Towards a bill of rights And Codifying the Constitution

Question 1

Pressure for change; Party:Conservatives

Answer 1

party call for HRA to be replaced by new Bill of Rights, but not by a Bill that adds a further level of Rights

Question 2

[Representation of the People Act 1983]

Answer 2

s. 3(1): Detained person is legally incapable of voting

Question 3

Hirst v UK

Answer 3

-Claimant argued that s.3 of RPA 1983 imposes a blanket restriction on all convicted prisoners to prison that applies automatically no matter what length, nature or type of sentence, and is incompatible with Article 3 ECHR. Hirst won

Question 4

Why the UK has no codified Constitution: Bogandor

Answer 4

Historical reason: Written constitution usually formed through revolution, regime change, war, attainment of independence.

Conceptual reason: Only dominant constitutional principle is parliamentary sovereignty.

Question 5

Case for a codified constitution: Bogdanor

Answer 5

Allows for a clear, accessible and coherent account of the body of fundamental rules and principles according to which the state and society are constituted and governed.

Question 6

Case for a codified constitution: Barber

Answer 6

• Affords a radical change and improvement of the constitution
• Clarity would be good as people will want to know where the constitutional power lies

Question 7

Case against a codified constitution: Barber

Answer 7

• Too many different areas of law that are not connected, shouldn’t be put into one document
• Difficult to determine what the role of the courts
• Too much certainty and clarity in constitution wouldn’t be beneficial