More handpicked essays just for you.
British political system short note
The Constitution of Britain
Essay on the important conventions of british constitution
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: British political system short note
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 institutions of the state.
Fundamentally it 'regulates the relationships between the state and
the citizen.' Bill Coxhall, 1998)
Britain can be distinguished between those countries which incorporate
their major constitutional rules into a single document. Britain is
one of few countries which do not have a codified constitution....
After the Revolution, the country was left in an economic crisis and struggling for a cohesive path moving forward. The remaining financial obligations left some Founding Fathers searching for ways to create a stronger more centralized government to address concerns on a national level. The thought was that with a more centralized, concentrated governing body, the more efficient tensions and fiscal responsibilities could be addressed. With a central government manning these responsibilities, instead of the individual colonies, they would obtain consistent governing policies. However, as with many things in life, it was a difficult path with a lot of conflicting ideas and opponents. Much of the population was divided choosing either the
There could be arguments supporting it and arguments going against it. As a result, the citizens of the UK saw a codified constitution as a necessity at that moment. However, there are many advantages of an uncodified constitution. The biggest advantage is the idea of flexibility. As societies are changing, and societal norms take new forms, it is very important for the constitution of countries to adapt to that quickly, as a country’s constitution should be in the best interest for its citizens.
For many years, the question of how adaptable and flexible the constitution is in Australia has been widely debated. As of now the atmosphere of verbal confrontation on protected change, has restored enthusiasm toward the issue in exploring whether the constitution is versatile and adaptable in meeting the needs of the nation following 100 years in being embraced.
The purpose of a revolution is to bring forth change in government and political standing. There has been revolutions happening throughout the course of history. The opposite of a revolution is a counter-revolution. A counter-revolution is revolution against a government recently established by a previous revolution. One particular culprit to the counter revolution is the United States' Constitution. This document is debated to be counter-revolutionary while still keeping the fundamental principles of the American Revolution alive. There is definitely proof for both arguments. Therefore, the U.S. Constitution was both a counter-revolutionary document and an extension to the American Revolution.
A constitution is the system of fundamental principles according to which a nation is governed. Our founding fathers created the US Constitution to set specific standards for our country. We must ask ourselves why our founding fathers created the Constitution in the first place. America revolted against the British due to their monarchy form of government. After the American Revolution, each of the original 13 colonies operated under its own rules of government. Most states were against any form of centralized rule from the government. They feared that what happened in England would happen again. They decided to write the Articles of Confederation, which was ratified in 1781. It was not effective and it led to many problems. The central government could not regulate commerce between states, deal with foreign governments or settle disputes. The country was falling apart at its seams. The central government could not provide assistance to the state because there wasn’t a central army. When they realized that the Articles of Confederation was not up to par, they held a convention, known as the Constitutional Convention of 1787. As a result of t...
Much like a young child growing up, they are prone to make mistakes. The same can be said about the United States after gaining independence from Great Britain. In 1778 the law of the land was the Articles of Confederation, where a majority of governmental power went to the 13 individual states in order to avoid a large, overbearing government like the one we recently fought against. Although it was great in concept, the Article of Confederation was not what the United States needed. With each state governing on their own the states were not united. But with the adoption of the U.S Constitution, that all changed.
Constitution is a necessary feature as it defines how power is disseminated within the government and establishes the rights of the citizens and the laws and rules for the country. In order to be successful, a country’s should reflect and satisfy every citizen’s needs and interests.
In this excerpt from Democracy in America Alexis Tocqueville expresses his sentiments about the United States democratic government. Tocqueville believes the government's nature exists in the absolute supremacy of the majority, meaning that those citizens of the United States who are of legal age control legislation passed by the government. However, the power of the majority can exceed its limits. Tocqueville believed that the United States was a land of equality, liberty, and political wisdom. He considered it be a land where the government only served as the voice of the its citizens. He compares the government of the US to that of European systems. To him, European governments were still constricted by aristocratic privilege, the people had no hand in the formation of their government, let alone, there every day lives. He held up the American system as a successful model of what aristocratic European systems would inevitably become, systems of democracy and social equality. Although he held the American democratic system in high regards, he did have his concerns about the systems shortcomings. Tocqueville feared that the virtues he honored, such as creativity, freedom, civic participation, and taste, would be endangered by "the tyranny of the majority." In the United States the majority rules, but whose their to rule the majority. Tocqueville believed that the majority, with its unlimited power, would unavoidably turn into a tyranny. He felt that the moral beliefs of the majority would interfere with the quality of the elected legislators. The idea was that in a great number of men there was more intelligence, than in one individual, thus lacking quality in legislation. Another disadvantage of the majority was that the interests of the majority always were preferred to that of the minority. Therefore, giving the minority no chance to voice concerns.
Upon the opening words of the Constitution, "We the People do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America," one must ask, who are these people? While the American Constitution provided its citizens with individual rights, many members were excluded. Elite framers manipulated the idea of a constitution in order to protect their economic interests and the interests of their fellow white land and slave owning men' by restricting the voices of women, slaves, indentured servants and others. Therefore, the Constitution cannot truly be considered a "democratic document." However, because it is a live document, malleable and controllably changeable according to the interest of congress, it has enabled us to make reforms overtime. Such reforms that have greatly impacted America, making us the free, independent nation that we are today.
Parliamentary sovereignty, a core principle of the UK's constitution, essentially states that the Parliament is the ultimate legal authority, which possesses the power to create, modify or end any law. The judiciary cannot question its legislative competence, and a Parliament is not bound by former legislative provisions of earlier Parliaments. The ‘rule of law’ on the other hand, is a constitutional doctrine which primarily governs the operation of the legal system and the manner in which the powers of the state are exercised. However, since the Parliament is capable of making any law whatsoever, the concept of the rule of law poses a contradiction to the principle of parliamentary supremacy, entailing that Parliament is not bound by the Rule of Law, and it can exercise power arbitrarily.
The document I chose to write about is the United States Constitution. When the thirteen British colonies in North America declared their independence in 1776, they laid down that “governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” The “colonies” had to establish a government, which would be the framework for the United States. The purpose of a written constitution is to define and therefore more specifically limit government powers. After the Articles of Confederation failed to work in the 13 colonies, the U.S. Constitution was created in 1787.
The Constitution is one of the most significant file and certificate in the United States, the constitution of United States of America was created by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison in the state of Philadelphia and in the year of 1787. The Constitution changed the life of people; furthermore, when the constitution was created, it provided different types of freedom for different people. The constitution of United States includes about twenty seven amendments, which the ten first amendments are most important, because they relate to basic freedom and equality of people. According to http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/preamble; The preamble of constitution of United States says that “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America” The constitution task is to try to defend and protect the people of United States; furthermore, it concludes different ages of people not a particular type of people. Actually, people of United States are free people intrusive Federal government doesn’t interfere in their life. The persons who wrote the constitution, tried to make a nation that a particular person doesn’t control all the affairs of the country; in addition, the European countries were absolutely monarchy which cause the people not decide and control everything. The United States doesn’t have queens or kings and no one is above the law. The United Stat...
The Constitution and the Declaration of Independence are very detailed and intricate documents. They remain effective documents for guiding our country even today. Many people believe that there should be regular reviews of the documents with regular updates. Technology, accepted lifestyles and world events have changed significantly and continue to change at a rapid pace. The constitution should be written to include all states, replacing individual state constitutions. Although the Constitution and Declaration of Independence remain applicable today, they require regular review and update.
The word ‘constitution’ is commonly used to describe a written legal document that embodies a set of rules and principles that ‘establish and regulate or govern the government’ of a country. The United Kingdom, however, does not have such a document.
The United Kingdom is often said to have no constitution, known as an unconfined, unitary constitution. There is no written constitution like the US it consists of common law statues and constitutional conventions. Whereas in the UK the local government don’t have a lot of control they just merely follow the Westminster rules. The new assembled Welsh Assembly, Scottish Parliament and Greater London Assembly have been very little power by the Westminister compared to American states. However “The unitary state