Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Features of the uk constitution
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Features of the uk constitution
The Strengths of the U.K. Constitution Britain’s need for a codified constitution, as a unitary state, is different. The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is also a political union, but based on the sovereignty of the national Parliament. The UK now has a Scottish Parliament and Northern Ireland Assembly able to pass their own domestic legislation and a National Assembly for Wales which can make secondary legislation. But all these were created by and are subordinate to the Westminster Parliament, as are all 468 county, borough, district and unitary councils. Parliamentary sovereignty also entails the right to make or unmake any law whatever. This means that (a) historically the courts have had no power to veto legislation, and (b) no Parliament is bound in perpetuity by existing laws, including our treaties with the EU. Under the Human Rights Act, there are some powers for the courts to strike down some legislation that is incompatible with these rights, however, only Parliament itself can change p...
The purpose of a constitution was to remove the royal authority 's institution and still govern the people with a popular sovereignty. Each colony developed their own constitution in different ways based on the economic, political, freedom, and social demands of the people as well as the states ' experiences. The Virginia constitution and the Massachusetts constitution were the two of the many states that created a constitution. Both of the constitutions have their similarity and difference, but they are more in common. In fact, It is said to be that the Massachusetts constitution was often overshadowed by the Virginia constitution. Nonetheless, the similarity between both constitutions is the structure of a commonwealth. That being the case, each state 's government are related to the federal government.
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
James Madison once said,” All men having power ought to be distrusted.” Through these words, Madison made the statement that not all government officials use their authority for good; some abuse that power and use it to gain more for themselves rather than vesting it within the people. This issue may lead to tyranny. Tyranny is when all powers belong to only one person or group. In May of 1787, the Constitutional Convention was held in Philadelphia to draft a better constitution. One of the topics that concerned many was how the constitution would guard against tyranny. Madison and the other delegates wanted a Constitution that would be strong enough to unite the states and the people together without letting there be one person or group gain too much power. They achieved this in several ways. Today, the U.S. Constitution guards against tyranny by including a separation of powers, federalism, and the fair representation of states.
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 worries of yesterday Eventually, we will have a tyranny without a strong, trustworthy constitution. We do not want to recreate exactly what the colonists were trying to avoid and escape from, which was tyranny. Tyranny refers to when a person has a lot of power, and has a lot on their hands, having complete control, and total control. In 1787 a group of delegates from 12 of the 13 states goes together to try to better the country.
At the present time, there is nothing wrong with the constitution, and if there was anything wrong with it, it could be changed by referendum, once again proving that becoming a republic is pointless. Currently, we are not tied down at all by the monarchy, and although the Queen does have the power to intervene in the running of our country, she doesn't out of tradition, and therefore, probably never will, bound by the tradition. If we become a republic, we would lose valuable ties with England and perhaps part of our heritage that goes with it. England can support us through many unfortunate events that we may face and England, being on the other side of the world may not, putting them in a position to offer us financial, military or other support.
The United States' Constitution is one the most heralded documents in our nation's history. It is also the most copied Constitution in the world. Many nations have taken the ideals and values from our Constitution and instilled them in their own. It is amazing to think that after 200 years, it still holds relevance to our nation's politics and procedures. However, regardless of how important this document is to our government, the operation remains time consuming and ineffective. The U.S. Constitution established an inefficient system that encourages careful deliberation between government factions representing different and sometimes competing interests.
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.
overrule UK laws but here we see that it does. So we can say that
Since America became independent, it is the constitution that has been governing it. Any activity happening in the entire United States always adheres to the constitution. Without the Constitution, United States would be engaging in a series of chaos and demonstrations because everybody will be formulating what they feel should be used as a rule without considering other people’s rights. To prevent this scenario from happening, the constitution grants all Americans the opportunity to be treated fairly especially in work places and public points, (Crosskey 122). It also allows everybody to take part in amendment and enactment of the rules needed to protect them and allows everyone to know all their rules so that nobody violates or discriminates
One of the key problems with the lack of a specifically written constitution is that it creates confusion among those that are not certain of the meaning of the constitutional rules. In most cases, the citizens of the United States claim that the first three words of their constitution is ultimately literal It is often put on a pedestal, and because of how definitive the constitution is, every citizen knows their rights and when it is breached, there are clear instructions of what the implications are. The same cannot be said for the UK’s constitution however, as people are often oblivious of the rights they have. In addition, the UK constitution leads to contradictions from their many sources; the UK no longer wished European Union law to be considered a rule of law and therefore began preparations to leave the EU. This risk would be eliminated with a codified
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
through fear of god and so now we can abolish them as this fear is no