The difference between the flexible and rigid constitution.
The difference between the flexible and rigid constitution.
A comparative discussion of the flexible and rigid constitution.
The difference between flexible and rigid constitution: -
1. Differences in nature : - A flexible constitution can be either written or unwritten. For example, the constitutions of both the United Kingdom and New Zealand are flexible, but the constitution of the United Kingdom is unwritten and the constitution of New Zealand is written. But a rigid constitution is always written - it is an essential feature of the rigid constitution.
2. Differences in the method of amending the constitution: - Flexible constitution can be amended very easily. The constitution can be amended by the legislature or by a simple majority in legislative assembly. But special and complex methods are used to amend the rigid constitution.
3. Differences in origin: - In a flexible constitution, the source of general law and constitutional law is one. The laws of a flexible constitution are usually made on the basis of customary practices, the demands of the people, the will of the government, and so on.
But the general law of a rigid constitution and the source of constitutional law are different. The source of constitutional law is the Constituent Assembly and the source of general law is the legislature.
4. Differences in Dignity: - A flexible constitution is supple and laws can be easily changed. As a result, neither ordinary law nor constitutional law has any special status. But a rigid constitution cannot be easily changed; As a result, neither the government nor the legislature can change the constitution at will. That is why a rigid constitution is much more dignified.
5. Differences in the question of supremacy of the legislature: - In the case of a flexible constitution, the legislature enjoys sovereign power. However, in a rigid constitutional system, the legislature is subject to the constitution. Here the constitution is above all power.
6. Differences of supremacy of the Constitution: - In a flexible constitutional system, the government and the legislature amend the constitution at any time as they see fit, at their own discretion and in their own interest. In this case, the constitution became a puppet in the hands of the government and the legislature. But in a rigid constitutional system, the government and the legislature have to amend the constitution within the powers and authority specified by the constitution. In this system, the constitution is the supreme law of the nation.
7. Differences in the supremacy of the judiciary: - In a flexible constitutional system, the legislature is vested with sovereign power. The judiciary does not have the power to interpret or legitimize the constitution. But in a rigid constitutional system, the supremacy of the judiciary is established. The judiciary has the power to interpret the constitution and to declare any law illegal.
8. Differences in protection of democratic rights: - A flexible constitution is not suitable for protection of basic and democratic rights of citizens. Because in this kind of constitutional system, the government restricts the rights of the citizens to protect their own interests.
But since a rigid constitution is amended through a complex process and the government cannot change the constitution if it wants to ; so the rigid constitution is conducive to the protection of democratic rights.
9. Differences in Sensitivity: - A flexible constitution can easily give constitutional status to the hopes, aspirations and various demands of the people. That is why a flexible constitution is sensitive.
But the rigid constitution is not sensitive to the aspirations or aspirations of the people. In certain constitutional procedures, the constitution is amended through a complex process. In this way, if the hopes and aspirations of the people remain unfulfilled, it creates the possibility of protests against the state.
10. Differences in utility in the federal system: - A general approach is that, flexible constitution is not suitable for the federal system because of its generally changing character.
But the rigid constitution is stable and it precisely distributes power among the various departments of government. Therefore, a rigid constitution is appropriate for the federal system.
0 comments