The Student Room Group

Constitutional LAW

'Would human rights be better protected under a UK written constitution'

im really struggling with this exam question if anybody can help please?
Reply 1
Is this an essay question? You can start by giving a background on the current state of human rights protection in the UK, including relevant statutes such as the Human Rights Act 1998 and case law such as R (on the application of Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union (the importance of having a written constitution that clearly defines the role of the different branches of government and the rights of citizens. A written constitution would have provided a clear framework for determining the process for triggering Article 50 and the role of Parliament in that process).

Then state that a written constitution in the UK would enhance the protection of human rights by providing a clear and explicit framework for the government to uphold citizens' rights, and a clearer framework for interpreting and enforcing human rights. Discuss the advantages of having a clear and explicit set of rights and protections for citizens, including the ability to hold the government accountable for upholding those rights, as shown by a comparison of human rights protection in countries such as the US, Canada, or Germany that have written constitutions (the use of the Bill of Rights and the US Constitution as a benchmark for interpreting human rights in the US legal system).

You can also give the pros of a written constitution, but conclude by supporting why a written constitution would be important.
Reply 2
Original post by Gesengi
Is this an essay question? You can start by giving a background on the current state of human rights protection in the UK, including relevant statutes such as the Human Rights Act 1998 and case law such as R (on the application of Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union (the importance of having a written constitution that clearly defines the role of the different branches of government and the rights of citizens. A written constitution would have provided a clear framework for determining the process for triggering Article 50 and the role of Parliament in that process).

Then state that a written constitution in the UK would enhance the protection of human rights by providing a clear and explicit framework for the government to uphold citizens' rights, and a clearer framework for interpreting and enforcing human rights. Discuss the advantages of having a clear and explicit set of rights and protections for citizens, including the ability to hold the government accountable for upholding those rights, as shown by a comparison of human rights protection in countries such as the US, Canada, or Germany that have written constitutions (the use of the Bill of Rights and the US Constitution as a benchmark for interpreting human rights in the US legal system).

You can also give the pros of a written constitution, but conclude by supporting why a written constitution would be important.


You are a legend and life saver thank you !!!
Reply 3
Original post by Priya2002
You are a legend and life saver thank you !!!


You're welcome! If stuck don't hesitate to reach out.

Quick Reply

Latest