Unwriting Constitution vs. Writing Constitution

Attribute	Unwriting Constitution	Writing Constitution
Process	Revoking or nullifying existing constitutional provisions	Creating or amending constitutional provisions
Authority	May be done by a higher authority or through popular uprising	Usually done by a designated body or through a formal process
Outcome	Results in the removal or alteration of constitutional rules	Results in the establishment or modification of constitutional rules
Legitimacy	May be seen as controversial or illegitimate by some	Generally seen as legitimate if done through proper channels

Introduction

Constitutions are the fundamental laws that govern a country, outlining the structure of government, the rights of citizens, and the limits of governmental power. There are two main approaches to constitution-making: unwriting constitution and writing constitution. Each approach has its own set of attributes that shape the nature of the constitution and its impact on the country. In this article, we will compare the attributes of unwriting constitution and writing constitution to understand their differences and implications.

Unwriting Constitution

Unwriting constitution refers to a system where the constitution is not codified in a single document but is instead derived from a combination of sources, including historical documents, judicial decisions, and customs. In an unwritten constitution, the constitution is not easily amendable and is often based on tradition and precedent. This system is commonly found in countries like the United Kingdom, where the constitution is not written down in a single document but is instead a combination of statutes, conventions, and judicial decisions.

• Derived from historical documents, judicial decisions, and customs
• Not easily amendable
• Based on tradition and precedent
• Common in countries like the United Kingdom

Writing Constitution

Writing constitution, on the other hand, refers to a system where the constitution is codified in a single document that serves as the supreme law of the land. In a written constitution, the rules and principles governing the country are clearly outlined in a single document, making it easier to amend and interpret. This system is commonly found in countries like the United States, where the Constitution is a written document that outlines the structure of government, the rights of citizens, and the limits of governmental power.

• Codified in a single document
• Serves as the supreme law of the land
• Rules and principles are clearly outlined
• Easier to amend and interpret

Attributes of Unwriting Constitution

Unwriting constitution has several key attributes that distinguish it from writing constitution. One of the main attributes of an unwritten constitution is its flexibility and adaptability. Because an unwritten constitution is not codified in a single document, it can evolve over time through judicial decisions, customs, and conventions. This flexibility allows the constitution to adapt to changing circumstances and societal norms without the need for formal amendment processes.

• Flexibility and adaptability
• Evolution through judicial decisions, customs, and conventions
• Adapts to changing circumstances and societal norms

Attributes of Writing Constitution

Writing constitution, on the other hand, has its own set of attributes that distinguish it from unwriting constitution. One of the main attributes of a written constitution is its clarity and certainty. Because a written constitution is codified in a single document, the rules and principles governing the country are clearly outlined, providing a clear framework for governance. This clarity helps to prevent ambiguity and ensures that all branches of government operate within the limits set by the constitution.

• Clarity and certainty
• Rules and principles are clearly outlined
• Provides a clear framework for governance
• Prevents ambiguity

Implications of Unwriting Constitution

Unwriting constitution has several implications for the governance of a country. One of the main implications of an unwritten constitution is the reliance on conventions and customs. Because an unwritten constitution is based on tradition and precedent, much of the governance of the country is guided by unwritten rules and norms that may not be clearly defined. This reliance on conventions can lead to uncertainty and ambiguity in the interpretation and application of the constitution.

• Reliance on conventions and customs
• Guided by unwritten rules and norms
• May lead to uncertainty and ambiguity

Implications of Writing Constitution

Writing constitution also has implications for the governance of a country. One of the main implications of a written constitution is the rigidity and formal amendment processes. Because a written constitution is codified in a single document, formal amendment processes are required to make changes to the constitution. This rigidity can make it difficult to adapt the constitution to changing circumstances and societal norms, as formal amendments can be time-consuming and politically challenging.

• Rigidity and formal amendment processes
• Formal amendments required to make changes
• Difficult to adapt to changing circumstances and societal norms

Conclusion

In conclusion, unwriting constitution and writing constitution are two distinct approaches to constitution-making, each with its own set of attributes and implications. Unwriting constitution is characterized by flexibility and adaptability, while writing constitution is characterized by clarity and certainty. The choice between unwriting and writing constitution depends on the historical, cultural, and political context of the country, as well as the desired balance between flexibility and certainty in governance.