The Uk judiciary has different methods that provide the protection of civil liberties within britain. However, there are also different drawbacks that make these protections difficult in the face of parliamentay pressure. The European convention on Human Rights Act 1998 has effectivley provided a stable document that reassures and states the rights of all citizens over Britain. Since this act has been passed, judges have been able to rule and make more effective decisions. This is because this act has persuaded judges to rule more confidentally rather than having to follow instructions of the common law e.g precedents.
This would encourage public involvement in politics and act as an improvement to our democratic society. If people know their rights and freedoms and understand how the government works it would dissolve the problem of political ignorance and apathy. This argument shows that a codified constitution is of greater benefit than an uncodified constitution because it will lessen political apathy, however, one could argue, how much better of an understanding would the public have of politics if the constitution was codified than if it was uncodified? Our basic rights and freedoms are common knowledge, and our human rights are codified as they are part of the EU which has a written constitution. Manifesto’s for political parties, such as Labour, are also written and campaign projects clearly set out
There are several arguments arguing against the above statement and they will be explored later on in this essay. The flexibility of the constitution can be argued in two ways. It can be seen as a positive as it allows new laws to be passed much easier and it doesn’t limit the government to what they can and can’t do, this is because its quite flexible due to its vagueness. The constitution allows it to be amended to keep up with society’s changes. For example, in the USA the right to own a firearm is entrenched in the Second Amendment and therefore is has been so much harder for those attempting to put restrictions on the ownership of guns.
| To create records on softwares | The use of passwords limit access and maintain confidentiality. Records can be easily updated. Information can be shared quickly and easily.Less bulky than paper records to store. | Lack of computer skills may restrict communication via computer. Records could be accidentally deleted.
The British Constitution Briefly explain the term flexible as used in the extract Flexible means that the constitution can be amended easily and quickly as unlike a rigid constitution such as the one in the US, there is no lengthy procedure for change that has to be followed. A flexible constitution it can be altered via the law-making process, by a simple majority in the legislature as no laws are regarded as fundamental. “There is no convincing case for a written/codified constitution in Britain” Discuss To a certain extent there is no convincing case for a codified constitution in Britain. The main reason against a codified constitution in Britain is because a codified constitution would totally undermine the sovereignty of Parliament, the idea that Parliament can legislate as it chooses and that there can be no superior authority to Parliament. Moreover, no such document could be entrenched whilst Parliament retains the power to alter it at will.
Since Standard English is usually time consuming to construct and difficult to use, people find it easier to use non-standard English, where the governing rules and grammar are more flexible making it efficient and easy to use. Non-standard English also complements and makes using technology less difficult and more efficient e.g. using numbers in a text “w8 4 me”. Using non-standard English also helps an individual represent and express one self-e.g. Lebanese people using words such as “cuz” for “cousin “ or Afghan origin people using the word “bachem” for brother in English.
has no influence over either the sword or the purse; no direction either of the strength or of the wealth of society . . . It may truly be said to have neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment; and must ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm even for the efficacy of its judgments .” After reading what Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist no. 78, I agree with what he wrote but I can’t fully agree.
If a Bill of Rights were to be created, there would be an agreement of all terms and their meanings whilst in the drafting stages. This would allow outdated laws to be worded in a more modern way which would inevitably lead to fewer loopholes or misinterpretations that are evident in today’s law. There would be a clear statement of what can be expected from the government in power at any time, giving citizens protection from abuse of power. At the moment in the UK, a government could win an election and then create, amend or abolish any legislation it desired quite easily in comparison to the system in the USA. This is due to their system
On the other hand, the House of Lords is not elected but is made up of a wide variety of people with different background and specialised expertise therefore allowing decisions that are made to be less biased and more thorough. Acts of Parliament, otherwise known as primary legislation, will progress through the House of Lords and the House of Commons regardless of which house a Bill was first raised and the five stages that it has to go through in each house include intense scrutiny. This is an advantage as the public knows that there is a great amount of detail and consideration going in to these stages to make a brand new law. The scrutiny in making these laws is intense and every stage is thoroughly gone through. A key advantage of the legislative process is that it is strongly controlled by the Government, and the bigger the Government’s majority the greater that control.
This potential error is eliminated through the automated mathematical system which never makes a mistake, making the accuracy very advantageous. This advantage in turn saves the company money as mistakes create a chain reaction, making it very difficult to fix. The limitation of human errors is one of the best advantages that come with computerised accounting systems. A second benefit of using a computerised accounting system would be that is saves the company a considerable amount of money. Lower cost can be brought about through computerised accounting systems as it is far more efficient.