Research Paper on:
Is There a Constitution in Great Britain?

Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
ensuring that there can be no misunderstanding. However, Britain is unlike many of these countries. It is a democracy, with many of the same freedoms and rights, yet, there is  no written constitution, but dos this mean that there is no constitution? Some critics would argue that as it does not exist in this standard and acceptable form it must  be absent, however when we look more closely at this issue we can argue the constitution does exist, simply that it is an unwritten constitution. It can also be  argued that due to the nature of this unwritten constitution there is a greater deal of flexibility, allowing it evolve at a much more natural pace in line with the  needs of society, and as such it may be seen as a more efficient constitution. The first stage in any argument such  as this needs to be a definition of what is meant by a constitution. Here we can look at the way it is defined and consider if as a part  of this there is a requirement for it to be written. This has been defined by many critics and authors, one of the best definitions can be seen as "A  body of laws, customs and conventions that define the composition and powers of the organs of the state and regulate the relations of the various state organs to one another  an to the private citizen" (Hood et al, 1987; 5). If we assume this definition is correct, there is not need for it to be written, but one can appreciate  how it would be simpler for a state if it were in writing. This means we can still argue that there is a form of constitution in Great Britain, only