.png){kind=logo}
1. Explain and evaluate the arguments for and against
codifying the UK constitution. (25 marks)
Answer: A codified constitution is one that is written down
in a single document or a set of documents, and is usually
entrenched and protected by a higher court. The UK has an
uncodified constitution, which means that its constitutional
rules and principles are derived from various sources, such
as statutes, conventions, common law and EU law.
Some arguments for codifying the UK constitution are:
- It would provide clarity and accessibility for citizens, who
could easily find out their rights and responsibilities, and
the powers and limits of the government.
- It would enhance the protection of human rights and civil
liberties, by entrenching them in a supreme law that could
not be easily changed by a simple majority in Parliament.
- It would improve the balance of power between the
executive, the legislature and the judiciary, by creating a
clear separation of powers and checks and balances among
them.
- It would strengthen the rule of law and constitutionalism,
by making the government more accountable and subject to
judicial review.
Some arguments against codifying the UK constitution are:
- It would reduce the flexibility and adaptability of theÂÂ
.png)