Whether the UK constitution should remain uncodified is arguable. The UK has an uncodified constitution, therefore it is not found in one single written document, whereas in the USA you are able to buy a copy of the US constitution in nearly any bookshop found. If we did have a codified constitution, rules would be written down which increases us to understand and claim our rights and it will be done more frequently. However, with an uncodified constitution, it is adaptable and makes amendments easily which allows it to remain relevant in modern times, making laws easily and creating new ones to keep up with our evolving political, social and economic climate.
Firstly, the constitution should be codified because it strengthens rights protections. If people in the US are able to buy a copy of the US constitution from any bookshop, then UK citizens should be able to as well. UK citizens lack a constitution which can be read and understood; therefore it is less likely for their rights to be claimed. If the UK was a constitution, they would be able to claim and know about their rights much more easily. Rights are not protected because they lack entrenchment in our political system.
Secondly, since the constitution is unwritten, it is unknown. Therefore, citizens will and do rely on the government to play by unwritten rules. If the constitution arrangements and procedures were defined and limited by law, it would be much safer and democratic which will then go on to lead to an educative benefit, enhance trust by the electorate and also help to protect the democracy.
Thirdly, the UK is becoming more integrated with other Western democracies such as the EU. Most of the developed countries such as Canada, New Zealand and America are part of the codified constitutions because it protects their basic rights. Therefore, if Britain adopted a codified constitution, then their civil liberties would not be at risk by an over powerful government.
Please join StudyMode to read the full document