed easily which protects our human rights as we grow in a society to allow for more rights to be added easily. Alternatively, the USA has an uncodified constitution and it allows the public to be more

  2. Should the Constitution of the UK remain uncodified?

    This means the UK would be defined and ruled by the old, outdated views of the past, instead of where it is now. Another reason the UK should keep its constitution uncodified is that if it were codified, the public would be exposed to judicial tyranny.

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