Terrorism Its Causes and Effects Essay Example for Free

Terrorism Its Causes and Effects Essay Terrorism has become a worldwide phenomenon with its many faces and manifestations. State-sponsored terrorism presents its worst form. Pol Pot in Cambodia let loose such a terrorism which killed millions of Cambodians. In India terrorism has been there in many States. Terrorists do not hesitate in using even the most cruel methods of violence and do not spare even women and children. In Punjab it has been Pakistan sponsored terrorism. It has been in control in Punjab but still not eliminated. Poverty, unemployment, deprivation and illiteracy make a good breeding ground for militancy extremism. In north-eastern States of India the terrorism has been on the rise and nothing effective has been done to check it. The tribal’s of these States have been victims of long neglect, deprivation, economic backwardness and alienation. Similarly People’s War Group (PWG) has been very active in Andhra Pradesh and has won support, sympathy and participation of the rural public in Telengana. Problem Of Terrorism The problem of terrorism need to be tackled on many fronts. It is a global menace and requires global cooperation between powers of the world to check and eradicate so devastating a phenomenon as terrorism. The biggest threat that the nation-state faces today emanates from terrorism which is widespread geographically and diverse ideologically. Modern terrorism thrives on its ability to hit where it hurts the most. The practitioners of modern terrorism believe the world ‘is beyond redemption. Irishterrorists, the Italian and Japanese Red Brigades, the Baader-Meinhoff gang in Germany, Islamic and Jewish fundamentalists have all sought to spread their ideology by the sword. Terrorist’s use of explosives, machine-gun fire or other sophisticated use of arms has interrupted the prayers of dozens of worshipers of all religions and cut short the journey of bus, rail and air passengers. Terrorism has many faces, faces and dimensions. It may be regional, national or global and international in scale. Then it may be regional, communal, political, state-sponsored or foreign in origin. It is found worldwide in one form or the other. The development of very fast means of transport, communication and very sophisticated automatic weapons, have given terrorism new dimensions, depth and immensity. With the globalization, economic integration and cooperation of the nations, the terrorism too has become unlimited and can be transported and transplanted to any part of the world easily. It is a cult of violence, killings, murders, arson and destruction to perpetrate terror, fear and demoralis1ation among the masses. It is in its worst form when it is state-sponsored. Then dictatorial and military rulers resort to violence, killings and shootings of people on suspicion or any other pretext and suppress human rights to make the public obey their unjust, discriminating dictates and administration. For example, Khmer Rouge, led by Pol Pot, let loose the reign of terror in Cambodia between 1970 and 1975 and millions of its citizens were killed by its trigger-happy troops in uniform. Similarly, the Communist Government in China suppressed and killed people in thousands when they demand political reforms, liberalization and freedom from tyranny in 1989. In Tiananmen Square alone outside the Great Hall of the People in Beijing, the main place of students demonstration, about 5,000 young students were shot dead and another 10,000 injured. In Tibet as well, the followers of Dalai Lama and Buddhism are tortured and prosecuted by the government troops and administrators. The people there are being forcibly sterilized and their brains are being systematically washed. Dalai Lama himself fled Tibet and sought refuge in India to escape state-sponsored terrorism, violence and persecution. Now, he has his Government-in-exile at Dharamshala in Himachal Pradesh. Terrorism in India is widespread and there seems no end to it, at least for the present. The way it has been spreading in States like Jammu and Kashmir, Punjab, Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Manipur, Tripura, Nagaland, etc. and spilling-over other states alarmingly, is a matter of great concern. The trigger-happy terrorists and extremists have been using all kinds of violence and automatic weapons and bombs to terrorize people and the administration. Their strategies include killings, murders, bomb-explosions, destruction of houses, looting of banks, disruption of road, and rail transportation and other means of communication, desecration of religious places, hijacking and kidnapping, arson and looting. They rape women and do not even spare innocent children. In retaliation, sometimes there is more terrorism, blood-shed, violence and destruction. In the cross-fire between terrorists and the government, the innocent citizens suffer the most because then the opponent forces become totally blind and lose discrimination. The militancy and terrorism and Punjab has been sponsored by neighbor Pakistan. The Pakistan’s ISI has been supervising and financing the terrorists in the Punjab and adjoining States of Haryana and Rajasthan. It has misled the many young people in the name of religion and separate and independent state of Khalistan. The extremists are trained and armed in Pakistani camps and then smuggled across the border into India. They explode bombs, loot banks, ransack homes, hijack, buses and planes and kidnap people. The militancy and terrorism in Punjab has been curbed and controlled to a large extent but it has not been eliminated. The then Chief Minister of Punjab, Mr. Beant Singh, himself was killed in an terrorist attack. In recent days there has again been a spurt in terrorist activities in Punjab. In the Bhatinda train blast in July, 1997, the fourth in the series of bomb-explosions, 38 lives were lost. The extremists have been striking at soft targets. According to the intelligence reports, Prakash Singh Badal himself was under threat from the terrorists. Again, terrorism in Jammu and Kashmir has been Pakistan- sponsored. A number of terrorist outfits have been active there supported, trained, armed and sneaked into the State by Pakistan. The extremists have given a communal colour to the violence and militancy and thousands of Kashmiri Hindus and Pandits have fled the State. The seeds of communal violence and extremism were really sown during the partition of the sub-continent into India and Pakistan. The terrorists groups in Kashmir mainly consist of some politically frustrated groups, religious fundamentalists and mislead youth of the society. Poverty, unemployment, deprivation and illiteracy have made the region a good breeding ground for militancy. The terrorists indulge in all sorts of anti-social and anti-government activities to achieve their narrow, sectarian, political and unholy aims but they are unlikely to succeed in spite of massive financial and other support from Pakistan. 2004 Lok Sabha campaign in JK-the Jaish-e-Mohammed leaflet in Mitari village, lays out a seven-point code of conduct for local residents. People’s Democratic party workers are â€Å"not to participate in the elections, or else face the consequences-which they understand†. Not only this-there has been scores of events of this nature in JK. During the 2002 Assembly elections, 250 companies of the police and paramilitary forces had been pressed into service to hold the ground. Likewise, contrary to that what may happen this time (2004), and how many companies would be needed is a matter of great concem for the Election Commission. The rise of terrorism and extremism in our north-eastern States of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram, Tripura, Manipur etc. is part of our colonial legacy. The long British rule never attempted to bring the tribal’s of these states into the main stream of the nation. Rather a feeling of separation, hatred, alienation and disharmony was created. Unfortunately even after 55 years of independence, our leaders and governments have failed to change the equation for better. Consequently, misled by a false sense of losing their ethnic identity and independence, they have taken to arms and extremism. Besides social-political and economic aspects there are some such other aspects as psychological, emotional and religious. As a result there has been no participation of the people of these States in the process of democracy and independence. They have been haunted by insecurity, neglect and alienation and want separate and independent states. To achieve their ends they commit heinous crimes like burning, looting and destroying of the homes and houses of other ethnic groups, killing†¢ government security personnel and soldiers. They explode bombs at public places and kill innocent people. They also resort to abduction and kidnappings. The Peoples War Group (PWG) has been quite active for a long time in Andhra Pradesh and now exercises control on a big part of the Telengana region. The poverty and unemployment coupled with illiteracy and exploitation of the weak and vulnerable sections of the society have made these parts of the State fertile ground for insurrection and terrorism. No effective. steps were taken to improve the socio-economic conditions of the people and they were demoralized. In sheer desperation and misery they saw a ray of hope in the PWG movement and if the information is to be believed the militants have been delivering goods. The militant Naxalite outfits have been successful in winning the sympathy, favor and patronage of the down- trodden and long exploited masses who have always been at a receiving and at the hands of the corrupt government officials for many generations. Large parts of Telengana are now under effective control and administration of the PWG. Simply banning an extremist group is not enough, the genuine grievances of the public need to be redressed at the same time. They need a healing touch besides social and economical developments and empowerment. Devaluation and decentralization of powers and economic resources at the grassroots levels to the panchayat raj institutions is the need of the hour. Militancy and terrorism can be checked and eradicated only with the support and active participation of the people of the area. The menace of terrorism needs to be tackled on many fronts. The cause of militancy and terrorism should be clearly and precisely identified and remedial steps taken. There should be clear under- standing and cooperation between neighboring countries on the matter to check terrorism. Moreover, national security and intelligence need be kept quite fit and updated. In the ultimate analysis terrorism achieves nothing, solves nothing. It is sheer madness to take to arms when there are many other democratic and constitutional means available to solve problems in a democratic country like India. Pakistan should also understand that its militant activities and terrorism in India will not succeed. They have already started boomeranging and Pakistan itself is in the worst configuration of communal violence, frenzy, terrorism and bloodshed. Terrorism and its sponsors commit a crime against humanity at large and must be dealt with accordingly. It is a global danger and can be eliminated only by close cooperation between various communities and nations of the world. All terrorist groups are criminals including even those who start with good intentions and objectives because sooner or later they degenerate into corrupt, criminal and anti-social groups. They become so blind in their over-ambition and misguided enthusiasm that they soon lose sense of balance and discrimination between good and evil. Most of the militant outfits have their origin in evil and sin. They are ruthless, rapacious and greedy and do not spare even children, women, old and weak people. They do not hesitate even to abduct and kill foreign tourists and visitors. It creates an endless vicious circle. Terrorists become indiscriminate’ in their killings, shootings and violence. They have no religion, ethics, fellow-feelings and code of conduct. Terrorism drains a country of its valuable resources and enormous funds are spent in facing and checking it. It is said not in vain that prevention is better than cure. Our political leaders are mainly responsible for the origin and growth of terrorism in India in most of the cases. There is still time that th1ey realize that national interest is above everything else and that unity and integrity of the nation is the hallmark of patriotism. Only patriotic feelings coupled with efforts in reduction of poverty, illiteracy, regional imbalances, and inequality among people can successfully face and fight the menace of terrorism.

Hamlet As An Aristotelian Tragedy Essay -- essays research papers

According to the Aristotelian view of tragedy, a tragic hero must fall through his or her own error. This is typically called the "tragic flaw", and can be applied to any characteristic that causes the downfall the hero. Shakespeare's Hamlet, Prince of Denmark can be seen as an Aristotelian tragedy and Hamlet as it's tragic hero. Hamlet's flaw, which in accordance with Aristotle's principles of tragedy causes his demise, is his inability to act. This defect of Hamlet's character is displayed throughout the play. In the opening scenes of the play, the Ghost of old Hamlet reveals the truth about his death to his son, and tells Hamlet to avenge the murder. Hamlet's first response is one that sounds of speedy action, saying "Haste me to know't that I with winds as swift†¦ May sweep to my revenge." (p. 34 lines 29-31) Unfortunately, Hamlet's inability to act on his father's extortion has him reluctant to kill King Claudius by the end of that very scene, when he says, "This time is out of joint, O cursed spite, that I was ever born to set it right." (p. 41 lines 190-191) As the play goes on, Hamlet still has yet to act on his murderous task. In act II, scene 2, Hamlet decides that, before he can avenge his father's death, he must make sure that the Ghost was telling the truth. This simply gives Hamlet more excuse to procrastinate-he gets to put off killing Claudius until after the "play within a play", Mousetrap, is preformed. Not surprisin...

Rape of nanking outline

The Rape of Nanking was a mass murder and war rape the all occurred in the period of six weeks. The Japanese e saw themselves as the superior race compared to the Chinese. There were approve intimately 500,000 people living in Nan king when the Japanese attacked. Over 300,000 CIA villains were killed by the Japanese in brutal ways that even the Nazis living in Anion g at the time were horrified.The Japanese had a long standing contempt for the Chine SE as a people. Being an island nation in the shadow of the much larger China for so much of its history bred a healthy balance offer and nationalism. The Rape of Nanking occurred in just a few weeks late in 1937 to early 1938. When people are asked to describe the Nanking Massacre the most co moon response is â€Å"six weeks of hell. † The Japanese army began to zero in on Nanjing The the the official dates of the war were December 9 , 1937 and lasted tell January 17 1938.The Japanese believed they were superior to all races. Ther efore what atrocity they committed in Nanking were justified to them. The direct cause was the impanel Army took Nanking and wanted to â€Å"celebrate† by raping and murdering thus ands of civilians. During which an estimated 300,000 Chinese soldiers and civilians we re killed, and 20,000 women were raped. The Japanese had troops pushing down from the north while a troop was way ting for them down south. Inside Nanjing was about 70,000 troops and a quarter lion civilians.The troops would begin bringing their own trucks through the city an d not long after that the troops were seen loading people into the trucks by dozens. Nevertheless, most of the Japanese have remembered what happened to the Asian nations including to the people in Nanjing, and the Japanese has lived as a pep useful nation, from the reflection to the war. Being an island nation in the shadow of the much larger for so much of its history bred a healthy balance of fear and nationalism.

Should the United Kingdom Adopt a Written Constitution - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 9 Words: 2635 Downloads: 5 Date added: 2017/06/26 Category Law Essay Type Argumentative essay Level High school Did you like this example? ESSAY QUESTION: SHOULD THE UK ADOPT A WRITTEN CONSTITUTION? First of all, In order to full explain if the UK should adopt a written constitution we need to define the meaning of a constitution. Duhaime.org defines a constitution à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“as the basic fundamental law of a state which sets at how that state will be organized and the powers and authorities of government between different political units and citizens.à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚  Macmillianditionary.com goes on to define a constitution à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“as a set of basic laws or principles for a country that describe the rights and duties of its citizens and the way in which it is governedà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ . I personally define a constitution as the body of rules set in place in order for that particular society to follow and it also guides that society. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Should the United Kingdom Adopt a Written Constitution?" essay for you Create order Now, we need to know how many types of constitution there is. There are three main types of the constitution which are: The written constitution. The unwritten constitution. Flexible/Rigid constitution. Basically, we will be focusing on just two types of the constitution which is the Written Unwritten constitutions. For us to fully grasp this question we need to know what a written and unwritten constitution are: WRITTEN UNWRITTEN CONSTITUTION Before we go any further, we need to know what a written and an unwritten actually are; Written constitution: I would define a written constitution as the body of rules is written and can also be found in one single document. Politics.co.uk defines the written constitution à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“as a formal document which defines the nature of the constitutional settlement, the rules that govern the political system and the rights of citizens and government in a codified formà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ . Examples of countries that use a written constitution: USA Argentina Nigeria Advantages of a written constitution: It is easily accessible The references of a written constitution can be made for the written document and any breach of the principles that are contained in the written constitution will obviously become unconstitutional. It can control the arbitrary rule in a way that it checks on the authority of the head of state so that he would not be able to abuse his authority. It consists of all the basic laws as well as the concepts will all be in one single document. Disadvantages of a written constitution: Cannot be easily amended Sometimes in an autocratic state, the leaders try and change some of the laws that are in the written constitution, in order for it to suit their personal needs. In a country where the written constitution is used, the constitution is supreme. It is also a rigid type of constitution Unwritten constitution: Many people assume that when a country has an unwritten constitution it necessarily means that their constitution is literally not written down. However, that is not the case the fact that it is called à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"an unwritten constitutionà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢, does not mean that their constitution is not written down it just means that it cannot be found in on document like the written constitution but is found in various documents. Merriam- Webster.com it defines an unwritten constitution as à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“not being embodied in a single document but based chiefly on custom and precedent as expressed in statutes and judicial decisions.à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚  Examples of countries that use an unwritten constitution: Israel New Zealand UK Advantages of an unwritten constitution: It is also a flexible constitution, meaning that it can be easily amended. An unwritten constitution reshapes. So that it can showcase the times we live in. There is supremacy of parliament. Unlike many countries that use a written constitution, states that use amending an unwritten constitution is way simpler. It is a simple procedure to change the constitution Disadvantages of an unwritten constitution: There is a lot of uncertainty within the constitution itself. All though the unwritten constitution is very flexible. Political issues can occur that can make the process harder or much more difficult. It is not easily accessible. DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WRITTEN CONSTITUTION UNWRITTEN CONSTITUTION The main difference between an unwritten and a written constitution is that a written constitution it can be found in one legal document which is usually enacted in the form of laws. A written constitution is very clear- cut, definite as well as systematic. A written constitution is actually the product that was born from the hard work of the people of that country/state. Basically, this type of constitution is made by a governmental group that is first of all elected into office by the general public of that society/country at a point in time in history. A country that has a written constitution, usually the constitution in that country is usually supreme because most of the laws that are used to guide that country/society is actually derived from the constitution. Also stated earlier, A written constitution is rigid, which means that the procedure to amend if there is anything to amend if there is any situation to do so it is a difficult one. Usually most written constitutions donà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢t really go through a process of change which can mean that most of the laws that derive from there are archaic or it isnà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢t necessary for this time and age. For example, the constitution of India was created in the year 1950 so some of the laws that were made then cannot identify with the society change of 2015 and it cannot be changed because the constitution is a rigid one. As for an unwritten constitution, is the type of constitution that most of the governmentsà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ concepts usually are not enforced into law or enforced that is made into an actual law or a body of laws. Usually an unwritten constitution comprises of customs, conventions, traditions and very few written laws that are actually dated. Unlike the written constitution, the unwritten constitution is unsystematic, not precise, not clear- cut. Basically it is the exact opposite of the written constitutio n. We know that for a written constitution that it is derived from the hard work of the people which most of the time they have no knowledge of this. However, an unwritten constitution actually derives from the conscious hard work of the people of that particular society. Which can mean that the effort that was put there was not really a whole hearted one. An unwritten constitution is not derived from any historical development or event, neither is it created by a governmental group e.g.: Constituent assembly at a certain point in history. Because of this, unlike a written constitution that can be called an enacted constitution. An unwritten constitution is usually called a cumulative constitution. A classic example of an unwritten constitution is the UK constitution which is our main topic of discussion. Also unlike the written constitution, an unwritten constitution is a flexible constitution ità ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s a flexible constitution which simply means that it can be easily am ended or even changed. The unwritten constitution is actually a time- friendly constitution meaning that unlike the written constitution that most of the laws that were made at that particular time in history e.g.: the Indian constitution that was created in 1950, most of the laws that are there are still being used now. This sometimes makes it difficult and confusing for the society of 2015 to comprehend. The unwritten constitution is a different case, due to the fact that that it is flexible which makes the amendment procedure quite simple. Most of the laws are changed during time and it agrees with that particular society at that point in time which makes it easy to comprehend. In a country that makes use of an unwritten constitution, the constitution is not supreme rather most of the countries that practice this constitution has a parliamentary government system which makes the parliament sovereign. Should the UK adopt a written constitution? We need to see both sides in o rder to decide which constitution will be suitable for the UK government. Advantages of the UK still having an unwritten constitution: First of all, we know that the UK constitution is an unwritten constitution. There are many sources that make up the UK constitution some can be: conventions, court rulings, statutes, common law, European laws, treaties etc. So even though the UK would want to adopt a written constitution it would be a very difficult procedure to begin with. Apart from this the Magna Carta (Which is the name of Britainà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s constitution) has a lot of historical history attached to it as well as major historic and political events that is recorded within this constitution, the Magna carta 1215[1] is basically the symbol of successful years of democracy as well as a symbol of unity between all the countries that make the united kingdom. In a written constitution we know that it is also a rigid constitution and whatever is stated down will be there f or years to come but with the uk constitution is a flexible constitution therefore making the procedure of amendment or changing the laws entirely easier than that of a country with a written constitution. Also a written constitution is usually created when there is either a government takeover or when that particular country is founded. Based on the fact that the UK is a very old country this can be difficult to automatically change from unwritten to written. Disadvantages of the UK having an unwritten constitution: The main disadvantage of the unwritten constitution of the UK is the fact that there is parliament supremacy. This literally means that whatever the parliament makes into law is final and nobody can repeal or contest this. So the problem here is that, the parliament can make anything they want to be made into law. This means that they can make discriminatory laws or autocratic laws and there is nothing the government or anyone can do about it. An example can be: T he US constitution 13th amendment[2] which states that: à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“No law can be passed that allows slavery as it is therefore unconstitutionalà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ . Even though it is difficult to amend a law in the US constitution is a form of a higher level of authority. Since this is not the case in the UK where the parliament is supreme and whatever laws that are made by parliament are permanent which can make it easy for the parliament to make slavery legal and nothing can stop this from happening. All though this cannot occur since slavery has been abolished and is not legal in the UK, but because of parliament sovereignty there would not be anything stopping them from doing so. Another example of parliament supremacy was when parliament decided to exempt them from the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012[3]. This act was to protect the confidentiality of the correspondence of the parliament and its constituents. Advantage of the written constitution in UK: Stated above we can determine what the advantage of the UK adopting a written constitution is that it will make the laws standard, it will make it clear for citizens to know their rights and their liberties. Apart from that in many countries that use the written constitution, the constitution is supreme which means just like the example of the 13th amendment of the US constitution which stated that no laws that enabled slavery would be allowed if it is, then this would be unconstitutional. Hence making it every law standard and since it is difficult to amend a written constitution it cannot be changed based anybody or governmental bodies whim. Also with the adoption of the written constitution in the UK it can eradicate the use of the monarchy in the UK. Disadvantages of the written constitution: Even though, that the written constitution looks more suitable for the UK to adopt this. However, if it does so there would be things that would not be agreeable or acceptable Such as discrimination. An example of a country that has had discrimination written in its constitution is: The New Hungarian Constitution which was enforced in 2012[4]: Article M. Section 1- Basic stipulation: à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“Hungary protects the institution of marriage between man and woman, a matrimonial relationship voluntary established, as well as the family as the basis for the survival of the nationà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ . This is basically saying that it does not recognize same-sex marriages this is highly discriminatory and un- called for. Another example of this discrimination and also Religious bias in this constitution can be found in: Article 11[5]- Freedom and responsibility says that- à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“Human dignity is inviolable. Everyone has the right to life and human dignity; the life of a fetus will be protected from conceptionà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ . This also banned abortion and preventing anyone who believes in this to either have a choice and it does not matter how this was conceived. And it also prev ents them from doing whatever they want with their own body. Also we know that Hungary is a Christian nation so therefore we have seen through its constitution that it is possible for a written constitution to have room discrimination and religious bias. This can occur in the UK if a written constitution is adopted, because we know that the Church of England is still the established church of the United Kingdom and they are also represented in parliament as a member of the House of Lords to be exact. All though, it is highly unlikely that the UK can establish law that contain discrimination and religious bias but it is a major maybe that it can occur. Conclusion: Personally, I believe that even though there are a lot of advantages that would makes a written constitution beneficial for the UK, The disadvantages which some is stated above outweigh the advantages. All though an unwritten constitution also has its major issue and problems the major one being: à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"Parlia ment supremacyà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢. The following facts summarize my personal view on why I think a written constitution should be adopted: For the fact that only three countries still have the unwritten constitution; Israel, UK and New Zealand. Shows that the written constitution is much more authentic. Another is Parliament supremacy since we know from what is stated above, that the parliament has the right to either make or unmake any law they please and nothing can be done about it. This means that they can decide to make laws that infringe on our fundamentals rights and freedoms. This that The Human Rights Act 1998[6] that was incorporated into laws can be affected as well as The European Communities Act 1972[7] which can affect these laws that show the supremacy of the community. And this can affect the laws that show the supremacy of community laws. Parliamentary supremacy can also be shown in this case: Where parliament tried to introduce The Asylum and Immigration Act Bill 2002 and this also had an ouster clause but due to parliamentary supremacy judicial review was removed from reviewing the failed asylum applicants. We know that due to the Constitutional Reform Act 2005[8] this made a lot of key changes in the structure of the UK constitution which means that we can adopt other acts and reforms that can push the UK on the path of a written constitution. BIBLIOGRAPHY à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"Definition of a constitutionà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢. 2015 (Online), www.duhaime.org (29th May 2015). à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"Definition of a constitution. 2015 (Online) www.macmillandictionary.com . (29th May 2015) à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"Sources of typeà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s constitutionà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢. 2015 (Online) www.answers.com (29th May 2015). à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"Difference between a written and constitutionà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢. 2015 (Online), www.preservearticles.com (29th May 2015) à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"Difference between written unwritten constitutionà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢. 2015 (Online), www.academia.edu (29th May 2015) à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"Personal view sourcesà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢. 2015 (Online) www.thewilberforcesociety.co.uk (5thJune 2015). [1] Magna carta 1215 constitution of the Uk. [2] The USA constitution (The bill of rights). [3] See the protection of freedom act 2012. [4] See article M, S(1) of New Hungarian constitution [5] Article 11 of New Hungarian constitution [6] The Human Rights Act 1998 [7] The asylum and immigration Act (bill) 2002 [8]Constitutional Reform Act 2005. Should the United Kingdom Adopt a Written Constitution - Free Essay Example Sample details Pages: 9 Words: 2635 Downloads: 5 Date added: 2017/06/26 Category Law Essay Type Argumentative essay Level High school Did you like this example? ESSAY QUESTION: SHOULD THE UK ADOPT A WRITTEN CONSTITUTION? First of all, In order to full explain if the UK should adopt a written constitution we need to define the meaning of a constitution. Duhaime.org defines a constitution à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“as the basic fundamental law of a state which sets at how that state will be organized and the powers and authorities of government between different political units and citizens.à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚  Macmillianditionary.com goes on to define a constitution à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“as a set of basic laws or principles for a country that describe the rights and duties of its citizens and the way in which it is governedà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ . I personally define a constitution as the body of rules set in place in order for that particular society to follow and it also guides that society. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Should the United Kingdom Adopt a Written Constitution?" essay for you Create order Now, we need to know how many types of constitution there is. There are three main types of the constitution which are: The written constitution. The unwritten constitution. Flexible/Rigid constitution. Basically, we will be focusing on just two types of the constitution which is the Written Unwritten constitutions. For us to fully grasp this question we need to know what a written and unwritten constitution are: WRITTEN UNWRITTEN CONSTITUTION Before we go any further, we need to know what a written and an unwritten actually are; Written constitution: I would define a written constitution as the body of rules is written and can also be found in one single document. Politics.co.uk defines the written constitution à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“as a formal document which defines the nature of the constitutional settlement, the rules that govern the political system and the rights of citizens and government in a codified formà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ . Examples of countries that use a written constitution: USA Argentina Nigeria Advantages of a written constitution: It is easily accessible The references of a written constitution can be made for the written document and any breach of the principles that are contained in the written constitution will obviously become unconstitutional. It can control the arbitrary rule in a way that it checks on the authority of the head of state so that he would not be able to abuse his authority. It consists of all the basic laws as well as the concepts will all be in one single document. Disadvantages of a written constitution: Cannot be easily amended Sometimes in an autocratic state, the leaders try and change some of the laws that are in the written constitution, in order for it to suit their personal needs. In a country where the written constitution is used, the constitution is supreme. It is also a rigid type of constitution Unwritten constitution: Many people assume that when a country has an unwritten constitution it necessarily means that their constitution is literally not written down. However, that is not the case the fact that it is called à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"an unwritten constitutionà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢, does not mean that their constitution is not written down it just means that it cannot be found in on document like the written constitution but is found in various documents. Merriam- Webster.com it defines an unwritten constitution as à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“not being embodied in a single document but based chiefly on custom and precedent as expressed in statutes and judicial decisions.à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚  Examples of countries that use an unwritten constitution: Israel New Zealand UK Advantages of an unwritten constitution: It is also a flexible constitution, meaning that it can be easily amended. An unwritten constitution reshapes. So that it can showcase the times we live in. There is supremacy of parliament. Unlike many countries that use a written constitution, states that use amending an unwritten constitution is way simpler. It is a simple procedure to change the constitution Disadvantages of an unwritten constitution: There is a lot of uncertainty within the constitution itself. All though the unwritten constitution is very flexible. Political issues can occur that can make the process harder or much more difficult. It is not easily accessible. DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WRITTEN CONSTITUTION UNWRITTEN CONSTITUTION The main difference between an unwritten and a written constitution is that a written constitution it can be found in one legal document which is usually enacted in the form of laws. A written constitution is very clear- cut, definite as well as systematic. A written constitution is actually the product that was born from the hard work of the people of that country/state. Basically, this type of constitution is made by a governmental group that is first of all elected into office by the general public of that society/country at a point in time in history. A country that has a written constitution, usually the constitution in that country is usually supreme because most of the laws that are used to guide that country/society is actually derived from the constitution. Also stated earlier, A written constitution is rigid, which means that the procedure to amend if there is anything to amend if there is any situation to do so it is a difficult one. Usually most written constitutions donà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢t really go through a process of change which can mean that most of the laws that derive from there are archaic or it isnà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢t necessary for this time and age. For example, the constitution of India was created in the year 1950 so some of the laws that were made then cannot identify with the society change of 2015 and it cannot be changed because the constitution is a rigid one. As for an unwritten constitution, is the type of constitution that most of the governmentsà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢ concepts usually are not enforced into law or enforced that is made into an actual law or a body of laws. Usually an unwritten constitution comprises of customs, conventions, traditions and very few written laws that are actually dated. Unlike the written constitution, the unwritten constitution is unsystematic, not precise, not clear- cut. Basically it is the exact opposite of the written constitutio n. We know that for a written constitution that it is derived from the hard work of the people which most of the time they have no knowledge of this. However, an unwritten constitution actually derives from the conscious hard work of the people of that particular society. Which can mean that the effort that was put there was not really a whole hearted one. An unwritten constitution is not derived from any historical development or event, neither is it created by a governmental group e.g.: Constituent assembly at a certain point in history. Because of this, unlike a written constitution that can be called an enacted constitution. An unwritten constitution is usually called a cumulative constitution. A classic example of an unwritten constitution is the UK constitution which is our main topic of discussion. Also unlike the written constitution, an unwritten constitution is a flexible constitution ità ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s a flexible constitution which simply means that it can be easily am ended or even changed. The unwritten constitution is actually a time- friendly constitution meaning that unlike the written constitution that most of the laws that were made at that particular time in history e.g.: the Indian constitution that was created in 1950, most of the laws that are there are still being used now. This sometimes makes it difficult and confusing for the society of 2015 to comprehend. The unwritten constitution is a different case, due to the fact that that it is flexible which makes the amendment procedure quite simple. Most of the laws are changed during time and it agrees with that particular society at that point in time which makes it easy to comprehend. In a country that makes use of an unwritten constitution, the constitution is not supreme rather most of the countries that practice this constitution has a parliamentary government system which makes the parliament sovereign. Should the UK adopt a written constitution? We need to see both sides in o rder to decide which constitution will be suitable for the UK government. Advantages of the UK still having an unwritten constitution: First of all, we know that the UK constitution is an unwritten constitution. There are many sources that make up the UK constitution some can be: conventions, court rulings, statutes, common law, European laws, treaties etc. So even though the UK would want to adopt a written constitution it would be a very difficult procedure to begin with. Apart from this the Magna Carta (Which is the name of Britainà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s constitution) has a lot of historical history attached to it as well as major historic and political events that is recorded within this constitution, the Magna carta 1215[1] is basically the symbol of successful years of democracy as well as a symbol of unity between all the countries that make the united kingdom. In a written constitution we know that it is also a rigid constitution and whatever is stated down will be there f or years to come but with the uk constitution is a flexible constitution therefore making the procedure of amendment or changing the laws entirely easier than that of a country with a written constitution. Also a written constitution is usually created when there is either a government takeover or when that particular country is founded. Based on the fact that the UK is a very old country this can be difficult to automatically change from unwritten to written. Disadvantages of the UK having an unwritten constitution: The main disadvantage of the unwritten constitution of the UK is the fact that there is parliament supremacy. This literally means that whatever the parliament makes into law is final and nobody can repeal or contest this. So the problem here is that, the parliament can make anything they want to be made into law. This means that they can make discriminatory laws or autocratic laws and there is nothing the government or anyone can do about it. An example can be: T he US constitution 13th amendment[2] which states that: à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“No law can be passed that allows slavery as it is therefore unconstitutionalà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ . Even though it is difficult to amend a law in the US constitution is a form of a higher level of authority. Since this is not the case in the UK where the parliament is supreme and whatever laws that are made by parliament are permanent which can make it easy for the parliament to make slavery legal and nothing can stop this from happening. All though this cannot occur since slavery has been abolished and is not legal in the UK, but because of parliament sovereignty there would not be anything stopping them from doing so. Another example of parliament supremacy was when parliament decided to exempt them from the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012[3]. This act was to protect the confidentiality of the correspondence of the parliament and its constituents. Advantage of the written constitution in UK: Stated above we can determine what the advantage of the UK adopting a written constitution is that it will make the laws standard, it will make it clear for citizens to know their rights and their liberties. Apart from that in many countries that use the written constitution, the constitution is supreme which means just like the example of the 13th amendment of the US constitution which stated that no laws that enabled slavery would be allowed if it is, then this would be unconstitutional. Hence making it every law standard and since it is difficult to amend a written constitution it cannot be changed based anybody or governmental bodies whim. Also with the adoption of the written constitution in the UK it can eradicate the use of the monarchy in the UK. Disadvantages of the written constitution: Even though, that the written constitution looks more suitable for the UK to adopt this. However, if it does so there would be things that would not be agreeable or acceptable Such as discrimination. An example of a country that has had discrimination written in its constitution is: The New Hungarian Constitution which was enforced in 2012[4]: Article M. Section 1- Basic stipulation: à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“Hungary protects the institution of marriage between man and woman, a matrimonial relationship voluntary established, as well as the family as the basis for the survival of the nationà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ . This is basically saying that it does not recognize same-sex marriages this is highly discriminatory and un- called for. Another example of this discrimination and also Religious bias in this constitution can be found in: Article 11[5]- Freedom and responsibility says that- à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã…“Human dignity is inviolable. Everyone has the right to life and human dignity; the life of a fetus will be protected from conceptionà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ . This also banned abortion and preventing anyone who believes in this to either have a choice and it does not matter how this was conceived. And it also prev ents them from doing whatever they want with their own body. Also we know that Hungary is a Christian nation so therefore we have seen through its constitution that it is possible for a written constitution to have room discrimination and religious bias. This can occur in the UK if a written constitution is adopted, because we know that the Church of England is still the established church of the United Kingdom and they are also represented in parliament as a member of the House of Lords to be exact. All though, it is highly unlikely that the UK can establish law that contain discrimination and religious bias but it is a major maybe that it can occur. Conclusion: Personally, I believe that even though there are a lot of advantages that would makes a written constitution beneficial for the UK, The disadvantages which some is stated above outweigh the advantages. All though an unwritten constitution also has its major issue and problems the major one being: à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"Parlia ment supremacyà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢. The following facts summarize my personal view on why I think a written constitution should be adopted: For the fact that only three countries still have the unwritten constitution; Israel, UK and New Zealand. Shows that the written constitution is much more authentic. Another is Parliament supremacy since we know from what is stated above, that the parliament has the right to either make or unmake any law they please and nothing can be done about it. This means that they can decide to make laws that infringe on our fundamentals rights and freedoms. This that The Human Rights Act 1998[6] that was incorporated into laws can be affected as well as The European Communities Act 1972[7] which can affect these laws that show the supremacy of the community. And this can affect the laws that show the supremacy of community laws. Parliamentary supremacy can also be shown in this case: Where parliament tried to introduce The Asylum and Immigration Act Bill 2002 and this also had an ouster clause but due to parliamentary supremacy judicial review was removed from reviewing the failed asylum applicants. We know that due to the Constitutional Reform Act 2005[8] this made a lot of key changes in the structure of the UK constitution which means that we can adopt other acts and reforms that can push the UK on the path of a written constitution. BIBLIOGRAPHY à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"Definition of a constitutionà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢. 2015 (Online), www.duhaime.org (29th May 2015). à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"Definition of a constitution. 2015 (Online) www.macmillandictionary.com . (29th May 2015) à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"Sources of typeà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢s constitutionà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢. 2015 (Online) www.answers.com (29th May 2015). à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"Difference between a written and constitutionà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢. 2015 (Online), www.preservearticles.com (29th May 2015) à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"Difference between written unwritten constitutionà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢. 2015 (Online), www.academia.edu (29th May 2015) à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"Personal view sourcesà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â€ž ¢. 2015 (Online) www.thewilberforcesociety.co.uk (5thJune 2015). [1] Magna carta 1215 constitution of the Uk. [2] The USA constitution (The bill of rights). [3] See the protection of freedom act 2012. [4] See article M, S(1) of New Hungarian constitution [5] Article 11 of New Hungarian constitution [6] The Human Rights Act 1998 [7] The asylum and immigration Act (bill) 2002 [8]Constitutional Reform Act 2005.