The Strengths and Weaknesses of Traditional Constitution of Britain - Essay Example

?Topic:  Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of Britain’s ‘traditional constitution’ XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX Course: XXXXXXXXXX Date: XXXXXXXXXXX Introduction All successful organizations have a set of rules that govern the way of conduct and how the firm is to be run. The basis of formulation of such rules, the mode of change and the form that they take is usually determined at the beginning. This is the same case for state and nations, which have the same setting. In order to administer and conduct operations in a state, the same rules apply. Any state whether large or small should have important and elemental values which enable efficient and effective governance. It is these rules that show a picture of the country’s values and nature. They bring out the character of the state as dictated by the understanding of the citizens of the laws based on whether they are laws or a formulation of how things should be done. As much as the state may formulate these laws independently and uniquely, some common characteristics can be identified in many states’ laws or in the general administration. For many nations and states, there are laws and rules that govern the conduct of people or provide guidance on the way of life. In Britain though, this is not the case. Unlike most states in the world, the country lacks the formal and legal documents that bring forth the procedures or arrangements by which the country is to be governed. It lacks the set of main values, norms and upholding by which the state is to be administered. Types of constitutions A constitution is a set of rules that govern the administration in a state and the government on the mode of administration1.There are various methods that are used to classify types of constitutions. A constitution can be codified or not codified, federal or unitary and flexible or rigid. A codified constitution is usually based in one document and is more likely to be inflexible while a federal constitution divides power into two parts of the government2. Written and unwritten The words written and unwritten refer to the way in which the constitution is formulated and the main distinction is brought out by whether the constitution is brought out in a single or a set of documents or whether it is just an assembly of various sources. A written constitution is usually presented in a document or a series of documents and this is common in almost all the countries. An unwritten constitution is one that is not expressed in a document or even a set of documents. Britain is an example of country that lacks a written constitution though some of its parts may be in written form. Any written document provides a clear guideline and is more authentic thus is seen more legally and can be easily endorsed than the unwritten one3. Rigid and flexible A constitution contains the basic principles that govern the mode of administration of any state. Basically making these rules is based on the aspect of continuity and thus lack of alteration. In the event of alterations, there are specific channels that are followed. The ease with which a constitution can be altered to suit the changing times reflects its flexibility. If therefore a constitution follows a long channel and is basically subject to a process which is restrictive before the laws can be changed, it is referred to be rigid. In the case of Britain that lacks a written constitution; the case of rigidity is actually questionable and may be less. If a bill formulated and passed in the parliament receives the royal pass on, it becomes effective since there is no higher restrictive force or body to create difficulties4. Therefore, the laws are subject to changes since there is no procedure earlier formulated and put down to change particular laws. The flexibility of the constitution in unmentionable and the laws are made by the parliament with no higher body to make them. The parliament tends to receive less restriction and the constitution also contains the non- legal part which is subject to changes without any legality or formal procedures being followed. The rigidity of a constitution will be dictated by the difficulty presented when changing the laws though this need not be if there is a big percentage of the political leader in support of the change. The political leaders support can transform a rather rigid constitution to a comparatively flexible one if they are in favour of the change. Subsequently, they can also change one to a very rigid one if they disfavour it. Presidential and premiership The nature of the head of the state can be used to classify the constitutions. In those states where the head of state is also the head of government, the constitution becomes presidential. The head of state in the case exercises real power and is a representative or the figurehead of the people. He speaks on behalf of the people he rules and this becomes an advantage as the president speaks on behalf of the people and thus does so in a clear authority and voice. The time to hold the office for a president is defined and this bring out some stability in the states and the works in place can be accounted for correctly. The president may also hold the office for some definite time and the office is not subject to changes since the head of state can be changed from time to time5. Where the position of the head of state and that of the head of government differ, the constitution is referred to as premiership. This different in the roles enables each party to work independently and there is efficiency in the practices. It brings out work divisibility where each party concentrates on a particular function. The separate functions of the two parties create flexibility, and continued stability as when change is postulated, both parties will not change simultaneously. Bi-cameral and unicameral In the case, where the structure of a legislature is divided into two bodies, the constitution is referred to as bi- cameral. The division has been adopted by many states and has advantages. It creates segregation of functions and creates an internal balance. In Britain, the House of Commons contain the elected parliamentary members while the House of Lords have individuals who are appointed, who hold positions by virtue of birth or post6. The unicameral constitutions lack this base and mainly common in small scale governments and states. Unitary and federal In most of the countries, power is usually conducted at different levels including the central, regional and local levels. A unitary state has power divided with the central government having the major role in creating laws. The lower positions have delegated powers given to them rather than by right. In a federal state, the main government as well as individual territories has primary powers. However, certain powers are reserved for matter of national interests to the central government and the regional governments have the autonomy with matters of regional interests7. Strengths of Britain’s ‘traditional constitution’ Flexibility and diversity When change is needed in the constitution, all which is required is a pass in an Act of Parliament8. This means that the state can easily adapt to the changes when needed. The election of the House of Commons enables for a transition and has a link to continuity in democratic principles. The system of election lead to a unity of powers in the constitution and therefore the state can go on with its manifestation of its goals and achievements9. Britain’s history and tradition The maintenance of culture is important in the enhancement of rules and morals in a state as it creates stability. Tradition is important as it is conservative. The conventions in the states have always been followed and no effort has been put to change them10. As such, the citizens are expected to act within the laws and anyone who acts out of the scope does so at their own risk. Rule of democracy The people have a say on who they want to elect to the office in the House of Commons. This means that they can choose to not vote in favour of an individual. When one gains disfavour while in court, they may decide to vote and eliminate him. Effectiveness of the government The two units of the government consisting of the House of Lords and the House of Commons are responsible for the efficient and effective running of the country. The two arms responsible for maintenance of law and order have independent functions and thus activities run in a more enhanced way11. Weaknesses of Britain’s ‘traditional constitution’ Dictatorship and uncertainty The central body in the British system of rule is the parliament. The parliament is composed of the House of Commons and the House of Lords. The House of Commons consists of elected members and it is more powerful of the two. The parliament is responsible for passing laws as well as discussing the matter of national importance. Members in the parliament may also belong to the leading political parties including the labour, liberal and democratic parties. The case of many varieties leads to lack of knowledge of what the constitution really contains in Britain. This is because there is not really a document written that can act as a point of reference to the people. Thus the motions brought forward by various people in the house can be altered and overturned in parliament like cases of legislation and terrorism. There can also be people who want to overturn others or have an upper hand in the houses leading to dictatorships and more advantages at the expense of the other group. Centralization The constitution is mainly central and its powers distributions are minimal. Its powers are central with the House of Commons dominating the House of Lords. The executive is also superior to the parliament and tends to control the House of Commons through whips. The central government also controls the local government12. In these cases, the orders come from higher levels and operations are distorted as they cease to be independent. Protection of rights The human rights and other new labour union were in favour of changing and amending the constitution. This was however rejected heavily much to their expectations. Most of the members wanted to retain their traditional mode and conserve their laws13. The labour reforms and the coalition reforms did not go through and this has resulted to human right and wage abuse especially to the low class and the peasants. References Abbott, F. (2006), Five: The Legal Protection of Democracy & Freedom: The Case for a New Written Constitution & Bill Of Rights. British Democracy: Its Restoration & Extension. ISR. Akehurst, M, & Malanczuk, P, (1997), Akehurst's modern introduction to international law, London: Routledge. Barendt, E, (1997), Is there a United Kingdom Constitution, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 137. Barnett, H, (2005), Constitutional and Administrative Law, London: Cavendish. Beatson, J, (1998), Constitutional reform in the United Kingdom: practice and principles, London: Hart Publishing . Brookshire, J, (1995), Clement Attlee, New York: Manchester University Press. Bogdanor, V, (1997), The Monarchy and the Constitution, Oxford University Press. Craig, P, & Grainne D, (2007), EU Law: Text, Cases and Materials, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Dicey, V, (1915), Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution, London: Macmillan and Company. Draft Cabinet Manual, Cabinet Office, 2010-12-14. http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/sites/default/files/resources/cabinet-draft-manual.pdf. Gallop, N, In the Constitution and Constitutional Reform p.26 (Philip Allan, 2011). Jerry, H, (1995), Clement Attlee, New York: Manchester University. Scarman, L, (2003), Why Britain Needs a Written Constitution, Charter88 Sovereignty lecture, Charter88. Smith, L, (2002), Change & Continuity in 17th Century English Parliaments, History Review: 1.  Smits, J, (2002), The Making of European Private Law: Towards an Ius Commune Europaeum as a Mixed Legal System, London: Intersentia Publishers. Steiner, J, et al. (2006), EU Law, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Steiner, J; Woods, L & Twigg-Flesner, C, (2006), EU Law (9th ed.), Oxford: Oxford University Press. Tomkins, A, (2003), Public Law, Oxford University Press.  Turpin, C, & Tomkins, A, (2007), British government and the constitution: text and materials, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.    Read More