...the arch of the British Constitution’. It is, indeed, an extremely significant part of our culture and history, as well as being central to our system of Government. It will therefore be necessary to begin any discussion of the constitutional issues involved in its abolition by outlining the current functions of the head of state in Britain. As ‘a state without a monarch is a republic’, it will then be necessary to consider the constitutional issues which would be implicit in giving effect to such a republic. These issues will include decisions as to the type of president we would have, how they would be selected, and the scope and extent of powers they would possess. This discussion is not intended to be one of the relative merits of a monarchy versus a republic: indeed, the decision to abolish the monarchy has already been made. Rather, it is an attempt to answer the question of how this central feature of our constitution could be replaced. In answering this question, I will look to a possible alternative, namely an elected president, and determine whether, and on what basis they could take over the functions of the monarch. Other constitutional issues regarding the selection of such a President must then be considered, along with other constitutional issues arising in this context. As a preliminary issue, it should be noted that in this hypothetical situation, it is Prince Charles, or rather King Charles III, who is on the throne. The Queen’s reign has ended and the...
Words: 3236 - Pages: 13
...“Constitutional reform since 1997 has not gone far enough.” Discuss. I agree with the view that constitutional reform since 1997 has not gone far enough to a large extent. The House of Lords Act of 1999 has reformed the House of Lords, the Human Rights Act of 1998 was an important area of constitutional reform, as well as the Freedom of Information Act of 2000 and the devolution of powers. The electoral system used in the UK has also been subject to discussion over reform however all constitutional reform can be said to have not gone far enough. The House of Lords Act of 1999 removed all but 92 hereditary peers from the House of Lords. This meant that the House of Lords could be seen as more legitimate as both unelected and not appointed peers would be seen as undemocratic and illegitimate. The removal of hereditary peers means that the House of Lords are more confident in their role in scrutinising and blocking legislation as they feel more legitimate. An example of the House of Lords exerting this role is the blocking of NHS reform which led to the government rethinking and amending plans, as well as the Hunting Act 2004. However reform of the House of Lords could be said to have not gone far enough, 92 hereditary peers still remain in the House of Lords, and the Liberal Democrats call for a wholly elected upper chamber, to make Parliament fully accountable. The House of Lords are also limited in the fact that they can only delay legislation for up to a year and therefore...
Words: 991 - Pages: 4
...Volume I (2010) ISSN 2218-2578 The Northern University Journal of Law Constitutional Reform in Bangladesh: Exploring the Agenda M. Jashim Ali Chowdhury 1. Prelude The Bangladeshi brand of democracy has caused some horrible nightmares in recent times. Though democracy in Bangladesh has got a certain degree of consolidation during the last eighteen years, ‘she could not make significant progress in consolidating her democratic institutions.’1 Over the years Bangladesh has gone through a phase of ‘illiberal democracy’ with the politicians behaving autocratically, rewarding political supporters and punishing the opposition. Partisan, financial and personal interests curbed the bureaucracy, judiciary, police or even the legislature.2 Disorder became the order, irregular the regular, and Machiavellism the political culture.3 On the other hand, the concept of separation of power has got a violent blow in the Constitution of Bangladesh. What the Constitution has done can very well be described as ‘assignment of powers’ of the Republic to the three organs of the Government.4 Concentration of power in the hands of Prime Minister resulted in paralyzing both the judiciary and legislature with leviathan omnipotence of the executive. Today’s Bangladesh may well be termed a ‘one legged state’ while the theory of separation of power contemplates a three legged one. Much water has already flown by and considerable amount of silt has filed up on this issue. Someone sought overnight purified...
Words: 5033 - Pages: 21
...Learning about constitutional reforms. Constitutional reform is a process whereby the fundamental nature of the system of government is changed or where a change is proposed. In the UK this may also involve the process of codification. Since 1997 there has been many key reforms that have made UK more democratic by a large amount and sometimes not so much if at all. Firstly the House of Lords reform where the voting rights of most hereditary peers was abolished. This makes the UK less undemocratic rather then more democratic. This is due to the fact that the House of Lords as a whole is an unelected chamber and therefore undemocratic, however by removing the voting rights of some hereditary peers it makes it less undemocratic as they are there simply by birth and not even appointed. So this reform does make the UK slightly more democratic however some peers remain and the whole chamber is still unelected and so is still very undemocratic. The referendum reform which is the introduction that any proposal to transfer power within the UK should be approved by a referendum. This makes the UK more democratic as it allows the country to become directly involved in the big decisions of devolution as it means large changes in there area/country and as a form of direct democracy makes the decision legitimate and fair. However it also can lead to voter fatigue and also only the government can decide when to put forward a referendum and so the power is not totally with the people...
Words: 282 - Pages: 2
...Developed in the 18th century by the French philosopher, Montesquieu , the doctrine of the separation of powers has been a controversial issue in British constitutional law. Whilst it is evident there are three individual branches of power, it is not wholly clear if the functions of these branches are kept concretely independent from one another. Certainly prior to the Constitutional Reform Act 2005, (herein referred to as the Reform Act), there was much overlap between the judiciary, and both the executive and legislative. The changes made by the Reform Act were indeed successful in creating a greater separation of powers, through the change of positions such as Lord Chancellor and the Law Lords. Furthermore, the Act was the first time the role of the judiciary was made entirely independent of government and enshrined in statute. However, the UK still does not have a strict separation of powers. The judiciary is not wholly independent of both the legislative and the executive. Whilst the Reform Act did strengthen the separation of powers in the UK from its previously weak position, the doctrine is not categorical. Prior to the Reform Act, there was arguably significant overlap in the branches of power, but particularly with the judiciary. The position of Lord Chancellor was one which was incompatible with the independence of the judiciary, and therefore the doctrine. It was said by legal commentators that; “The Lord Chancellor’s position…compromised the judiciary…as an independent...
Words: 498 - Pages: 2
...knowledge, explain how the independence of the judiciary is guaranteed process by. In theory the Judiciary should be independent from the government since it is its own pillar in society. In the coming years the independence of the judiciary has been cemented. This is partly due to the constitutional reform act as shown in the extract, now the Lord Chancellor is guaranteed independence from the Lord chief justice. The Lord Chancellor had to swear an oath to defend the independence of the Judiciary. Another important step to independence of the Judiciary was achieved by the erection of the Supreme Court in 2009, which moved powers further away from the government in the way they could manipulate the courts i.e. The process by which judicial appointments are made is also more independent and distanced from government after these reforms. Other ideas that keep the Judiciary independent, which are not included in the extract are also important. One important aspect of Judicial Independence is the idea that Judges pay cannot be manipulated by the government, their pay is determined by an independent pay review body and so cannot be reviewed by the house of commons. Since the constitutional reform act of...
Words: 860 - Pages: 4
...There have been many constitutional reforms since 1997 that is progressive towards a more democratic system, however it is not a complete democracy and there are still parts of the constitution could be improved. In 1997 Labour government came to power, with tony blair as prime minister, later Gordon Brown came to power between 2007 to 2010 have made a series of constitutional reforms. This was due to the fact that many practices of british politics were out of date, and therefore sought to modernise the constitution. Another main issue was that the central parliament, Westminster has too much power and therefore the labour party sought to decentralize and distribute the power towards other regions. The house of lords is the upper chamber of the Uk’s bicameral parliament, Beginning in the the 11th century. The house of lords’ role in government is to work with the house of commons to; make laws, check and challenge the actions of government ( the house of lords has no veto power) and provide independent competence. Firstly, in 1999 the Labour party under Tony Blair as Prime Minister reformed the house of lords. For centuries the house of lords consisted of members that inherited their seats, the Act removed such right. The act reduced members of the house of lords from 1,330 members to 669 members and a proportion of the members that are ‘cross benchers’ members with no party affiliation. In order for this act to receive supported votes, Tony Blair and the labour party passed...
Words: 319 - Pages: 2
...Has constitutional reform in the UK gone too far since 1997? Due to the uncodified nature of the UK constitution it is organic and the lack of higher law enables constitutional reforms to occur far quicker and with greater ease than seen in other countries, such as the USA. A constitutional reform is a political change in the constitution. There are varying bodies of opinion on the extent of constitutional reforms that are currently required within the UK. Constitutional changes have been mainly seen since 1997, under Blair and Brown, such as the establishment of a Scottish Parliament and Welsh Assembly in 1999, a constitutional reform some argue to be unnecessary while others argue should be extended and developed. A key issue that has divided constitutional opinions since 1997 is the idea of the unelected House of Lords, which some say undermine the legitimacy of democracy within the UK. The Salisbury convention already exists and ensures that the House of Lords does not obstruct proposals, which are previously contained in the elected government’s most recent manifesto, which is argues as an example of the removal of undemocratic sovereignty held previously by the Lords. However the fact that it is unwritten has been opposed to as the Lords is not fully controlled by the Government. To counteract the opposition other reforms have been introduce to reduce the powers of the House of Lords, such as the 1999 reform reducing hereditary peers to 92 from 600, and also the loss of...
Words: 1560 - Pages: 7
...▪ Document is authoritative, highest law of the land. Binds all political institutions – leads to 2 tier legal system ▪ Provisions of it are entrenched, difficult to amend or abolish ▪ It is judiciable, all political bodies are subject to authority of the courts, in particular a supreme court. o Uncodified – increasingly rare, UK one of few ▪ Not authoritative, constitutional laws treated same as ordinary laws ▪ Not entrenched, constitution can be changed through the normal process for enacting statute law. ▪ Not judiciable, judges do not have legal standard to declare that actions of other bodies are constitutional/not constitutional. o However: ▪ No constitution is entirely written, written documents do not encompass all aspects of constitutional practice ▪ No constitution is entirely unwritten, no constitution consisting only of rules of conduct or behaviour. • Unitary and federal o Unitary – establish constitutional supremacy of central government over provincial and local bodies. Reflected in UK via Parliament o Federal – divide sovereignty between 2 levels of government, both central and regional posses a range of powers that the other...
Words: 2123 - Pages: 9
...A constitution is a body of fundamental principles or established models according to which a state or is acknowledged to be governed. The UK’s constitution is part-written and uncodified. There is evidence the UK’s constitution is strong and successful, however there is evidence to also suggest that the UK needs constitutional reform. One huge advantage of the UK constitution is its ability to be flexible and change according to modern opinions or issues. An uncodified or unfixed constitution like the UK’s allows it to me able to keep updated with new social and political situations. It easier to create an Act of Parliament according to a new situation, than to amend a codified constitution. For example, in reaction to this idea of ‘new politics’ and the public’s desire to be able to influence the government between elections, lead to the introduction of referendums in 1997. The UKs democracy has withstood the tale of time and is seen as a huge strength of the UK’s constitution. The UK’s constitution is an example of the UK’s custom and tradition linking generations and has been tested in history to prove that it works. The constitution has adapted and developed over time: it is a ‘living’ constitution due to the idea that it is able to grow. In despite of parliamentary sovereignty, there are a number of ways in which the democratic character of the UK is maintained and the power of the government scrutinized and reduced where necessary. For instance, the House of Lords and...
Words: 754 - Pages: 4
...out a case against an elected second chamber Jan 2011 a) With reference to the source, describe two functions of the House of Commons b) With reference to the source, and your own knowledge, explain how the House of Commons can control the power of government c) To what extent is the House of Commons effective in carrying out its various functions? May 2011 a) With reference to the source, describe three proposals that seek to strengthen parliamentary representation by increasing popular participation b) With reference to the source, and your own knowledge, explain how three of these proposals seek to make government more accountable to Parliament c) To what extent will the coalition government’s proposals bring about an effective reform of Parliament? Jan 2012 a) With reference to the source, why are legislative committees needed? b) With reference to the source, and your own knowledge, explain the ways in which backbench MPs can call government to account c) To what extent has the formation of a coalition altered the relationship between Parliament and government? Jan 2013 a) With reference to the source, outline two criticisms of David Cameron’s appointments to the House of Lords b) With reference to the source and your own knowledge, explain three considerations that are taken into account when appointing Life Peers c) Assess the arguments in favour of a largely...
Words: 1305 - Pages: 6
...‘The UK would benefit greatly from the introduction of a fully codified constitution’ Discuss Plan Arguments against * Ruins the doctrine of sovereignty-Parliament sovereignty is effectively beaten. * Judges have to police the constitution and effectively interpreted. – Threat of judicial tyranny. Codified constitutions cannot be interpreted by the public so the judges would have to interpret it which could bring out preferences and values of senior judges * Un-necessary- doesn’t Philly limit governments * Hard to change * Easily outdated * Legal documents created at one point of time rather than a document which has been endorsed by history and created over time Arguments for * Clear rules * One codified document * Limited government * Neutral interpretation * Protecting rights of individual liberty * Education value – highlight certain values and strengthen citizenship Introduction The argument of a codified constitution has been a debated subject for a long time within the UK political spectrum. The argument stands at present moment that if the UK should or should not implement a codified constitution. Both sides of the argument withstand staggering evidence both in favour and factors denouncing the idea being drawn at the same time. The fact of a codified constitution would invoke a greater judicial intervention within the UK – maybe even put the state under risk of judicial tyranny. On codified constitution we...
Words: 1530 - Pages: 7
...Future Development of the Britain…….………………………………………. 8 III. Expensive……………………………………………...…………………………………………………………. 9 6. Comparison to American Head of State…………………………………………………………………… 11 7. Recommendation……………………………………………..……………………………………………………. 11 8. Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 12 9. References……………………………………………..……………………………………………………………… 14 1. Introduction Monarchy was the primary government form for a majority of European countries before 1914 (Bogdanor, 1995). However, in modern Europe, few countries retain the monarchies. The United Kingdom, as one of the most developed countries, still maintains the position of monarch as the head of state. Today’s British monarchy, which is also called a Constitutional Monarchy, is quite different from the past ‘absolute monarchy’. “The monarchical shell remains intact, but the inner workings have been taken over by party political leaders,” says Norton (2007). In the past, the monarch...
Words: 3077 - Pages: 13
...opinion is the industrial revolution. Leading the global movement of industrialization made the UK today a prosperous country. Citizens enjoy their civil liberties according to the Human Rights Act 1998 which gives further effect to the European Convention on Human rights in the United Kingdom. The Kingdom of Morocco is the most politically stable country in the Arab World. The Alaoui Dynasty reigned and governed the country for several centuries and is still the central pillar of the Moroccan state. The Monarchy is believed to be the rationale for the exceptional stability of Morocco, and few Moroccans would argue the contrary after the events of the “Arab Spring”, yet the country has a long democratization process to achieve. The constitutional reform that was launched by His Highness the King Mohammed VI is a decisive step for Morocco to become a democratic state. Comparing the political systems of the United Kingdom and Morocco is an interesting subject of study. Both countries are very old monarchies but share only some few characteristics. Throughout this essay, we will try to compare the political systems of the UK and Morocco according to the following subjects: the monarchy, the legislative, the executive, and the judicial branches. II. Body A. The Monarchy Also referred to as the Crown, the British Monarchy is an important aspect of the UK’s political traditions. According to the uncodified Constitution of the United Kingdom, the Monarch is the Head of State...
Words: 1178 - Pages: 5
...“Analyze the causes of either the Spanish Civil War or the Korean War.” The Spanish Civil War is a classical example of a country changing from an absolute monarchy to a constitutional monarchy to a republic. This process was done through many different phases and most importantly through corruption and appealing speeches. I will throughout this essay closely examine some of the most important causes of the Spanish Civil War. Write about the weaknesses of the government and the unstructured Spanish army: • Explain why the why the elections in Spain were corrupt o The rich had the power o The party leaders were easily manipulated by the wealthy. • The government was also weak because the king was allowed to interfere in the progress of electing a new prime minister o Builds on the corruption part above o King had a lot of power • No difference between the Conservatives and the Liberals o No difference means it was only a matter of the party leader to convince other to support them o Weakness is that Spain could only go in one direction with two parties with the same goals and ideology. • Explain how the army had lost support o Army known to be violent o Too many officers and people with power o They changed the system in Spain from a absolute monarchy to a constitutional monarchy The powerful Catholic Church linked to the weaknesses of the government • Explain the how the Catholic Church influenced the education o They were against modernization and...
Words: 526 - Pages: 3
