Tunayapokea sana. Lakini Professor mzima unatuambia kuwa Uingereza haina Katiba, tutakukatalia, tena sana. Tumesoma haya mambo tena kwa sana tu. hata wewe soma tu utayajua. Ukiwa na nia utayajua. Equation kama hii inaweza kukupa taabu kidogo maana it is too abstract to comprehend!Kaka acha upuuzi, kila mtu anayo haki ya kutoa maoni yake. Mimi sio mhaya.
Tatizo lenu mnalolijua nyinyi ndio sheria, that is wrong. Jifunzeni kuyapokea maoni yasiyofanana na ya kwenu.
Lakini hii ukiwa na nia utaelewa:
Britain’s unwritten constitution
Unlike most modern states, Britain does not have a codified constitution but an unwritten one formed of Acts of Parliament, court judgments and conventions. Professor Robert Blackburn explains this system, including Magna Carta’s place within it, and asks whether the UK should now have a written constitution.
For most people, especially abroad, the United Kingdom does not have a constitution at all in the sense most commonly used around the world — a document of fundamental importance setting out the structure of government and its relationship with its citizens. All modern states, saving only the UK, New Zealand and Israel, have adopted a documentary constitution of this kind, the first and most complete model being that of the United States of America in 1788. However, in Britain we certainly say that we have a constitution, but it is one that exists in an abstract sense, comprising a host of diverse laws, practices and conventions that have evolved over a long period of time. The key landmark is the Bill of Rights (1689), which established the supremacy of Parliament over the Crown following the forcible replacement of King James II (r.1685–88) by William III (r.1689–1702) and Mary (r.1689–94) in the Glorious Revolution (1688).
From a comparative perspective, we have what is known as an ‘unwritten constitution’, although some prefer to describe it as ‘uncodified’ on the basis that many of our laws of a constitutional nature are in fact written down in Acts of Parliament or law reports of court judgments. This aspect of the British constitution, its unwritten nature, is its most distinguishing characteristic.
Should the UK have a written constitution?
The question then arises in this 800th anniversary year — should the UK now take steps to codify all its laws, rules and conventions governing the government of the country into one comprehensive document, ‘a new Magna Carta’? The case for a written UK constitution has been debated at our universities and by politicians of all parties for several decades and has been the subject of a House of Commons committee inquiry during the 2010–15 Parliament. If a written constitution for the future is to be prepared, it must be one that engages and involves everyone, especially young people, and not simply legal experts and parliamentarians. Some of the mystique and charm of our ancient constitution might be lost in the process, but a written constitution could bring government and the governed closer together, above all by making the rules by which our political democracy operates more accessible and intelligible to all.