Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sademajek)
    could someone please answer this question

    Using your own knowledge as well as the extract, identify and explain reasons why judgesmay have been accused of being ‘driven by a human rights agenda

    You can talk about cases that the courts have ruled to infringe human rights like for terrorism -Abu Qatada, right to privacy or anonymity - Jamie buglers killers etc
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sademajek)
    ok ,
    A constitution is a set of rules that defines themanner a country is run. The British constitution is said to be an unwrittenconstitution, more accurately it is uncodified as much more of the British constitution is written down, however, theyare not all written down in a single document like a codified constitutionwould require as how the US is, however draws from several different sourcessuch as; statutes laws, common law, conventions, EU laws, authoritativedocuments etc. Statute law, is a written law passed down by parliament forexample the human rights act of 1998 which brought the European convention onhuman rights into British law, conventions is another source of the Britishconstitution, they are unwritten laws considered binding on members of thepolitical community for example the Salisbury convention which made sure thatthe house of lords does not obstruct proposals contained in the governments most recent manifesto.

    Has the British constitution become increasinglycodified? Its not the case that the British constitution is being written in asingle document but in fact that more of the constitution is being written downas there is increasingly more written statutes that have great constitutionalimpacts as they are passed by parliament making them more rigid therefore harder to change as parliament has ultimatesovereignty, however you could say the EU laws are exempt from this, thesignificant examples of statute law with great constitutional impacts are suchas the TheHuman Rights Act [1998]which was put inplace under Tony Blair, the Human Rights Act enshrined into constitutional lawbasic human rights that appear as articles of the European Convention of HumanRights, However does allow for changes to be made by the government to theseterms. The Act's terms include: Article 2 (Right to Life), a citizen's right tolife is protected by law. No citizen can be deprived of their lifeintentionally, except in the case of serving a criminal sentence. Article6 (Fair Trial), all citizens are to be tried fairly and equally in a court oflaw, and are presumed innocent until proven guilty. Article12 (Marriage and Family), all men and women have the right to marry and start afamily. Anotherexample that could be used is Devolution for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland as much of it hasthe character of fundamental law, it has limited the powers of Westminster itcontributes to the case that the British constitution has becomemore codified in the sense that it is more rigid and hard to change because itis derived through referendums, defying this means that the government is againstthe wish of the people.

    Another statute that supports that indeed theBritish constitution is becoming more codified is the 2005 constitutionalreform act which separate the judiciary form the executive and legislature bycreating a supreme court court which more adopts the idea of separate powersmostly found n codified constitutions like the US for example , it also tookover the judicial work of the house of lords, establishing the judicial appointments commission. The prospect of a coalition government in 2010 opens up the discussion even more as it led to the coalition agreement for stability and reform and called for constitutional clarification by the cabinet secretary,which demonstrates that indeed the constitution is becoming more codified asthere was a need for ‘clarification’ which without a doubt a codified constitution does establish.

    Authoritative documentation has undoubtedly been imbedded into the constitution for example theministerial code first published as questions of procedure for ministers in1992, and now as a set of ‘rules’ for ministers. The cabinet manual alsodemonstrates hugely the change of the British constitutions as traditions arebeing replaced as it set out how the government and civil service relate to themonarchy, devolved administrations and international institutions such as theEU.

    In conclusion there is no doubt that theBritish constitution is becoming more codified not in the sense that everythingis written down on piece of authoritative document making it highly entrenchedbut in the sense that there is a growing body of codified statute la, that aremaking the constitution more rigid, however it is still a far cry from a completecodified constitution as laws and be flexibly changed by the sovereignty ofparliament just needing a majority.
    I like it, especially the intro.
    You should mentioned other 'written down' parts such as the cabinet manual (I forgot what that does) xD
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    For Core Executive, I just can't wrap my head around question about whether the Cabinet makes key policy decisions. Any help?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by govtandpolitics)
    Anyone else not revised enough and anything they have revised, they don't understand????? Please someone relate xD I'm panicking, don't know any government
    im the same im going to have to pull an all nighter because i really need to make up for how crap unit 1 went
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Can someone look at my plan for this question please?
    ' Various demands upon MPS can make it difficult for them to put their interests of the constituents first '

    Intro- one of the most important functions of parliament is to represent, therefore MPs have to manage to represent their constituent as they have been elected to do so, however this can become an issue when MPs are blindsighted by things like party loyalty, promotions, collective responsibilty and individual ministerial responsibilty- making it impossible to manage these all at the same time

    Yes it makes it difficult...
    Point 1- Party Loyalty- the MPs are voted mostly on the basis of what party they represent, like safe seats in areas in the South for Conservatives and Upnorth (not anymore haha) for Labour. This means that MPS owe it to their party for using their party image to get elected, therefore they have to be party loyal and respect the party they are in. Also, the members are constricted by party discipline by their party whips which means that because they have to stay loyal, they prove this through voting for their parties views unlike their own
    However, party loyalty didn't mean much for the Conservative and Liberal democrats through the coalition term as there were many backbench rebellions on issues like student tuition fees, unprecedented rebellion overregretting the absence of the referendum of EU membership in the queen speech- due to LIb dems losing AV referndum

    Point 2- Due to our parliamentary style of government, the gvernment has to perform as a collective face, and take collective responsibility over their governments work, therefore if MPs are scrutinised over choosing to support the government instead of oppose it only to represent their constituents because then the government will look weak to the opposition and it is said that opposition don't win elections, governments lose them..so they have to support the party to maintain dominance in parliament
    However, select committees confined of party majorities of the government go against the government whilst they scrutinize, for example, Home affairs committee 2006 - detaining terror suspects under Blair.

    Point 3- Individual ministerial responsibilty- if an MP has been promoted to a minister then it makes it difficult to solely manage their constituency because they have demands from their demand, and ministerial responsibilty means that the ministers have to be accountable and responsible for their actions and those of its department
    E.g Ian Duncan Smith 2016 resigned over disability cuts and Robin Cook in 2001 over Iraq war
    However, the Prime Minister in witney visits his constituency often to solve problems in the constiuency, ministers still juggle their role

    Point 4- MPs have their own agendas when they become an MP, they may want to introduce their own legislation through the private member's bill system whereby they can influence government policy. E.g Ban on hunting act, 2009 Autism Act and 1967 Abortion act
    However, the MP has to gain support from his own party and from his own constiuents to do this
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    The content to the essay is brilliant and clear with relevant examples but, make sure you balance your argument. So you strongly mentioned how the British constitution has become increasingly codified but lacked a counter argument as to why the constitution has stayed uncodified. Such as the concept that the uncodified constitution is flexible due the the 2006 Terrorism Act which was implement as a result of the 7/7 bombings in 2005 thus it keeps up to date and current with major issues etc.
    In essence, balance out your points. 2 for 2 against!

    (Original post by Sademajek)
    ok ,
    A constitution is a set of rules that defines themanner a country is run. The British constitution is said to be an unwrittenconstitution, more accurately it is uncodified as much more of the British constitution is written down, however, theyare not all written down in a single document like a codified constitutionwould require as how the US is, however draws from several different sourcessuch as; statutes laws, common law, conventions, EU laws, authoritativedocuments etc. Statute law, is a written law passed down by parliament forexample the human rights act of 1998 which brought the European convention onhuman rights into British law, conventions is another source of the Britishconstitution, they are unwritten laws considered binding on members of thepolitical community for example the Salisbury convention which made sure thatthe house of lords does not obstruct proposals contained in the governments most recent manifesto.

    Has the British constitution become increasinglycodified? Its not the case that the British constitution is being written in asingle document but in fact that more of the constitution is being written downas there is increasingly more written statutes that have great constitutionalimpacts as they are passed by parliament making them more rigid therefore harder to change as parliament has ultimatesovereignty, however you could say the EU laws are exempt from this, thesignificant examples of statute law with great constitutional impacts are suchas the TheHuman Rights Act [1998]which was put inplace under Tony Blair, the Human Rights Act enshrined into constitutional lawbasic human rights that appear as articles of the European Convention of HumanRights, However does allow for changes to be made by the government to theseterms. The Act's terms include: Article 2 (Right to Life), a citizen's right tolife is protected by law. No citizen can be deprived of their lifeintentionally, except in the case of serving a criminal sentence. Article6 (Fair Trial), all citizens are to be tried fairly and equally in a court oflaw, and are presumed innocent until proven guilty. Article12 (Marriage and Family), all men and women have the right to marry and start afamily. Anotherexample that could be used is Devolution for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland as much of it hasthe character of fundamental law, it has limited the powers of Westminster itcontributes to the case that the British constitution has becomemore codified in the sense that it is more rigid and hard to change because itis derived through referendums, defying this means that the government is againstthe wish of the people.

    Another statute that supports that indeed theBritish constitution is becoming more codified is the 2005 constitutionalreform act which separate the judiciary form the executive and legislature bycreating a supreme court court which more adopts the idea of separate powersmostly found n codified constitutions like the US for example , it also tookover the judicial work of the house of lords, establishing the judicial appointments commission. The prospect of a coalition government in 2010 opens up the discussion even more as it led to the coalition agreement for stability and reform and called for constitutional clarification by the cabinet secretary,which demonstrates that indeed the constitution is becoming more codified asthere was a need for ‘clarification’ which without a doubt a codified constitution does establish.

    Authoritative documentation has undoubtedly been imbedded into the constitution for example theministerial code first published as questions of procedure for ministers in1992, and now as a set of ‘rules’ for ministers. The cabinet manual alsodemonstrates hugely the change of the British constitutions as traditions arebeing replaced as it set out how the government and civil service relate to themonarchy, devolved administrations and international institutions such as theEU.

    In conclusion there is no doubt that theBritish constitution is becoming more codified not in the sense that everythingis written down on piece of authoritative document making it highly entrenchedbut in the sense that there is a growing body of codified statute la, that aremaking the constitution more rigid, however it is still a far cry from a completecodified constitution as laws and be flexibly changed by the sovereignty ofparliament just needing a majority.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by IssyJuly7)
    For Core Executive, I just can't wrap my head around question about whether the Cabinet makes key policy decisions. Any help?
    For this question you've only gotta analyse the key roles of Cabinet. It's essentially asking "Is making decisions REALLY one of Cabinets roles"

    So you could say yes because one of their roles is to legitimise policy. If Ministers don't have the backing of Cabinet then they have nothing at all which suggests that they do make the key decisions.
    E.g. Thatchers Shop Bill in 1986 didn't go through because of Cabinet not supporting it.

    Another role of Cabinet is to act as a debate forum. They debate key policies within their department and as a whole before they actually become policies.
    E.g. In 1997-2001 the Northern Ireland Secretary in Cabinet had debated issues and formalised the Good Friday Agreement before it was fully processed.

    Another role is to settle disputes. In this sense, by settling disputes between two cabinet ministers, they are, in effect, making key decisions. The disputes are often around policy.
    E.g. Gordon Brown and Margaret Beckett disputed over the policy of what the minimum wage should be raised to in 1997. It was resolved by cabinet in Brown's favour.

    But then you could say that they dont because:
    Recently cabinet are becomming less important:
    Blair's bilateral meetings. Short meetings with cabinet and only briefing them on subjects.
    E.g. Iraq War was largely debated by Cabinet but they weren't allowed access to any papers or files so did they really have much of a chance to decide?

    Also now Cabinet is much less of a debate chamber, more of a rubber stamp. I.e. most policy is decided by the main ministers (Quads) and then sent to Cabinet for 'approval'.
    E.g. Decisions about adopting the Euro had been debated by Cabinet a lot, but this meeting seemed more like a chance to just air their grievances as the decision to not change to the Euro had already been done by Blair and his ''club'' of senior ministers (including Tony Blair)

    Hope this helped!
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LowkeyLogical)
    The content to the essay is brilliant and clear with relevant examples but, make sure you balance your argument. So you strongly mentioned how the British constitution has become increasingly codified but lacked a counter argument as to why the constitution has stayed uncodified. Such as the concept that the uncodified constitution is flexible due the the 2006 Terrorism Act which was implement as a result of the 7/7 bombings in 2005 thus it keeps up to date and current with major issues etc.
    In essence, balance out your points. 2 for 2 against!
    Thanks a buch! i was thinking so, i wrote this a while back so going to balance it.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    so what are peoples final prediction for the exam tomorrow? do you think judiciary could come up?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    HELP. Using your own knowledge as well as the extract, identify and explain two arguments forhaving common law as part of the constitution.
    What reasons are there????????
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sademajek)
    so what are peoples final prediction for the exam tomorrow? do you think judiciary could come up?
    It'll probably be a ten marker
    Offline

    4
    (Original post by govtandpolitics)
    HELP. Using your own knowledge as well as the extract, identify and explain two arguments forhaving common law as part of the constitution.
    What reasons are there????????
    just the pros of judicial activism and review (a bit)
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sademajek)
    so what are peoples final prediction for the exam tomorrow? do you think judiciary could come up?
    I'm thinking for Parliment it'll be a question on HOL reform
    Constitution it might be on whether we should get codified one. Or sources of the constitution
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by govandpolitics)
    just the pros of judicial activism and review (a bit)
    Which are??
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LenniesRabbit)
    For this question you've only gotta analyse the key roles of Cabinet. It's essentially asking "Is making decisions REALLY one of Cabinets roles"

    So you could say yes because one of their roles is to legitimise policy. If Ministers don't have the backing of Cabinet then they have nothing at all which suggests that they do make the key decisions.
    E.g. Thatcher's Shop Bill in 1986 didn't go through because of Cabinet not supporting it.

    Another role of Cabinet is to act as a debate forum. They debate key policies within their department and as a whole before they actually become policies.
    E.g. In 1997-2001 the Northern Ireland Secretary in Cabinet had debated issues and formalised the Good Friday Agreement before it was fully processed.

    Another role is to settle disputes. In this sense, by settling disputes between two cabinet ministers, they are, in effect, making key decisions. The disputes are often around policy.
    E.g. Gordon Brown and Margaret Beckett disputed over the policy of what the minimum wage should be raised to in 1997. It was resolved by cabinet in Brown's favour.

    But then you could say that they dont because:
    Recently cabinet are becomming less important:
    Blair's bilateral meetings. Short meetings with cabinet and only briefing them on subjects.
    E.g. Iraq War was largely debated by Cabinet but they weren't allowed access to any papers or files so did they really have much of a chance to decide?

    Also now Cabinet is much less of a debate chamber, more of a rubber stamp. I.e. most policy is decided by the main ministers (Quads) and then sent to Cabinet for 'approval'.
    E.g. Decisions about adopting the Euro had been debated by Cabinet a lot, but this meeting seemed more like a chance to just air their grievances as the decision to not change to the Euro had already been done by Blair and his ''club'' of senior ministers (including Tony Blair)

    Hope this helped!
    Thank you so much, this helped a lot!
    Offline

    4
    (Original post by govtandpolitics)
    Which are??
    judges can defend minorty interests.
    perhaps better respected by public compared to politicians
    can impose essential but unpopular legislation that politicians are unwilling to do themselves/
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    What are the general consensus predictions for constitutions and multilevel governance??
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BirdIsWord)
    I like it, especially the intro.
    You should mentioned other 'written down' parts such as the cabinet manual (I forgot what that does) xD
    Thanks! what mark would you give it as it is?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Can someone please help me with the judiciary. How has the judiciary become more politicised? It would be really helpful if you included 2 points for and against with examples!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sabnamraii)
    Can someone please help me with the judiciary. How has the judiciary become more politicised? It would be really helpful if you included 2 points for and against with examples!
    Rise of judicial activism to counter ministers criticising judicial decisions, e.g. Lord Neuberger calling Theresa May's comments on a court decision "inappropriate" in 2013

    Judges are also commenting on policy more, e.g. Lord Woolf criticised the CRA 2005 publicly

    ----

    Flip side, the CRA 2005 removed the Lord Chancellory from the Lords and reduced appointment power so it rests in the Judicial Appointment Commission

    Judges are paid independently through the Consolidated Fund although their pensions were still cut in 2013

 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.