An “Unwritten Constitution”

In every country, the constitution is the basis of law. USA, Canada, France, New Zealand and Israel all have unwritten constitutions. The written constitution contains all of the laws and principles that make up the constitution. Unwritten constitutions tend to be more uncodified and are highly reminiscent of the UK constitution. ‘[1]

It is easy to understand why the English Constitution has this unwritten, unusual nature. England’s history is to blame. Written constitutions are not an accident. Written constitutions are often the result of political events …’. The British constitution is more about political than legal values. Citizens and the United Kingdom Parliament respects the rule-of-law and the constitutionalism, as is evident by the words of Geoffrey Marshall. This is an accepted but vague constitutional rule that rests on the principles constitutionalism, and the rule.

The UK constitution, as it is unwritten, can be easily adapted to the changing times. The changing times require the updating of laws to reflect current news, perceptions and beliefs. The parliament only needs to acknowledge that changes are needed and continue making amendments. The UK constitution’s traditional laws are not ineffective, but they can be changed to reflect changing conditions. In the UK, for example, a [3]Constitutional Reform Act from 2005 resulted in a greater division of powers.

Human rights has seen some of the biggest modernizations. With the [5]Humans Rights Act of 1995 and the [6]Freedom of Information Act of 2001, this is a feature that has been firmly established. The UK constitution has distinct advantages in that it promotes transparency, accountability and democracy. Parliament, made up of both House of Commons & House of Lords, deals with all issues pertaining to constitution. Parliament is responsible for the government, which can be dissolved. The unwritten constitution is responsible for the conventions that have been used to guide constitutional behavior. They led to parliament acts mandating resignation of a government after it loses a vote on ‘no-confidence’. In the majority of written constitutions, judges are given a lot of power. They’re not elected so they can be easily influenced by subjective issues. So, parliament can be used to monitor and control the quality of government and regulations.

The unwritten constitution has its advantages, but it also has limitations. Unwritten constitutions can be prone to being politicized. It is a fact of life that the supremacy of parliament is the law. Judicial courts can only serve to regulate Parliament. A lack of codified constitution is the reason for the incapacity of judicial tribunals. A flexible constitution poses additional risks. Due to the lack of a specific legal status, any law can be altered arbitrarily by either parliament or government. It is also easy to erode individual rights due to the absence of a strict legal system.

The unwritten constitution is also criticized for its lack of clarity. It is in contrast to a written Constitution, which is explicit and detailed. It is easier to understand for the average citizen and promotes transparency of judicial decisions. It is at this point that we will have to debate whether a codified version of the Constitution would be best for the United Kingdom. It is argued that a written constitution will allow all to be aware of the rules, institutions and directives that govern and guide ministers civil servants and parliamentary members in their duties. [8] The vast amount of common law and Acts of the Parliament, as well as European treaty obligations that surrounds them, are difficult for the majority of people to comprehend. This mass of unwritten but important conventions must be replaced by an easily accessible document of basic law which dictates how the United Kingdom’s government operates. The government has too much power to change the constitution and political system to suit its own interests. A written constitution is needed to prevent this.

The current ‘unwritten Constitution’ is anachronistic, full of references to our ancient history. It is unsuited to 21st-century social and political democratic values and the future aspirations and hopes of its citizens. It does not give priority to the sovereignty and participation of the people in the political process. Written constitutions would outline the boundaries and relationship of the British state with Europe and other countries. Today, it would be a source for national pride and an expression of the nation’s identity. Arguments against a written Constitution include that it’s un-British, unwanted and unnecessary. The Westminster system has been successful in bringing stability to the UK and has not reduced the UK government to one document. Most other countries’ written constitutions are the products of independence or revolution.

It is British to have an unwritten constitution. It reminds us of our rich history and gives us a sense of pride. Contrary the claims that it has become outdated, its nature is one of evolution and flexibility, allowing for more practical solutions to be found as problems arise and individual changes to be made than under an established constitution. Some are worried about an alleged “elective dictature” and insufficient checks and balanced in the political process. In reality, ministers face a variety of pressures to make controversial reforms. A written constitution will lead to more litigation and a politicised judiciary. Judges would be forced to judge the constitutionality government legislation.

It is not worth considering this issue because there are too many practical issues involved in the preparation and implementation of a written Constitution. Even those who are in favor of the idea do not consider it a priority. It would be a distraction, and could destabilise the country.

In light of all the facts I have read and heard, my view is that this current open constitution will protect the UK in every way and strengthen constitutional values.

Bibliography

Lisa Webley&Harriet Samuels Public Law. 3rd Edition. Oxford University Press

Martin Lougnlin 2013, The British Constitution: a Very Short introduction, Kindle Edition

Geoffrey Marshall (2001), Constitutional Theory.

The Constitutional Reform Act of 2005 amended the British constitution by introducing reforms to the judicial system.

Parliament Act 2011

Humans Rights Act 1998

The Freedom of Information Act of 2000 provides the public with the right to access information held by public authorities and to promote openness and accountability.