Politics Paper 1

Explain and Analyse 3 Sources of the US Constitution

Explain and Analyse 3 Sources of the US Constitution

• Common Law - body of law that is developed through the decisions and precedent of the court system. It is simply court rulings that have been passed down over the years and have become law. One example is royal prerogative. These are historic powers of the monarch which have now been passed to the Prime Minister and can include peerages. Common law has judicial precedent but does not have precedence over statute law. Acts of Parliament can easily override any common law

• Statute Law - these are laws made by Parliament and are often reffed to as Acts of Parliament. They can override any law. One example is the HRA 1998 which emphasised the fundamental right and freedoms already set out and backed by the ECHR. One example is freedom of peaceful assembly. These are significant as they are te most powerful law of the country and are hard to be removed. In theory these rights can be removed at any time by Parliament, however in practice it does have the ‘double lock’ of the ECHR

• Conventions - these are written traditions that enable government and political activity to run smoother. They are bound by nothing but tradition and those taking part must have a shared understanding of it and what it is. One example is the 1945 Salisbury Convention where the Lords agreed to not delay the governing party’s manifesto policies. This was shown in the 1949 Act of Parliament where the Lords agreed not to delay any policy by more than 1 year. Conventions are significant as it shows that people taking part in it are not constitutionally obliged to act as they do, unless it becomes law.

Explain and analyse 3 constitutional reforms introduced since 1997

• Freedom of Information Act 2000 - required all public bodies like the NHS to publish any necessary information online and enabled the public to request any information they’d like from the Information Commissioner’s Office using Freedom of Information Requests. For example, in 2020 alone there was 44,000 FOI requests, 50% of which got refused. The reason why these often get refused is because unlicensed bodies want to keep someone’s personal details away from the public eye. This creates conflict between an individual’s right to privacy and an individual’s right to information

• Fixed term Parliaments Act 2011 - this was an Act following the election of the coalition government (Lib dems and Conservatives). This meant that no Prime minister was able to call a snap election by dissolving Parliament, instead it required 2/3 majority in Parliament to have a re-election. However, debate around the FTPA continued during periods of political instability especially during the 2017-2019 Brexit deadlock, the inability to call a general election easily prolonged the crisis. The 2022 Dissolution and Calling of Parliament Act repealed the FTPA, restoring the Prime Minster’s power to call elections with the monarch’s approval.

• Human Rights Act 1998 - this incorporated the ECHR into UK la, setting out the basic fundamental rights into law. It set out basic freedoms such as right to life and freedom from torture. Courts can use this law to decide on cases and if they protect the individual’s basic human rights. For example, in the case of Aby Qatada and his deportation to Jordan, the court blocked it fearing that evidence obtained under torture would be used against him. In this case, the court used the HRA to protect his freedom for torture. This is significant as it educates people on their rights and moreover protects people’s civil liberties. However, this act is criticised by Conservatives who believe that , as in the case of Aby Qatada, individual rights are prioritised rather than the population’s rights as a whole as Aby Qatada was part of an Islamic terrorist group.

Explain and analyse 3 ways the British constitution upholds citizens’ rights.

• Freedom of Information Act 2000 - required all public bodies like the NHS to publish any necessary information online and enabled the public to request any information they’d like from the Information Commissioner’s Office using Freedom of Information Requests. For example, in 2020 alone there was 44,000 FOI requests, 50% of which got refused. The reason why these often get refused is because unlicensed bodies want to keep someone’s personal details away from the public eye. This creates conflict between an individual’s right to privacy and an individual’s right to information

• Human Rights Act 1998 - this incorporated the ECHR into UK la, setting out the basic fundamental rights into law. It set out basic freedoms such as right to life and freedom from torture. Courts can use this law to decide on cases and if they protect the individual’s basic human rights. For example, in the case of Aby Qatada and his deportation to Jordan, the court blocked it fearing that evidence obtained under torture would be used against him. In this case, the court used the HRA to protect his freedom for torture. This is significant as it educates people on their rights and moreover protects people’s civil liberties. However, this act is criticised by Conservatives who believe that , as in the case of Aby Qatada, individual rights are prioritised rather than the population’s rights as a whole as Aby Qatada was part of an Islamic terrorist group.

• Equality Act 2010 - this replaced old anti-discriminatory piece of legislation with a simple act. It provides protection in the workplace and society against any discrimination towards someone’s age,race,religion or disability. This is key in upholding citizen’s constitutional right against any form of discrimination that may stop them from living their daily lives. It is significant in the use by courts which can decide whether a company/individual has acted against the Equality Act. For example, GTR, the rail company, has admitted in a leaked document that it has breached the Equality Act by paying for disabled people’s taxis in order for them to access the nearest accessible station if staff wasn’t around to help, admitting it was ‘not a good option’. This highlighted just how easily companies can manipulate and play with an individual’s rights and to which they can be held accountable by courts

Explain and analyse 3 reasons why the Uk should retain its uncodified constitution

• Flexibility and Adaptability - The uncodified constitutions allows the UK to adapt to the changing circumstances without the need for a lengthy or rigid amendment process. It is based on statutes, common law and conventions. The introduction of the Scottish Parliament and Welsh Assembly in the 1990s through the Scotland Act 1998 and Government of Wales Act 1998 demonstrated the constitution’s ability to accommodate devolution. This flexibility is especially beneficial in fast-changing world, where rigid codified systems struggle to adapt and respond effectively to students.

• Preservation of Parliamentary Sovereignty - Retaining an uncodified constitution ensures that parliamentary sovereignty remains the core principle of the UK’s political system. This means Parliament can legislate without being bound by a higher, entrenched legal framework. for example, Brexit demonstrated parliamentary sovereignty in action. The UK’s departure from the EU required repealing the European Communities Act 1972, showing how Parliament could reassert its supremacy without constitutional constraints. Codification could challenge parliamentary sovereignty by introducing entrenched rules, potentially giving courts more power to strike down legislation.

• There is no popular demand for it and other issues are more important - Many would question how this would be implemented and how this would affect their lives. There are other more important issues such as EVEL. However, there is not much opposition towards it either, A poll done by the Ministry of Justice asking ‘Should the UK have a written constitution?’ 44% said yes, 39% said no and 17% were unsure.

Explain and analyse 3 arguments in favour of constitutional reform

• House of Lords Reform - Reforming the upper chamber of Parliament will allow for increased representation in parliament but will also make the lawmaking process more difficult. Suggestions were made regarding reform by the Joint Committee on the Draft House of Lords Reform Bill published a report on the 23rd of April suggesting electoral mandate and that 80% should be elected and 20% nominated that way it allows for both representation and nomination of the Lords. This is significant as by providing representation in parliament it enhances representative democracy and allows for the population to choose who they want to make their laws. However, despite proposals and going through the Commons and the second reading, the Bill was refused by the Deputy Prime Minister in September 2012

• Electoral Reform - The existent electoral system (FPTP) proves to be unrepresentative of its votes. This means that the votes received by a party do not certainly illustrate the number of votes it received. For example, in teh 2024 general election, the Reform UK party received 14% of the vote but only 4 seats whereas Labour received 34% of the vote and 63% of the seats. This shows how the current FPTP system is unrepresentative, undermining representative democracy and its features, showing need for reform. However, attempts for reform have been rejected by the population in the 2011 AV referendum which showed that more than 70% of voters voted they don’t wish to change the FPTP

• Devolution - Devolved institutions such as Scotland and Wales don’t have enough power extended to them, showing that Westminster Parliament still has more power over a country it does not operate in. Devolution would solve the problem of EVEL, which enables Scottish MPs to vote on issues that do not concern them, such as tuition fees in 2004 when the House of Commons wanted to introduce various tuition fees, Scottish MPs’ vote was crucial to the passing of what became to be the Higher Education Act 2004, when the matter of education did not affect them. This is significant showing that devolution will solve many problems faced by the English Parliament and end the devolved institutions’ say on English matters. However, EVEL was abolished in 2021 for being too complex and time-consuming.