The people respect a constitution which stands for supremacy. Thus the people take pledge in the name of the constitution as if somebody is taking oath by putting his hand on the Gita or the Bible or the Koran. The most serious flaw of a rigid constitution is that it cannot swiftly bend to meet some exigency. A time may come when the people cannot wait for amending the constitution in a time-consuming procedure. In the absence of such adaptability there may break out violence and revolution. It is said that the French Revolution of broke out because the evils in the constitution of France could not be cured quickly and the people demanding for sweeping changes could not wait for a long and indefinite period of expectancy.
The second disadvantage of a rigid constitution is that a country cannot progress along the new socio-economic lines under a rigid constitution. Can a person continue to wear the same garment during the childhood, youth and old age?
But under a rigid constitution he cannot outgrow his childhood. There should be a certain flexibility.
In any event, we could not make this constitution so rigid that it cannot be adapted to changing conditions. A constitution is said to be flexible when the procedure for its amendment is like that of an-ordinary law. So there is no distinction made between the constitutional law and ordinary law with regard to the procedure of amendment of the same.
From this it follows that under a flexible constitution there is no difference between the constitutional law and ordinary law at all.
Under a flexible constitution the legislature is the sovereign and there is nobody to question the unconstitutionality or illegality of any law made by the legislature. The classic example of flexible constitution is that of England. The parliament of England can do anything and everything, except making a man into woman.
WHAT THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION MEANS TO ME By Jeffrey A. Trueman What the United States (U.S.) Constitution means to me is the inalienable. What The Constitution Means To Me Essay The Constitution of the United States is written as a set of rules and principles for this country that define the nature.
The major merit of a flexible constitution is that it can easily adapt itself to the new conditions or to meet any eventuality. Since it is flexible, it can bend without breaking. It is very useful for every new and developing country. Secondly, a flexible constitution can avoid a political crisis like a revolt or revolution. Since the passions of the people can be met by bending the constitutional framework, it can easily avert a serious political crisis.
That is why there has been no serious political chaos in England. The major defect of a flexible constitution is its instability and lack or permanence. It is a dangerous suggestion that the structure of the constitution can be drastically changed by the wave of popular passion.
If it so happens it is bound to harm the nation. Secondly, a flexible constitution does not suit a federation because the division of power and respective jurisdiction between the federal authority and the federating provinces must rest on some permanent and durable foundation. If a power given to a province is taken away in the manner of amending an ordinary law, where will be the guarantee of the federation?
A constitution may be either written or unwritten.
Email Address Subscribe. Neil Whoriskey October 11, To that end, she concludes her work with a scene in which she matches wits with an actual high school debater. Post a comment. Politics Oct 18 Funeral services for Rep. You can detect the zeal she had then and the fond amusement she has now. The debate topic: Should the U.
The USA has a written constitution, but the constitution of England is unwritten. The USA has a formal single document called the constitution, whereas there is no such document in England. The written aspect of the British constitution includes the Bill of rights , the Act of Settlement , the Parliament Act of , and the Representation of the People Act which extended the suffrage. These were never codified within the structure of a single orderly document.
So we find that the constitution of England is not wholly unwritten. We have also noticed that some written ness is there in the constitution of England. It is at the same time to be admitted that the USA constitution is not wholly a written document. The American people follow some conventions and traditions which are as good as the written words of the constitution.
So we find that the USA constitution provides for an indirect election of the President but the convention has made the election rather direct. Again, although the constitution of the USA provides for separation of powers, the President of the USA, in effect, is not only the chief executive but the chief legislator also. If it is so, where is the demarcating line between the written and unwritten constitution? The answer is that a written constitution is predominantly written and an unwritten constitution is predominantly unwritten.
The distinction between the written and unwritten constitutions is not scientific. The former is precise, definite and systematic.
The latter is unsystematic, indefinite and unprecise. In the first place, an unwritten constitution is indefinite, vague and unprecise. The advantages and disadvantages of the written and unwritten constitution mentioned above are rather theoretical. The success of a government does not depend on the written or un-written elements of it.
While the constitution of England is un-written, that of the USA is written. Both are the leading democracies in the world. It is not known that any country failed to attain its goals for want of a written constitution or an unwritten one. Although England has no written constitution enshrining the fundamental rights, the people of England enjoy more fundamental rights and individual liberties than in any country of the world. Actually, different methods suit different political and social systems.
During the Second World War the parliamentary election in England was not held because of the war conditions. But in the same year the presidential election was held in the USA because it was a must under the written provisions of the constitution. There was no demand in the USA to scrap the written constitution on the ground that it is unworkable during emergency.
The constitution, like all laws, is to serve the needs of the contemporary society. For making such changes in the constitution there are different modes laid down in different constitutions. These different procedures are significant.
It may need something more than the parliamentary majority. There are additional requirements such as a joint session of both the houses of the law-making body. It sometimes needs more than one debate and the lapse of certain amount of time between the proposal and the debate. The constitutions of England and Canada may be amended by the national legislature acing through a simple parliamentary majority. In some countries the constitution cannot be amended by the national law-making body alone. Again, many constitutions cannot be amended by the legislature alone but may need action by other bodies as well.
Thus the constitution of USA can be amended only by:. In India the constitution can be amended by two-thirds majority in each house of the parliament. In cases where it involves a division of power between the union and the states the amendment must be approved by half of the states. Some popular voting is called for in the constitutional amendment of some countries. For example, an amendment of the constitution of Australia can be done through some sort of popular voting. Thus, after obtaining an absolute majority in the parliament, the amendment must secure a majority vote in a popular referendum.
Note: A constitution was originally simply a law, ordinance, or decree usually made by a king, emperor, or other superior authority. A constitution now usually contains the fundamental law and principles with which all other laws must conform. Unlike the U. Constitution, the British Constitution is not set down in a comprehensive document, but is found in a variety of statutes as the Magna Carta and in common law.
Canada inherited many of the rules and practices that are considered part of the British Constitution, but the Constitution of Canada is also set down in comprehensive documents, such as the Constitution Act, and the Constitution Act, formerly called the British North America Act, Latin constitutio system, fundamental principles of an institution , from constituere to set up, establish. Rhyming Dictionary: Words that rhyme with constitution.
Thesaurus: All synonyms and antonyms for constitution. Spanish Central: Translation of constitution. Nglish: Translation of constitution for Spanish Speakers. Britannica English: Translation of constitution for Arabic Speakers.