Should the British Constitution Remain Uncodified or Codified

Should the British constitution remain uncodified or codified

A constitution merely describes the foundation principles or “established precedents” in which a state or institution is governed. The United Kingdom (as well as one other sovereign institution) rely on an“unique” constitution that is described as un-codified, with most states running a codified constitution. The difference between a codified constitution and an uncodified constitution can be represented through physical properties: a codified constitution is one that is a “written set of laws” ultimately and tends to be a result of a form of dramatic political change such as a revolution. Seemingly, an uncodified constitution is one that is unwritten in some or all elements and is a result of evolution of politics, constricting differences to 'written' and 'unwritten' would be naive, both types of constitution have political benefits as well as weaknesses to an institution which often prompts the debate to which an institution as of the one in the UK should adopt. (This essay will review negative and positive aspects that will be used in a final judgment whilst from a neutral perspective/stance)

One argument that suggests Britian's constitution should be codified is the lack of sovereign states that use a codified constitution these factors can be categorized into “for factors”; the introduction to a codified constitution would clarify the nature of the political system to citizens; this point is reinforced by modern events in such as devolution causing changes in Europe, these events seemed complex to British and Scottish citizens as the two countries relations alter, a constitution would entitle citizens to information regarding rules between two institutions in a more assessable and visual friendly medium, and therefore a citizen could act appropriately to vote for the way they would like their country to be run (for example) , having said this qualitative statements like this are difficult to draw judgments from as it dosent show a true reflection on an institutions population density.

The United Kingdoms involvement in the EU is sometimes pounded upon, with Britain failing to adopt European features such as the euro currency and the prime minster promising a referendum regarding Britians involvement in the EU, it is easy to understand that relations seem some-what 'blurred', this supports ideology that is for the Constitution. The constitution would act of means of written consent that would illustrate involvement with the EU and how it is affected, this is seen as a benefit by some as the relationship with the EU is clearer to citizens.

An additional argument supporting the codification of the constitution is limited government. A codified constitution would see the end of parliament sovereignty and subsequently end elective dictatorship (this simply describes the constitutional imbalances that allows dictatorship through elective means) In the UK it is reflected by a government being able to do what it wants as long it maintains control of the House of Commons. This would also mean the government wouldn’t b able interfere with the constitution due to the existence of a higher law acting as a barrier to the constitution

A codified constitution can be described as educational beneficial additional, a constitution demonstrates central goals of a government. Take for instant the American constitution, it is seen as a patriotic symbol to may people in further instance the the right to freedom of speech has been made famous from the constitution. This strengthens citizenship as it creates political make-up that is beneficial to a multicultural society.

On the other hand there are many arguments against the idea of a codified constitution; for instance the belief that the constitution is ridged when codified: it easier done to introduce an act through parliament rather then edit or add amendment to the constitution, if a constitution is uncodified it is more flexible as it is not intrenched hence meaning a constitution can not be made relevant or up to date with ease. This was shown in President Obama’s campaign against the right of arms. Flexibility is a useful utility to have in a modern dynamic society which is was a uncodified constitution provides