Should uk have a codified constitution

• Argument 1: The uk should have entrenched rights

  • gives us our current foundational rights - example would be US constitution - US brithright citizenship - Trump pushing for an exectuvie order -> supreme court is upholding the 14th amendmant -> provides a fundamental legal framework -> upholds rule of law and strengthening democratic governance
• Counter argument : entrenched rights are archaic and arent progressive -> lack of flexibility -> right to bear arms -> led to unneccesary violence and the reason for the american stereotypes of school shootings -> due to entrenched rights its difficult to change -> lead to gridlock -> UK has unentrenched rights -> allow to protect citizens -> Online safety Act 2024 -> making sure companies protect users -> due to parliamentary sovereignty and rapid legislation
• Argument 2: In the UK - argued to be semi codified -> protection of minority righrs ensure that certain freedoms cannot be overriden by popular opinion or temporary political majorities - > Smith V Home sec 2024 - Romany women argued that it goes against ECHR banning gypies from certain areas for 12 months due to police crime and sentencing act -> protects them from discrimination -> led to new legislative reviews and amended the issues.
• Counter argument 2: Protect rights but not minority rights -> Hungary constitution amendment on banning LGBTQ+ -> tyranny of majority -> crackdown by Victor Oban on human rights -> vulnerability of disadvantaged groups -> use of SPDOs in the UK -> prevent protesting -> enfringing on civil liberties and arguably seen as an elective dictatorship
• Argument 3: Codified constitution uphold judicial oversight -> rights are constitutionally protected -> courts are empowered to review government actions and strike down laws that violate these righrs -> Boris Johnson proroguing parliament to pass on the EU withdrawal bill - > court deemed it illegal and unlawful as it enfringed on the uk constitution -> the court is showing its willingness to step in demonstrated its independence and no one is above the rule of law
• Counter argument 3: judicial oversight shifts power away from elected representatives -> undermine parliamentary sovereignty -> UK tribunal allowed a palestinian family to settle under a scheme for ukrainian refugees -> public criticism by Kier starmer > Lady Chief sue carr says if they continue it will undermine judicial independence -> highlights how without a codified constitution , the boundaries between the judiciary and politics rely on convention -> tensions and uncertainty over the proper limits of judicial and political power.