Uk Unwritten Constitution Analysis

1989 Words8 Pages
People often refer to the UK having an 'unwritten constitution' but that's not firmly true. It may not be present in a sole copy, like in the USA or Germany, but most of it are written down, ample of it in the laws passed in Parliament, that is as statute law. Therefore, the UK constitution is often described as 'partly written and wholly uncodified'. (Uncodified means that the UK does not have a single, written constitution.)1 The British Constitution is based on principles found in statutes, customs, precedents, judicial decisions, historical documents, conventions and practices. These various sources make it difficult to locate specifics of the constitution, but on the other hand it permit for the constitution to be easily amended, giving…show more content…
This statement clearly shows the flexibility of the UK constitution.3 The United Kingdom is said to have a unitary constitution which is governed as a single unit where there is no written constitution emphasizing the powers of the UK parliament or the central government. But the constitution of the United Kingdom is better described as ‘multi-layered’ than unitary because of the devolution of powers to Scottish, Northern Ireland and welsh legislatures under the Acts of the UK parliament. UK is a constitutional monarchy. Walter Bagehot (1826-77) was one of the most important Victorian writers on the constitutional monarchy. His book ‘The English Constitution’, which was first published in 1867, provided an analysis of the role of monarchy which remains relevant today. Bagehot’s views of how monarchy works proved influential, and by the reign of King George V the principle of constitutional monarchy was firmly established in Britain.…show more content…
The UK constitution is flexible and it evolves. According to the needs of the people it should change automatically. Judiciary should give to accommodate the changes. Judges are being textual by not giving the spirit to the constitution. Some pursue to mention flexibility as a benefit which might be vulnerable by codification while the others highlight the vagueness of the UK constitution as a difficulty. The UK constitution has changed over time, through two main components of historical development. That is the varying relationship between the executive, the Parliament and the monarchy and the milestone improvements that have protracted rights and liberties and restricted constitutional
Open Document