Miss Christian 12E F9 Lesson #2 Wednesday 14th September 2011 Codified & Uncodified

Learning Objectives To examine the advantages and disadvantages of codified constitutions To debate whether the UK should adopt a written constitution

Traffic Light Question Challenge Miss Christian 12E F9 Lesson #2 Traffic Light Question Challenge Wednesday 14th September 2011 Define; a) A codified constitution b) An uncodified constitution Give an example of; a) A codified constitution (not USA) b) An uncodified constitution (not UK) How many countries in the world have a codified constitution? MERIT 128 PRAISE SLIP

Codified Constitution Uncodified Constitution DEFINITION A codified constitution is a constitution in which key constitutional provisions are collected within a single document, it is commonly known as a written constitution. EXAMPLES Afghanistan, Australia, France, Germany, India, Ireland, North Korea, Russia, South Africa, USA, Vietnam DEFINITION An uncodified constitution is a constitution that is made up of rules that are found in a variety of sources, in the absence of a single legal document or written constitution. EXAMPLES Israel, New Zealand, Saudi Arabia, UK, Canada, San Marino

Codified and Uncodified Constitutions Codified Constitutions Authoritative The constitution is a ‘higher law’. The constitution binds all political institutions, including those that make ordinary law. Entrenched This means that it is difficult to amend or abolish. Judiciable Because the constitution is a ‘higher law’, the judiciary can declare whether a law or action is constitutional or unconstitutional.

Codified and Uncodified Constitutions Uncodified Constitutions Not authoritative Constitutional laws enjoy the same status as ordinary laws. Not entrenched The constitutions can be changed through the normal processes for enacting statue law. Not Judiciable In the absence of a higher law, judges do not have a legal standard against which they can declare things constitutional or unconstitutional.

Advantages and Disadvantages Read p208-210 Make a list of Advantages and Disadvantages of a Codified Constitution and an Uncodified Constitution Codified Constitution Uncodified Constitution

Codified Constitution Advantages Disadvantages Clear Rules Limited Government Neutral interpretation Protecting rights Education and citizenship Rigidity Judicial tyranny Legalistic Political bias Unnecessary

30 seconds – 1 minute – 30 seconds = 2 minutes total Let’s Debate THE MOTION: This House would adopt a written constitution for the UK. (British Parliamentary Style Debating) PROPOSITION OPPOSITION 1st Speaker 2nd Speaker 3rd Speaker 4th Speaker 30 seconds – 1 minute – 30 seconds = 2 minutes total

YES! The UK should adopt a written constitution. Nowhere can easily be seen as from so many sources. Would remove uncertainty about specific roles e.g. of the monarch. Some say it is outdated, inefficient and undemocratic with most conventions dating back to a pre-modern era. The House of Lords reflects a pre-democratic era with the idea of hereditary power. Tendency for executive dominance (power of executive). E.g. Blair removed session of question time, changed electoral system and composition of Lords. A constitution would constrain their power. No separation of powers – executive exercises great control over legislative process and local/subnational government. Would protect the independence of the judiciary. Would provide up-to-date statement of rights of people which is more relevant that European Convention. Key laws would be entrenched (i.e firmly established and difficult to amend) Would be easier for the courts to interpret what is lawful behaviour and uphold the constitution. At the moment judicial review is limited as no definitive criteria for determining what is unconstitutional. Would set out clearer values and structure of the political system. Would prevent any constitutional crises (e.g. over hung parliament in 2010 where no single part had an overall majority).

NO! The UK should not adopt a written constitution. Traditional constitution known as the ‘Westminster model’ – claims this is how it is supposed to operate. System has worked well for several hundred years and has provided liberty and stability. Reflects the history and enduring values of the British people Provides for strong and effective government. Includes doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty with power centralised in cabinet. There is no widespread demand for or interest in change. Flexibility allows adjustments to meet new demands when required i.e. ‘new wine in old bottles’. Peoples rights have been protected and a written constitution does not guarantee these rights (e.g. in US, Zimbabwe and Russia). Would be hard to devise a constitution which pleases everyone.

Homework Reading and Note Taking, Heywood, p191-195 Principles of the constitution Consolidating your understanding Should the UK adopt a codified constitution? Flexible or rigid constitution? Further Reading A codified constitution for Britain (Vernon Bogadnor – Politics Review)