The Advantages Of The Uk Constitution Outweigh The Negatives.
The benefits of the United Kingdom Constitution outweigh the drawbacks.
It is assumed by individuals that in order to maintain law and order, a specific set of laws must be observed and communicated to the general public; in other words, they must adhere to a specific constitution. However, the uncodified constitution of the United Kingdom rejects such an assumption, and it has been observed that this has resulted in good outcomes throughout the years. When a constitution is not codified, principles do not have a single source of authority, despite the fact that they are practiced in a variety of settings, including statute law, acts of parliament, and decisions of higher courts. In this article, the distinction between the advantages and disadvantages of the United Kingdom Constitution will be made, with the advantages outweighing the problems by examining the bad features and then overturning them with the good elements.

Critics may contend that, due to the absence of a written constitution in the United Kingdom, the rights of minorities and the general public are not adequately protected by the Parliament. A document may not explicitly state that individuals have the right to freedom of speech or expression, or that they have any other rights that must be accorded to them under certain circumstances. Individuals have recently raised concerns about the United Kingdom’s constitution and whether or not they should have their own Bill of Rights, as reported in the media. They fear that their rights are jeopardized in the absence of a written constitution. Another difficulty that arises as a result of the absence of a codified constitution is the topic of clarity and interpretation. For example, the variables that are still up in the air include conventions on ministerial responsibility and whether or not a government has acted in violation of the Constitution.
The rule of law, say critics, is not effectively protected because power is concentrated in the core of the government. When a government is highly powerful, it has the ability to impose legislation that could jeopardize civil rights while simultaneously weakening other organizations. In contrast to the United States Constitution, the United Kingdom Constitution does not include a system of checks and balances, and the authorities are not necessarily separated; as a result, the United Kingdom will not be able to establish a government that is capable of functioning correctly. Despite the fact that there is a system of referenda in place, they do not provide legal certainty. Consider the referendum, which is a method of persuading citizens that they are the ones who have a say in the legislative process. The administration, on the other hand, suggests a referendum only when there is legal assurance that the outcome will be guaranteed if the request is made.

A variety of concepts and factors contribute to the perception of the traditional constitution as outmoded and undemocratic. Individuals, for example, have expressed concern that the structure of the House of Lords is incompatible with the values of liberal democratic governments. They are viewed as undemocratic because they are appointed and obtain their positions as a result of the fact that they come from a line of descent. Therefore, they are seen as an inaccurate reflection of the general people and as unsuited for participation in a democratic society.

Supporters of the uncodified constitution in the United Kingdom take a variety of approaches to the large and helpful part of the constitution that pertains to managing the United Kingdom. For example, in order to be followed or acknowledged, it is not necessary for the protection of individuals to be written down in a single document. Why is it necessary to change or modify the United Kingdom constitution now, when it has served the country so well in the past? It supports the philosophy of ‘if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.’ Furthermore, the absence of a codified constitution does not imply that the United Kingdom does not have legal laws that protect its citizens. As a matter of fact, there are some legislation that are written, such as the European Convention on Human Rights and the Human Rights Act of 1998. Those measures, in addition to limiting governmental power, directly protect citizens and their rights, as well as provide them their freedom to pursue their own interests. According to the Human Rights Act, in the case of Abu Qatada, the government wanted to deport him back to his home country of Jordan in 2012, but the Human Rights Act prohibited them from going through with the process. The European Court of Human Rights stated that sending him back was unconstitutional because of the possibility of tortuous activities.

It is possible that the United Kingdom constitution will not be written in a single document. Individual pieces of legislation, such as the statute law, common law, international agreements, authoritative works, and the European Union Law, make the laws crystal plain.

Parliament creates statute legislation with the permission of both the House of Commons and the House of Lords, and it must also be authorized by the Royal Family before it can be ratified by the people. Because of its legislative sovereignty, it is the most important source of the principles and rules that form the foundation of the British Constitution. For example, the Great Reform Act (1832), which raised the voting age to eighteen, and the Parliament Act (1911), which established the House of Commons as the dominant chamber, are both covered by statute law. There have also been recent constitutional amendments, including the creation of a Scottish Parliament (Scotland Act, 1998) and the establishment of fixed-term elections for the House of Commons (Fixed-term Parliaments Act, 2011).
The Common Law, on the other hand, is concerned with legal concepts that have been established and enforced by the UK courts. When there is no express statutory law, the common law, as administered by the courts, encompasses the clarification and interpretation of statutes and other regulations. For example, universal rules are founded on court rulings in specific situations that have been decided over time. It has been decided to broaden the rights of homeowners, giving them the ability to attack intruders who invade their land. It is a case that resulted in a new regulation as a result of a previous case that was beneficial to future legislators.

Conventions shall be defined as rules or norms that are both required and unambiguous in their application. Because of conventions, it not only makes the United Kingdom’s constitution more flexible, but it also forces the monarch to agree to Acts of Parliament and gives him or her no choice but to do so. Because detractors say that the government has too much power because it does not have a codified constitution, they fail to see that even their legislative bodies have policies that they must adhere to, which is known as the Cabinet Manual. Originally published in 2011, this eleven-chapter manual covers topics such as the function of the monarch, elections, and the creation of governments, as well as collective cabinet decision-making. It assists the government by providing clear interpretations of conventions and guiding them in the right direction.

Legal and political texts that have been included into the United Kingdom’s Constitution are among the works considered authoritative. This form of labor contributes to the direction of the functions of institutions and the functioning of the political system as a whole. They are useful in interpreting the ideals that support the constitution and are more focused on constitutional practice than on the constitution itself. An introduction to the study of the Law of the Constitution, written by V. Dicey in 1884, distinguished between the law and the 19th century constitution, which was centered on parliamentary sovereignty and the rule of law. It concentrated on the fact that both the parliament and the people were sovereign in their own right; legal sovereignty and political unity were stressed. Additional to this, EU law comprises of treaties and legislation, which are incorporated into the UK Constitution as a whole.
Furthermore, the constitution of the United Kingdom allows for rules and regulations to remain flexible; they are not entrenched. For example, in contrast to the United States, it takes a long time to amend a country’s constitution to ensure that it corresponds to the living standards of the modernized world. When the first United States Constitution was ratified in 1788, it had provisions that are no longer applicable in the present world, such as slavery, which is no longer a contentious issue. On the contrary, having a flexible constitution allows for swift adjustments and reforms to be implemented if and when they are necessary. Additionally, referenda play an important role in the justification of the constitution because, when the public’s opinions are sought and taken into consideration, it directs policymakers down the most democratic path, which not only grants citizens their rights, but also empowers them to exert control over their own government.

Taking into consideration the diversity of the British population, it is certain that the UK constitution is a perfect fit for all individuals who differ in age, gender, ethnicity, and heritage, as well as in customs and traditions, as well as in religious affiliation. It is unnecessary to refer to every individual and their particular background because of the absence of a defined constitution because so many people have varying religious and cultural beliefs and backgrounds. So it is difficult to assign a classification to every individual. As a result, the uncodified constitution supports the mixture of traditions and democratic values as a whole, rather than supporting them individually.

By weighing the advantages of the United Kingdom Constitution, it is possible to conclude that an uncodified constitution is not only advantageous to the public, but it also ensures the development of a strong collaborative government. It is also intended to serve the general people and their requirements. Referring back to the sentence above, it summarizes the fact that individuals do not necessarily require a single document that outlines their requirements, rights protection, and authorities granted to them. Their emotions, thoughts, and everyday habits, on the other hand, are well aware of these influences.