Hello again! This time in our Crunching Concepts series, we're tackling an integral yet often underestimated aspect of the UK's constitutional system: constitutional conventions. Although uncodified, these unwritten rules have immeasurable sway in shaping the operation of the UK's government. It's time to delve into the heart of these conventions!
Constitutional conventions are unwritten rules and principles that have evolved over time in the UK. They regulate the exercise of power and form the backbone of the UK's uncodified constitution. Based on historical precedents, political practices, and values, conventions provide unique insights into the gradual development of the UK's constitution.
Attention is essential to constitutional conventions, and here's why:
1. Ensuring Stability: They assure the functioning and stability of the political system, delivering a flexible framework that allows the government to adapt to evolving circumstances.
2. Power Regulation: Conventions limit the powers of various players within the political system, insisting they operate adhering to established norms and checks and balances.
3. Weighty Expectations: Despite lacking legal enforceability, conventions bear significant political weight. Violations can lead to political and constitutional crises, or urge demands for reform.
4. Historical Relics: They encapsulate the UK's distinctive constitutional history, illustrating its preference for an evolutionary rather than codified align of constitutional change.
Now, let us delve into some notable cases that cast a spotlight on constitutional conventions:
• Attorney General v Jonathan Cape Ltd [1975]: This case emphasised the ministerial responsibility convention, which states that ministers are answerable to Parliament for their departments' actions.
• R (on the application of Miller and another) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union [2017]: The Supreme Court held that the government could not trigger Article 50 to initiate Brexit without Parliament's approval, as it would involve removing rights under UK law.
• R (on the application of Miller) v The Prime Minister [2019]: This case involved parliamentary sovereignty, laying down that the Prime Minister cannot prorogue Parliament for an inappropriate purpose or an excessive length of time, as ruled by the Supreme Court.
CaseSnappy is dedicated to simplifying complex legal concepts for law students, professionals and anyone wanting to decode legal complications. We hope that this discussion on constitutional conventions has made a typically intricate subject a bit more comprehensible.
Do join us on CaseSnappy, it's free! Together, we can unravel more legal concepts in this exciting Crunching Concepts series, making all things law, a little less daunting, one concept at a time.