Home > Constitutional & Administrative Law
Question: “Britain is one of the very few states which lack a written constitution, but this bare accident of history does not provide an argument for us to adopt one. Britain’s constitution has by and large been a success.”
Barber N. W. ‘Against a Written Constitution’ (2008) Public Law 11
Consider this statement. Do you think the United Kingdom should adopt a written constitution? Give full reasoned arguments for your view referring to relevant examples and the scholarly literature where appropriate.
Answer: The United Kingdom in comparison to other countries like the USA or France does not have a written constitution. A constitution can be defined as “a set of laws on how a country is governed”. (1) The British constitution consists of common law, civil law, historical documents, the acts of Parliament and the European Legislation. The British constitution is in fact an uncodified one rather than an unwritten one. The laws that make up the constitution are actually written within several documents mentioned; what is lacking is a single book where all these laws have been compiled. There are different sources where the British constitution does come from namely the “Statutes such as the Magna Carta of 1215 and the Act of Settlement of 1701, Laws and Customs of Parliament; political co......(short extract)
To download the full answer, please Sign in or Register then make a payment or submit coursework.
Details: - Mark: Not available | Course: Constitutional and Administrative Law | Year: 1st | Words: 1856 | References: Yes | Date written: January, 2011 | Date submitted: April 23, 2011 | Coursework ID: 674
