Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The Doctrine of Parliamentary Sovereignty
Features of parliamentary sovereignty
Difference between uk constitution and us
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The Doctrine of Parliamentary Sovereignty
The Differences Betweek the UK and US Constitutions
The constitution of a state, at its most basic, can be described as
the fundamental principles from which it is governed, usually defining
how power is split up within it and thereby constructing a framework
within which it operates (www.oed.com). In this essay, I will first
provide a brief summary of the UK and US constitutions and then
attempt to outline the key differences and similarities between the
two and discuss whether the differences really do pale in comparison
with the fundamental similarities.
Queen Elizabeth the 2nd once said, “The British constitution has
always puzzled me” (Hennessy, 1996) and this certainly becomes
understandable when studying it. The traditional UK constitution is
un-codified. This means that it lacks the primary source of a clear
written document and is derived solely from four sources- statute law
(laws made and passed by the government), common law (legal principles
which have been developed and applied by the courts), conventions
(rules of behaviour which are considered binding by those who operate
the constitution) and works of authority (these are written works used
for guidance on aspects of the constitution) (Jones et al., 2004).
Statute law has precedence over the other three sources. The
traditional constitution is therefore based upon four essential
components; 1.parliamentary sovereignty, which makes parliament the
supreme law making body and gives it the absolute legal right to make
the laws it chooses, 2. the rule of law, which says that laws must be
interpreted and applied by an impartial and independent jury with fair
trails ...
... middle of paper ...
...overnment/constitution-1.htm).
This is a huge difference to anything in the UK or US constitution
and, coming back to the title of this essay, the fact that there is
not such a major difference like this between the two shows that yes,
both the US and the UK constitution certainly do have fundamental
similarities.
Bibliography
* Hennessy (1996), The Hidden Wiring: Unearthing the British
Constitution, Gollancz
* Jones, Kavanagh, Moran, Norton, (2004), Politics UK, 5th Edition,
First Edition published 1991, Pearson Education Limited
* Singh (2003), Governing America, The Politics of a Divided
Democracy, Oxford University Press
* Websites: www.history.uk.com, www.iranonline.com, www.oed.com-
Oxford English Dictionary Online, www.statistics.gov.uk,
www.usgovinfo.about.com
laws is to keep the bad things out from the old society out such as
The United States of America and Costa Rica’s constitutions have several similarities and differences. The United States and Costa Rica have two of the most successful constitutional republics in the history of the world. They are alike in several ways, however, there are some major differences that allows them to thrive in their own environments. There are many components that describe the two countries: physical structure, traditions and how the constitutions were established, how the constitutions work, languages, military, religion, education, voting rights, presidential elections, and structure of the legislative branch, presidential terms, vice presidents, and Supreme Court justices.
The constitution of the UK is very unique compared to the constitutions in other European countries. In this essay, I will talk about the features of the UK constitution, the sources of the constitution and the principles, which guide it. This essay will also include key points about the uncodified nature of the constitution, and the advantages and disadvantages that come along with it. A topic of discussion has been whether or not the uncodified nature of the constitution of the UK should remain the same, or if, it should be codified. I will further discuss these ideas in this essay and highlight the pros and cons from both sides – codified and uncodified.
The United States Constitution and Texas Constitution are similar, but not indistinguishable. One can see that the constitution was made to prevent tyranny in the states from the idea of the federalists who wanted to build a strong form of government that gave people rights without giving their representatives too much power. In the U.S. Constitution, the elites made the decision that they would form a representative government with a Bill of Rights in order for the anti-federalists to agree to sign. The constitution established a stronger form of government, which helped the economic and social tensions. The constitution consists of: the preamble, which states the general principles for a government, the Bill
In 1918, while the rest of Europe was still engaged in World War I, a newly formed communist government was developing in Russia. Much like 18th century Americans, they had just managed to overthrow what was viewed as a tyrannical government and hoped to form a new nation free of the injustices of the previous rule. Both countries wrote a new constitution as well as a declaration of rights to facilitate this, but their respective documents had vast differences. These disparities stemmed from differences in the ideologies of the new governments. The primary objectives of the Russian Declaration of Rights of the Working and Exploited People and the later constitution were the “abolition of all exploitation of man by man, complete elimination of the division of society into classes, merciless suppression of the exploiters, socialist organization of society, and victory of socialism in all countries.” Americans wanted equality of opportunity and personal freedom instead of the social equality desired by the Russians. The American constitution and Bill of Rights were created to protect personal liberties and individual freedom while the Russians were more concerned with the welfare and equality of the population as a whole. This difference is partially due to the differences in the conditions leading to revolution in each country. The American Revolution was initiated by the wealthy in response to what they considered unfair treatment by a foreign ruler while the Russian revolution was instigated by the poor in reaction to centuries of oppression and exploitation by the wealthy within their own country.
In comparing the Articles of Confederation with the U.S constitution that was produced by the federal convention in 1787, it is important to note that the U.S operated under both documents. During March 1, 1781, the Articles of Confederation went into effect when it was ratified by Maryland. However, the U.S constitution replaced the Articles of Confederation as soon as it was ratified on June 21, 1788 by New Hampshire. The main difference between the Articles of Confederations and the U.S Constitution is that the constitution didn’t force the laws, but established the why of the constitution. In establishing the why, it warranted the farmers to work on the government being better than the Articles of Confederations. They wanted the government
As stated in the first paper; The Constitution of the United States was designed to be a framework for the organization of our country’s government. Many foreign countries also have constitutions, which outline the rights of individuals and the powers of the law; such as the Iraqi Constitution of 2005. I will compare the similarities and differences of the US and Iraqi Constitutions and discuss Articles 2, 36, 39, & 90 and women’s rights of the Iraqi Constitution.
The United States Constitution and The Declaration of Independence are two of America 's most famous documents and most cherished symbols of liberty, however they are very different in their intents and themes, although both together laid the foundation for our independence as a nation. The Declaration of Independence proclaims the United States of America a free and independent nation that would no longer be under British Rule. The Constitution is the basis of the U.S. government. It can be rightly stated that the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are best friends necessary in support for each other. There are two proofs necessary to make this argument: the first being, the Declaration requires limited, constitutional union
laws made by others in our society, and decide whether or not the laws we make
Has a law of nature to govern it, which obliges everyone; and reason, which is that law, teaches all mankind who will but consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions (Locke 9).
rules and laws to follow and bide by; for laws are one of the cornerstones of a
The principle concern of the rule of law is to limit and discipline public power.The rule of law is adn ideal and a morden name for natural law.The rule of law is used in contradistinction to 'the rule of man' and 'rule according to law'.Even in most autocrartic form of government there is some law according to whic powers of government are exercised but it does not means that there is rule of law.Therefore ,the rule of law means that the law rules or
The strict supremacy of statute over judicial decisions and a tradition of literalism in statutory interpretation, 2. Where no legislation exists, the courts are bound by the doctrine of precedent in accordance with a strict hierarchy of judicial authority, 3. In the absence of a relevant precedent, the judges will be guided by legal principle and reasoning by analogy, and 4. There is a clear way of distinguishing the ratio of a case. A key feature of the unwritten constitution is ‘the separation of powers’.
According to Reference.com (2007), law is defined as: "rules of conduct of any organized society, however simple or small, that are enforced by threat of punishment if they are violated. Modern law has a wide sweep and regulates many branches of conduct." Essentially law is the rules and regulations that aid in governing conduct, handling disputes, and dealing with criminal actions.
The Rule of Law means that the state should govern its citizens, in a way which works with the rules that have been agreed on. The Rule of Law is simply a fundamental principle of our constitution. Britain and other Western democracies are different in that Britain has an unwritten constitution, meaning that our constitution is not found in a certain document but that we actually have a constitution from the rules about who governs it, and about the powers they entail and how that power can be passed or even transferred. The Constitution includes; Acts of Parliament, Judicial decisions and Conventions.There are three main principles around the Rule of Law being the separation of powers, the supremacy of Parliament and the Rule of Law. The