First, one has to understand what a constitution is, a constitution is a set of rules or principles that defines or shows how a country is governed. Many of the constitutions are written that is, are found in a document. Unlike these constitutions, Britain has its constitution unwritten that is, it cannot be found in any document but the country is still governed lawfully. Britain has her constitution from various sources that include statutes like the Magna Carta, laws, and parliament customs or political conventions. In addition, case laws, which are matters that are constitutional and decided in a court of law and, constitutional experts that have written on some subjects. Britain also has two basic principles, which are the rule of law and parliament supremacy (History Learning Site, 2000, par. 1-5).
Britain’s governance is one of the best though it does not have a written constitution. Some rules like the bill of rights, act of settlement, and that of the union are still upheld in Britain. This constitution may seem to contradict especially to other nations who use the written constitution. Britain has surpassed all those odds and has always been stable politically with this type of constitution. Some of the rules are written in different places and not in one document (Dorothy, 2002, par. 4).
Over the last thirty years, the rise of the urge for democracy has gone up especially after the cold war and the fall of the Berlin wall. The issue of democracy in many states has led to a lot of criticism of the unwritten constitution in Britain because the disadvantages accompanying it are viewed to make it look bad. Although besides its disadvantages, Britain has used this constitution for so long and it is good democratically compared to many other states.
There are various difficulties associated with this constitution. These involve uncertainty whereby, people do criticize its nature of ambiguity. Most people argue that it is not easy to know or understand what exactly this constitution is talking about. Therefore, this nature makes many understand differently and seems as if it is made as they go along. Another issue, is that it is easily changed therefore, those governments that are elected democratically may change it to suit their needs and thus, form a dictatorial kind of government. Many argue that in Britain, it seems that there is no fair competition among parties, as it is only the Labor party has taken control. This is seen as part of a constitution that is highly flexible and one that can be changed any time the party wishes (John, 2006, par. 3-4). This may lead to a change without considering the interests of the people but only favoring those people in power.
In the unwritten form of the constitution, there seems to have weak people’s rights protection because there is nothing forcing the government to abide by the law and, it seems they do it at their own will. The critics say that this is a serious issue because; a government can come into power and be so strange that it may start violating human rights by not protecting them well. These are most of the criticism mainly given by individuals who normally think that an unwritten constitution is dictatorial. In the last thirty years, many changes have taken place worldwide and most of the nations have adopted a written constitution as a way of their governance. America being a superpower has influenced most of the countries into having a written constitution, because they use it and, view it as the best mode of governance. This has led most countries especially, the developing nations to adopt a written constitution (Bill, 2004, p. 5).
These forms of criticism are not merited. Britain has been stable since its existence without any type of constitutional problem. Her people’s sense of patriotism has made it more stable and far much better in the world. Britain has a royal institution that is part of the leadership and still does exist without any problems. An unwritten constitution is not a problem in any country but it all depends on the people, and also the leadership in it. Britain has emerged as an influential country in the world and the unwritten constitution seems not to affect her democracy and governance. Many countries use the written type of constitution and still are not stable because of dictatorship, coups, and other related political problems. Britain has not had any problem in terms of a constitutional crisis and still they respect the institutions as they are. Britain has also been able to solve its internal issues without the interference of other nations, therefore; this shows how she is strong despite having an unwritten constitution. The criticism of the British kind of constitution is not merited because as far as it has its disadvantages, the written constitution has also its disadvantages. A written constitution has the major disadvantage of being rigid in that it takes time to change even in a crisis. Therefore, it all depends on a nation and Britain has proved to do it with an unwritten constitution (Chris, 2009, p. 3).
Reference
Bill, J. (2004). Politics UK. UK: Longman.
Chris, T. (2009). Law express: Constitutional and administrative law. Wesley: Longman.
Dorothy, S. (2009). Key principles of the British unwritten constitution. Web.
John, H. (2006). The British Constitution. Web.
History Learning Site (2000). The British Constitution. Web.