Constitutional Convention
A Constitution simply convey an assurance between the people and the government where it organises , distributes and regulate state power. There have been assorted attempt by countless number of people to render a clear analogy as to what a Constitution is. Amongst them Professor KC endeavoured to delineate about a constitution in his seascape as,
“the whole system of a government of a country , the collection of rules which establish and regulate or govern the government”1
Contemporary to that of Professor KC, Thomas Paine took the millstone to construe the constitution and came to a viewpoint that it can be deduce as
“A constitution is not the act of a government but of a people constituting a government and a government without constitution is power without right.”2 A neophyte would classify that the constitution is the superior law of a land that administer social club , trade union or nation state which lay down how they should engage. A constitution is the backbone for the country and it is structured like the working of a clockwork where it is provided a bedrock which reside of rules and doctrines. The British constitution has derived over an interminable period of time, reflecting the relative stability of the British polity. It has never been thought necessary to consolidate the basic building blocks of this order in Britain. What Britain has instead is an accretion of diversified statutes , conventions , judicial decisions and treaties which collectively can be attribute to as the British Constitution. It is thus more accurate to refer to Britain’s constitution as an un-codified , rather than an “unwritten” one3. Sir Ivor Jennings adduces a commensurate appraisal of this appreciable anomaly:
“if a constitution means a written document, then obviously Great Britain has no constitution. In countries where such a document exists , the word has that meaning. But the document itself merely sets out rules determining the
“the whole system of a government of a country , the collection of rules which establish and regulate or govern the government”1
Contemporary to that of Professor KC, Thomas Paine took the millstone to construe the constitution and came to a viewpoint that it can be deduce as
“A constitution is not the act of a government but of a people constituting a government and a government without constitution is power without right.”2 A neophyte would classify that the constitution is the superior law of a land that administer social club , trade union or nation state which lay down how they should engage. A constitution is the backbone for the country and it is structured like the working of a clockwork where it is provided a bedrock which reside of rules and doctrines. The British constitution has derived over an interminable period of time, reflecting the relative stability of the British polity. It has never been thought necessary to consolidate the basic building blocks of this order in Britain. What Britain has instead is an accretion of diversified statutes , conventions , judicial decisions and treaties which collectively can be attribute to as the British Constitution. It is thus more accurate to refer to Britain’s constitution as an un-codified , rather than an “unwritten” one3. Sir Ivor Jennings adduces a commensurate appraisal of this appreciable anomaly:
“if a constitution means a written document, then obviously Great Britain has no constitution. In countries where such a document exists , the word has that meaning. But the document itself merely sets out rules determining the