The British Constitution: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 16:29, 9 July 2010

What is a Constitution?

According to the OED, a constitution is a "the system of laws and basic principles that a state, a country or an organization is governed by" (OED). So it is a body of written rules that regulate the relation of the state and its individual subject, the rights and responsibilities, plus the state structure (government, parliament, courts).

The Uniqueness of the "British Constitution"

Special about the so-called "British Constitution" is that there is no single document which has the word constitution upon it. However, Walter Bagehot already used the term in his famous work The English Constitution. Unlike the German "Grundgesetz or the Constitution of the United States of America (1787), the British version is rather made up of several laws and unwritten customs and a set of various sources from several ages [1,2], e.g.:

Statutes
Conventions
Exercises of the royal prerogative
The Common law
European law
International law
Treaties
Authorities and precedents

Benevolent critics such as Walter Bagehot interpret the British constitutional monarchy as some kind of "organic" "product of evolution rather than design" (Bagehot) , developed gradually of the necessity to maintain a certain security.[3,6]. Or as Jack Straw (MP, Lord Chancellor, Secretary of Justice) says: "a product of many centuries of change, some revolutionary but most gradual and evolutionary...", "the British people have developed an innate understanding of the rights which has come from centuries-old tradition – its in our cultural DNA”. A history of around 800 years [3]. Others like Tom Nairn or Christopher Hitchens are in favour of a written constitution in order to get rid of the "ancien regime" of elitist hegemony.

Pros and Cons

Whereas in other countries one can refer to a central document, the British use precedent cases as some kind of model interpretation. The advantage is that the British set of sources allow judicial and political flexibility. Bagehot stresses this trait because it allows pragmatic political decision making according to arisen situations and provides a legal mechanism adoptable to new developments [6]. [And the disadvantage??]

Sources

[1]Turpin, Colin and Adam Tompkins. British government and the Constitution. 6th ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007: 5-9, 33-42.

[2]“What Is The British Constitution?” Re-Constitution. 6. July. 2010 <http://www.re-constitution.org.uk/discover-the-facts/what-is-the-british-constitution/>[1]

[3]Straw, Jack. “Modernising the Magna Carta.” 2008. Ministry of Justice. 6.July 2010 <http://www.justice.gov.uk/news/sp130208.htm>[2]

[5]Straw, Jack. “Constitutional change and the future of parliamentary democracy.” 2009. Ministry of Justice. 6.July 2010 <http://www.justice.gov.uk/news/speech241109a.htm>[3]

[6]Bagehot. Walter. Die Englische Verfassung. Ed./Trans. Klaus Streifhau. Berlin: Luchterhand. 1971, 1-38. [please! in the English original!!]

[7]Faith, Thompson. Magna Carta. London: Oxford University Press, 1950: V, 3-10, 33,-69.

[8]“Judiciary.” Re-Constitution. 6. July. 2010 <http://www.re-constitution.org.uk/discover-the-facts/judiciary#facts_5>[4]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 ==What is a Constitution?==
-According to the OED, a constitution is a "the system of laws and basic principles that a state, a country or an organization is governed by" (OED). So it is a body of written down rules that regulate the relation of the state and its individual subject, the rights and responsibilities, plus the state structure (goverment, parliament, courts).
+According to the OED, a constitution is a "the system of laws and basic principles that a state, a country or an organization is governed by" (OED). So it is a body of written rules that regulate the relation of the state and its individual subject, the rights and responsibilities, plus the state structure (government, parliament, courts).
 ==The Uniqueness of the "British Constitution"==
-Special about the so-called "British Constitution" is that there is no single documents whoch has the word constitution upon it. However, Walter Bagehot already used the term in his famous work ''The English Constitution''. Unlike the German "''Bundesgesetz'' or the "Constitution of the United States of American" (1787)it is the British version is rather made up of several laws and unwritten customsa and a set of various sources from several ages [1,2], e.g.:
+Special about the so-called "British Constitution" is that there is no single document which has the word constitution upon it. However, Walter Bagehot already used the term in his famous work ''The English Constitution''. Unlike the German "''Grundgesetz'' or the ''Constitution of the United States of America'' (1787), the British version is rather made up of several laws and unwritten customs and a set of various sources from several ages [1,2], e.g.:
 *Statutes
 *Conventions
@@ Line 13: / Line 13: @@
 *Treaties
 *Authorities and precedents
-Today's British political system of parliamentry democracy and constitutional monarchy developed gradually as some kind of "organic" "product of evolution rather than design" (Bagehot) , born out of the necessity to maintain a certain security.[3,6]. Or as Jack Straw (MP, Lord Chancellor, Secretary of Justice) says: "a product of many centuries of change, some revolutionary but most gradual and evolutionary...", "the British people have developed an innate understanding of the rights which has come from centuries-old tradition – its in our cultural DNA”. A hsitory of around 800 years [3].
+Benevolent critics such as Walter Bagehot interpret the British constitutional monarchy as some kind of "organic" "product of evolution rather than design" (Bagehot) , developed gradually of the necessity to maintain a certain security.[3,6]. Or as Jack Straw (MP, Lord Chancellor, Secretary of Justice) says: "a product of many centuries of change, some revolutionary but most gradual and evolutionary...", "the British people have developed an innate understanding of the rights which has come from centuries-old tradition – its in our cultural DNA”. A history of around 800 years [3]. Others like Tom Nairn or Christopher Hitchens are in favour of a written constitution in order to get rid of the "ancien regime" of elitist hegemony.
 ==Pros and Cons==
-Whereas in other countries one can refer to a central document, the British use precedent cases as some kind of muster-interpretation of there muddle of laws. The advantage is that the British set of sources allow judicial and political flexibility. Bagehot stresses this trait because it allows a pragmatical political decision making according to arisen situations and provides a legal mechanism adoptable to new developments [6].
+Whereas in other countries one can refer to a central document, the British use precedent cases as some kind of model interpretation. The advantage is that the British set of sources allow judicial and political flexibility. Bagehot stresses this trait because it allows pragmatic political decision making according to arisen situations and provides a legal mechanism adoptable to new developments [6].
+[And the disadvantage??]
 ==Sources==
-[1]Turpin, Colin and Adam Tompkins. British government and the Constitution. 6th ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007: 5-9, 33-42.
+[1]Turpin, Colin and Adam Tompkins. ''British government and the Constitution''. 6th ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007: 5-9, 33-42.
 [2]“What Is The British Constitution?” Re-Constitution. 6. July. 2010
@@ Line 30: / Line 31: @@
 [5]Straw, Jack. “Constitutional change and the future of parliamentary democracy.” 2009. Ministry of Justice. 6.July 2010 <http://www.justice.gov.uk/news/speech241109a.htm>[http://www.justice.gov.uk/news/speech241109a.htm]
-[6]Bagehot. Walter. ''Die Englische Verfassung''. Ed./Trans. Klaus Streifhau. Berlin: Luchterhand. 1971: 1-38.
+[6]Bagehot. Walter. ''Die Englische Verfassung''. Ed./Trans. Klaus Streifhau. Berlin: Luchterhand. 1971, 1-38. [please! in the English original!!]
 [7]Faith, Thompson. ''Magna Carta''. London: Oxford University Press, 1950: V, 3-10, 33,-69.