Contents
The Constitution 2
Separation of Powers 3
Rule of Law 4
Parliamentary Supremacy 5
Judicial Review 6
Constitutional Justification for Judicial Review 7
Human Rights 9
Conflicts Between Rights 12
, The Constitution
- Unwritten - no single authoritative document. Various sources make the constitution more flexible.
Source Examples Flexible Inflexible
Statute - Bill of Rights 1689 - ‘Constitutional’ statutes are as easy to - Practicalities/political considerations
(legal, - ECA 1972 enact as any other statute. make repealing certain Acts
written) - HRA 1998 - No special procedures unlike USA impossible (e.g. HRA 1998, Devolution
- Scotland Act 1998 (entrenchment) Acts)
- As easy to repeal as ordinary statutes - Parliamentary time/political will
(simple majority and royal assent) must be considered. Govt dominates
parliament
Case Law - Residual Freedom - By nature flexible since judges may - Doctrine of precedent means that
(legal, - Rule of law interpret law to reflect society principle of certainty and fairness are
written) - Actions of state - Judges can overturn previous decisions adhered to.
must have legal - Parliament can override it by legislating - Can only change when cases come
authority (Entick v before court
Carrington) - rule of law is a deeply embedded
- Parliamentary concept
Supremacy (Pickin) - Courts will not hear cases which
parliament is legislating on
- Security of tenure = slow judicial
turnover, old social make-up
Royal - Foreign affairs - RP powers can be changed or removed - RP powers cannot be extended or
Prerogative (declaring war, by statute e.g. the Fixed Term new ones created (BBC)
(legal, making treaties) Parliaments Act 2011 removed the - Some RP powers unlikely to be
unwritten. - Domestic affairs Queen’s power to dissolve parliament, removed as that would reduce the
Residual (summoning the Crown Proceedings Act 1947 power of govt to act quickly and
power of parliament, removed the Crown’s immunity to claims unilaterally.
monarch, appointing the PM, in tort and contract.
given to PM) pardon/mercy)
Conventions - Individual - Considered binding but are not legally - Often very deep rooted (e.g. judges
(non-legal, ministerial enforceable (Madzimbamuto) not being involved in politics)
unwritten. responsibility (e.g. - No procedure required to change them - Difficult to get momentum to change
Considered Priti Patel resigning - Legislation can easily overrule them them, since they are seen to prevent
binding but as Int’l Dev. - New conventions can be developed e.g. constitutional crisis
not legally Minister after govt seeking parl’s approval before wars
enforceable) unauthorised - Can be dropped by agreement e.g.
meetings) collective ministerial responsibility over
- Monarch plays no EU referendum
active role in govt.
Pros - Written Constitution Cons - Written Constitution
- Clear definition of function of each branch of state - Lack of flexibility - hard to change with public opinion
- System of checks & balances prevents one branch from (e.g. right to bear arms in the US prevents gun control)
having excessive power - Politicises the judiciary (e.g. US supreme court justices
- Provides judicial bulwark against executive tyranny chosen on political basis)
- Clear statement of civil liberties & rights - Loses fluidity and flexibility of conventions
- Provides legal certainty to citizens - Bound by ancestors’ views on what society might be like
The Constitution 2
Separation of Powers 3
Rule of Law 4
Parliamentary Supremacy 5
Judicial Review 6
Constitutional Justification for Judicial Review 7
Human Rights 9
Conflicts Between Rights 12
, The Constitution
- Unwritten - no single authoritative document. Various sources make the constitution more flexible.
Source Examples Flexible Inflexible
Statute - Bill of Rights 1689 - ‘Constitutional’ statutes are as easy to - Practicalities/political considerations
(legal, - ECA 1972 enact as any other statute. make repealing certain Acts
written) - HRA 1998 - No special procedures unlike USA impossible (e.g. HRA 1998, Devolution
- Scotland Act 1998 (entrenchment) Acts)
- As easy to repeal as ordinary statutes - Parliamentary time/political will
(simple majority and royal assent) must be considered. Govt dominates
parliament
Case Law - Residual Freedom - By nature flexible since judges may - Doctrine of precedent means that
(legal, - Rule of law interpret law to reflect society principle of certainty and fairness are
written) - Actions of state - Judges can overturn previous decisions adhered to.
must have legal - Parliament can override it by legislating - Can only change when cases come
authority (Entick v before court
Carrington) - rule of law is a deeply embedded
- Parliamentary concept
Supremacy (Pickin) - Courts will not hear cases which
parliament is legislating on
- Security of tenure = slow judicial
turnover, old social make-up
Royal - Foreign affairs - RP powers can be changed or removed - RP powers cannot be extended or
Prerogative (declaring war, by statute e.g. the Fixed Term new ones created (BBC)
(legal, making treaties) Parliaments Act 2011 removed the - Some RP powers unlikely to be
unwritten. - Domestic affairs Queen’s power to dissolve parliament, removed as that would reduce the
Residual (summoning the Crown Proceedings Act 1947 power of govt to act quickly and
power of parliament, removed the Crown’s immunity to claims unilaterally.
monarch, appointing the PM, in tort and contract.
given to PM) pardon/mercy)
Conventions - Individual - Considered binding but are not legally - Often very deep rooted (e.g. judges
(non-legal, ministerial enforceable (Madzimbamuto) not being involved in politics)
unwritten. responsibility (e.g. - No procedure required to change them - Difficult to get momentum to change
Considered Priti Patel resigning - Legislation can easily overrule them them, since they are seen to prevent
binding but as Int’l Dev. - New conventions can be developed e.g. constitutional crisis
not legally Minister after govt seeking parl’s approval before wars
enforceable) unauthorised - Can be dropped by agreement e.g.
meetings) collective ministerial responsibility over
- Monarch plays no EU referendum
active role in govt.
Pros - Written Constitution Cons - Written Constitution
- Clear definition of function of each branch of state - Lack of flexibility - hard to change with public opinion
- System of checks & balances prevents one branch from (e.g. right to bear arms in the US prevents gun control)
having excessive power - Politicises the judiciary (e.g. US supreme court justices
- Provides judicial bulwark against executive tyranny chosen on political basis)
- Clear statement of civil liberties & rights - Loses fluidity and flexibility of conventions
- Provides legal certainty to citizens - Bound by ancestors’ views on what society might be like
