Should the Uk Remain an Uncodified Constitution?

1160 Words5 Pages
Should the UK remain as an uncodified constitution? A constitution is a set of rules that: seek to establish the duties, powers and functions of the various institutions of government; regulate the relationship between and among the institutions; and define the relationship between the state and the individual. There are many different types of constitution. Constitutions can be codified or uncodified, unitary or federal and seen as rigid or flexible. The most common way of comparing classifying constitutions is codified or uncodified. The UK is an example of an uncodified constitution whereas the U.S.A is an example of a codified constitution. This essay will show that the UK should not adopt a codified constitution. Codified and Uncodified constitutions. A codified constitution is a constitution in which key constitutional provisions are collected within a single document, it is commonly known as a written constitution. Codified constitutions have three key features. In a codified constitution the document itself is authoritative in the sense that it constitutes higher law. The provisions of a constitution are also said to be entrenched. This means that they are difficult to amend or abolish. As a codified constitution sets out the duties, powers and functions of government institutions of higher law it is judiciable. The other type of constitution is an uncodified constitution. 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. Unlike codified constitutions, the constitution is not authoritative. Constitutional laws enjoy the same status as ordinary laws. Uncodified constitutions are also not entrenched. The constitution can be changed through the normal processes for enacting statute law. On the one hand there are many arguments
Open Document