Exam 17: The Canadian constitution and constitutional change

Correct Answer:

Answered by Examlex AI Copilot

A written constitution and an unwritten constitution differ primarily in their formality, codification, and flexibility.

A written constitution is a formal document that defines the structure of a government, delineates the powers and responsibilities of its various branches, and outlines the rights and duties of citizens. It is typically a single, coherent document that has been officially drafted, ratified, and is accessible to the public. Examples of countries with written constitutions include the United States, whose Constitution was ratified in 1788, and India, with a constitution that came into effect in 1950.

Key characteristics of a written constitution include:

1. Codification: A written constitution is codified, meaning that it is contained within a single document or a series of documents that are formally adopted.
2. Clarity: The provisions are explicitly stated, which can help in reducing ambiguity and providing a clear understanding of the law.
3. Rigidity: Written constitutions often have specific procedures for amendments, making them relatively difficult to change. This rigidity can provide stability and predictability in the legal system.
4. Judicial Review: A written constitution usually allows for the judiciary to interpret its provisions, which can lead to a body of constitutional law through court decisions.

In contrast, an unwritten constitution is not contained in a single, formal document. Instead, it consists of various sources, including statutes, legal conventions, judicial decisions, and historical documents. The United Kingdom is a prime example of a country with an unwritten constitution, where the constitution's components are found in common law, statutes, and political conventions.

Key characteristics of an unwritten constitution include:

1. Un-codification: An unwritten constitution is not consolidated into a single document. It is spread across various legal and non-legal sources.
2. Flexibility: Because it is not a single, rigid document, an unwritten constitution can be more easily and frequently adapted to changing circumstances.
3. Evolution: An unwritten constitution evolves over time as new conventions emerge, statutes are passed, and court decisions are made.
4. Lack of Judicial Review: In systems with an unwritten constitution, there may be less scope for judicial review of legislation against a codified set of constitutional principles, as there is no single constitutional document to reference.

In summary, the main difference between a written and an unwritten constitution lies in their form of documentation, the ease with which they can be amended, and the clarity and accessibility of their provisions. Written constitutions provide a clear, stable framework for governance, while unwritten constitutions offer greater flexibility and evolve with the political and social fabric of the country.