Introduction to the UK constitution - Characteristics of the...

Learning Outcomes

This article explores the key characteristics of the UK constitution in an SQE1-focused way, explaining its uncodified structure, the hierarchy and interaction of legal and non-legal sources, and how these shape constitutional practice. It examines parliamentary sovereignty in depth—its classic Diceyan formulation, contemporary scope, practical limits, and interaction with devolution, human rights protection, and (retained) EU law—using leading cases to illustrate how the doctrine operates in real disputes. It analyzes the modern rule of law, from formal requirements of legality and legal certainty to substantive protections such as equality, access to justice, and judicial control of executive power through judicial review. It discusses the identification, development, and political enforcement of constitutional conventions, showing how they complement, constrain, and sometimes conflict with legal rules. It reviews the constitution’s flexibility and mechanisms of change through ordinary statutes, political practice, and institutional reform. Finally, it outlines the UK’s separation of powers and institutional relationships, highlighting the overlap between Parliament and the executive, the enhanced independence of the judiciary, and the constitutional significance of accountability mechanisms.

SQE1 Syllabus

For SQE1, you are required to understand the key characteristics of the UK constitution, including its sources, core doctrines, and institutional relationships, with a focus on the following syllabus points:

• the uncodified (unwritten) nature of the UK constitution and its varied legal and political sources
• the distinct concept and practical operation of parliamentary sovereignty and its consequences for law-making and limitations
• the doctrine, scope, and contemporary contours of the rule of law, including its legal and political aspects
• the significance, identification, and limitations of constitutional conventions, including their non-legal but binding nature
• the flexibility and adaptability of the UK constitutional framework, including how changes may occur
• the principle of separation of powers and its practical implementation (or lack thereof) in the UK context
• the relationships between Parliament, the executive, the judiciary, and the devolved institutions

Test Your Knowledge

Attempt these questions before reading this article. If you find some difficult or cannot remember the answers, remember to look more closely at that area during your revision.

1. What is meant by saying the UK constitution is "uncodified"?
2. Which principle means Parliament can make or unmake any law it chooses?
3. True or false? Constitutional conventions are legally enforceable rules.
4. Name two key sources of the UK constitution.

Introduction

The UK’s constitution is distinctive: it is uncodified, meaning there is no single, supreme legal document analogous to the constitutions found in many countries. Instead, constitutional rules and principles are derived from a variety of sources, both legal and non-legal—statutes, common law, parliamentary conventions, royal prerogative, works of authority, and, historically, supranational sources such as EU law and binding international treaties. This dispersed and layered structure gives the UK constitution unique features: flexibility, a combination of law and convention, and scope for both continuity and swift change. It means stability is maintained without rigid constraints, but can also create complex relationships between legal and political norms, and between the different organs of the state.

Key Term: uncodified constitution
An uncodified constitution is not set out in a single document but is derived from multiple sources, both legal and non-legal, such as statutes, case law, conventions, and prerogatives.

The UK’s arrangement places significant weight on political accountability and the reliability of the fundamental constitutional doctrines—such as the rule of law and parliamentary sovereignty—while relying on a culture of respect for conventions and non-legal obligations to supplement and interpret authoritative rules.

The Uncodified Constitution: Sources and Structure

Unlike countries with a codified constitution (such as the United States, Germany, or France), where core constitutional rules are entrenched in a single, higher law, the UK’s constitution has developed organically through custom, legal precedent, gradual statutory reform, and changing institutions. The result is a constitutional order whose foundational principles are found scattered across several sources, each with its own function and status.

Key sources of the UK constitution include:

• Statutes (Acts of Parliament): These are the most authoritative source of constitutional law in the UK. Important statutes such as Magna Carta 1215, the Bill of Rights 1689, the Acts of Union 1707 and 1800, the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949, the Representation of the People Acts (governing electoral rights), the European Communities Act 1972 (now repealed), the Human Rights Act 1998, the Constitutional Reform Act 2005, the Scotland Act 1998 (with amendments 2016), the Government of Wales Act, and other devolution statutes have all shaped the constitutional framework. Constitutional statutes can be altered or repealed by ordinary parliamentary procedure, but some have been judicially recognised as having a special constitutional importance (see Thoburn v Sunderland CC).
• Common Law (Case Law): Judicial decisions play a significant role in interpreting the powers and constraints of public bodies, identifying constitutional principles (such as legality and due process), and sometimes filling gaps where statutes are silent. Key cases—such as Entick v Carrington (1765), establishing the need for legal authority for government action; M v Home Office (1994), affirming the rule of law applies to government ministers; and judicial developments in the area of judicial review—demonstrate the living, incremental nature of constitutional law. The courts have, for example, required that any interference with rights by the state must have clear statutory authority.
• The Royal Prerogative: The prerogative comprises ancient discretionary powers historically exercised by the monarch. Today, these are exercised almost exclusively by ministers in the monarch’s name, subject to established conventions and, increasingly, statutory limitation or abolition. Classic prerogative powers include the making of treaties, the deployment of armed forces, the issuing of passports, and (formerly) the dissolution of Parliament. However, the courts have clarified that the prerogative is subject to statute (Attorney General v De Keyser’s Royal Hotel [1920]), cannot be extended to create new powers (BBC v Johns [1965]), and may be subject to judicial review as to its scope (R (Miller) v Prime Minister [2019]).
• Constitutional Conventions: These are non-legal, but politically binding, customs that regulate the operation of government—such as the convention that the monarch grants royal assent to Acts of Parliament, that ministers are drawn from Parliament, and that the government is accountable to Parliament. Conventions allow flexibility and permit the constitution to respond to political pressures, providing moral and practical checks in areas where the law is silent or ambiguous. They are recognised by courts (see Attorney General v Jonathan Cape) but are not legally enforceable.
• Works of Authority: Authoritative texts, notably Dicey's An Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution, Erskine May’s Parliamentary Practice, and Bagehot’s The English Constitution, are relied upon to clarify the meaning and significance of conventions, institutional procedures, and gaps in written law.
• International Treaties and External Sources: The UK is a party to various treaties, most notably the European Convention on Human Rights (incorporated into domestic law by the Human Rights Act 1998) and, historically, European Union law (now "retained EU law" under the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018). While treaties are not self-executing in UK law unless incorporated by statute, their principles may increasingly shape the interpretation and development of common law and statute (notably, ECHR rights via the HRA 1998).
• The Law and Custom of Parliament (Parliamentary Privilege): Parliament regulates its own affairs, protected by law and custom from judicial interference. Article 9 of the Bill of Rights, for instance, provides members of Parliament with legal immunities necessary for parliamentary debate, known as parliamentary privilege.

Key Term: constitutional convention
A constitutional convention is an established, non-legal rule that guides the behaviour of political actors but is not legally enforceable.

The interplay of these sources—statute, common law, convention, royal prerogative, and works of authority—means the UK constitution is both shaped and interpreted by the interaction of Parliament, courts, and political actors. The constitution is known for its flexibility, but this also places particular importance on political accountability, ethical standards, and judicial oversight.

Parliamentary Sovereignty

The foundational doctrine of the UK constitution is parliamentary sovereignty, which holds that Parliament has the legal power to enact, amend, or repeal any law it chooses and that no body can override or set aside an Act of Parliament. AV Dicey's classical formulation remains the central reference point:

• Parliament is the supreme law-making body and may legislate on any subject.
• No Parliament may bind its successors or be bound by its predecessors.
• No person or body, including the courts, may question the validity of an enacted statute.

Key Term: parliamentary sovereignty
Parliamentary sovereignty means Parliament has the legal authority to make or repeal any law and cannot be bound by previous Parliaments or overridden by any other body.

This doctrine underpins the constitutional flexibility of the UK’s legal system. There is no special procedure for constitutional change: any law, however fundamental, can in principle be created, altered, or repealed by ordinary statute, and subsequent Parliaments can reverse any legal arrangement established by previous Parliaments, unless there is a political, practical, or moral obstacle.

However, the scope and limits of parliamentary sovereignty have been debated and, in certain contexts, challenged or refined in the modern era:

• Express and Implied Repeal: Parliament can expressly repeal earlier statutes, or effect repeal by implication where a later statute is inconsistent with an earlier one (Ellen Street Estates v Minister of Health [1934]). However, courts have recognised that certain "constitutional statutes" (such as the Bill of Rights 1689, Magna Carta, the European Communities Act 1972, and the Human Rights Act 1998) may not be subject to implied repeal—signalling their special status—though they remain open to express repeal (see Thoburn v Sunderland City Council).
• Entrenchment and Devolution: Modern statutes establishing devolved governments (Scotland Act 1998, Wales Act 2017, Northern Ireland Act 1998) state that these institutions are permanent unless abolished by referendum, but Parliament retains legal power to legislate otherwise, at least in theory. The Sewel Convention recognises that Westminster "will not normally legislate with regard to devolved matters without the consent" of the devolved legislature, but—per the Supreme Court in Miller—this is a political and not a legal constraint.
• International Law and Treaties: Parliament can legislate even in breach of international obligations; courts will give effect to statute even if it conflicts with international law, as in Cheney v Conn (1968).
• The Impact of EU Law (now 'Retained EU Law'): During the UK’s EU membership, the European Communities Act 1972 gave domestic effect and supremacy to directly effective EU law. The principle of EU law supremacy required UK courts to disapply even later Acts of Parliament that were inconsistent with EU law. However, Parliament could repeal the 1972 Act at any time, which it did via the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018; EU law now continues as "retained EU law," which Parliament can alter or repeal.
• Human Rights and Judicial Interpretation: The Human Rights Act 1998 requires courts to interpret statutes, "so far as it is possible to do so," in a way compatible with ECHR rights. If impossible, courts may issue a declaration of incompatibility but remain unable to strike down primary legislation.

Parliamentary Sovereignty in Operation

Parliament’s supremacy means the courts are required to give effect to an Act of Parliament, even if it conflicts with fundamental rights or principles, or breaches an established convention. The doctrine is upheld through the "enrolled bill rule": once a bill receives royal assent and becomes law, a court cannot inquire into alleged procedural defects or fraud in its passage (see Pickin v British Railways Board).

This is reflected in cases such as:

• Pickin v British Railways Board [1974]: Parliament’s procedure in passing legislation is not subject to judicial review; courts will not question whether proper notice or procedures were adhered to.
• R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union [2017]: Parliament retained power to repeal treaties incorporated in statute (ECA 1972), and the government could not use the royal prerogative to override the rights and obligations established by Parliament.
• Factortame (No.2): During the era of EU law supremacy, UK courts disapplied Parliament’s statutes to give effect to EU rights. The fundamental point, however, was that Parliament had voluntarily accepted this limitation and remained able to legislate otherwise.

Key Term: enrolled bill rule
The enrolled bill rule is the principle that courts will not question the validity or procedural regularity of a statute once it has passed both Houses of Parliament and received royal assent.

Limitations and Challenges to Parliamentary Sovereignty

Despite its centrality, the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty is subject to certain practical and political limitations:

• Constitutional Statutes: As stated, statutes such as the Human Rights Act 1998 and the Scotland Act 1998 are regarded as constitutional and may require explicit wording for repeal or amendment, though no law is absolutely entrenched.
• Political Constraints: Some statutory changes—such as to the devolution settlements or the right to vote—would be politically contentious and difficult, if not impossible, to implement without popular or devolved consent.
• Judicial Attitudes: Judges have occasionally speculated whether there could be legal limits to Parliament’s authority in extreme situations (see obiter comments in Jackson v Attorney General [2005]), such as abolishing judicial review, but to date no such limits have been given legal effect.
• Devolution and Conventions: Legal recognition of devolved institutions typically preserves Parliament's sovereign legislative competence, but political conventions and practical arrangements render certain actions unlikely except in extraordinary circumstances.

Worked Example 1.1

A government wishes to repeal an Act that gave effect to an international treaty. Can Parliament do this, and what principle allows it?

Answer:
Yes. Parliament can repeal any Act of Parliament, including those that incorporate international treaties into domestic law, under the principle of parliamentary sovereignty.

The Rule of Law

The rule of law is a foundational doctrine of the UK constitution, supporting and constraining the exercise of governmental power. From Dicey’s classic nineteenth-century formulation, advancing the supremacy of law and the equality of all persons before the law, the concept has developed to include modern notions of legal certainty, access to justice, protection of rights, and the measured, proportionate exercise of power.

Key Term: rule of law
The rule of law requires that everyone, including government officials, is subject to and accountable under the law.

Contemporary applications of the rule of law include:

• Legal Certainty: Laws must be publicly accessible, clear, prospective (not retrospective), and predictable in their application (Raz, Bingham). Secret, vague, or arbitrary laws fail this requirement.
• Equality Before the Law: All persons, including ministers and government officials, are subject to the law and accountable in the ordinary courts (as in Entick v Carrington; M v Home Office). This concept excludes immunity for the state except where expressly provided.
• Formal and Substantive Protections: Not only must state action be lawful in form (proper process, legal basis), there is also increasing recognition of substantive content: that laws should not undermine basic rights and justice.
• Judicial Protection: An independent judiciary must be able to hold public authorities to account, ensure fair procedures, and provide effective remedies (as seen in R (Unison) v Lord Chancellor [2017], regarding access to justice and tribunal fees).

Recent statutes support the rule of law as a constitutional essential: section 1 of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 affirms its centrality, without defining the term.

The procedural aspect of the rule of law, in particular the need for a statutory or lawful basis for all state action, is enforced strongly in judicial review. Authorities acting ultra vires (beyond their powers) or in bad faith, or who fetter their discretion or fail in fair procedure, are subject to challenge and quashing of their acts.

Worked Example 1.2

A minister orders the search of a citizen's home without statutory authority. Is this lawful under the UK constitution?

Answer:
No. The rule of law requires that all government action must have a lawful basis. Without proper statutory or common law authority, the minister's act would be unlawful (see Entick v Carrington).

The rule of law is also closely linked with substantive concepts of justice and human rights: laws and their application must be consistent with recognised human rights and enable access to the courts for redress. For example, in R (UNISON) v Lord Chancellor, the Supreme Court held that prohibitive court fees impeding access to justice were contrary to the rule of law.

Key Term: proper administration of justice
The appropriate exercise of legal powers by officials, ensuring fairness and due process in the operation of the legal system.

Rule of Law and Parliamentary Sovereignty

There is a tension between the principle of the rule of law and parliamentary sovereignty, as Parliament can technically legislate in breach of rule of law standards. However, it is generally presumed that Parliament intends to legislate in accordance with fundamental rights and the rule of law. Where Parliament wishes to limit or remove individual rights or judicial oversight, it must do so in clear express words (see R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex p Simms).

Key Term: legality (principle of legality)
The courts presume that Parliament does not intend to override fundamental rights or principles except by clear and specific wording in a statute.

Flexibility and Adaptability

The UK constitution stands out for its lack of entrenchment or complex amendment process. Changes to even core constitutional rules are made through ordinary Acts of Parliament, without special procedures, super-majorities, or referenda unless explicitly provided for (e.g., referenda for changes to the status of Northern Ireland). This enables the constitution to change incrementally or to respond rapidly to new circumstances.

Key Term: flexibility (of the constitution)
Flexibility refers to the ease with which constitutional rules can be changed using the ordinary legislative process, without special entrenchment.

This characteristic confers both strengths and vulnerabilities:

• Advantages: The constitution can respond efficiently to shifting political, economic, or social needs, as shown in the rapid enactment of the Coronavirus Act 2020 to respond to the Covid-19 pandemic, or, historically, in the swift enactment of statutes such as the Parliament Acts and the devolution legislation.
• Disadvantages: Essential constitutional protections—such as civil liberties, voting rights, and limits on executive power—may be altered or removed without special safeguards, potentially exposing constitutional settlement to the risk of majoritarian abuse or the erosion of norms.

Examples of Change

• The Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949 changed the balance of power between the Commons and Lords using ordinary legislative processes.
• Fast-tracked statutes, as with the War Damage Act 1965 (which reversed a judicial decision retrospectively), demonstrate the potential for swift constitutional innovation or reversal.
• The adoption of new institutions, such as the Supreme Court (by Constitutional Reform Act 2005), demonstrates practical flexibility in meeting modern expectations of judicial independence.

This flexibility is moderated by established conventions, political practice, and strong expectations of public accountability. Political reality means that certain constitutional statutes, such as those providing for devolution or core human rights, are unlikely to be changed without widespread consultation or a political mandate, even if there is no legal impediment to parliamentary action.

Constitutional Conventions

Constitutional conventions are significant to the effective operation of the UK’s uncodified constitution. They serve to regulate the behaviour of political actors, supplementing or qualifying legal rules, and adjusting practices to reflect changing values and circumstances. They are recognized as binding in a political sense, even though they lack legal enforceability.

Key Term: constitutional convention
A constitutional convention is a non-legal rule regarded as binding by those to whom it applies, but not enforceable by the courts.

Identification and Status of Conventions

Key characteristics of conventions:

• They are non-legal, political rules; breach of a convention provokes criticism, loss of office, or a constitutional crisis, but not legal remedy.
• They fill gaps and provide flexibility where strict law is absent or unworkable (e.g., the monarch’s formal powers are guided almost entirely by convention).
• They are identified by the presence of precedent, belief in their binding nature, and a reason for the rule (the 'Jennings test').
• Their scope may change, adjust, or even wither if political consensus no longer supports them.

Examples of constitutional conventions:

• The monarch grants royal assent to all bills passed by both Houses of Parliament.
• Ministers are drawn from and remain responsible to Parliament.
• Collective and individual ministerial responsibility: collective responsibility requires Cabinet agreement; individual responsibility holds ministers accountable for their departmental conduct.
• The Sewel Convention: Parliament "will not normally legislate with regard to devolved matters without the consent of the devolved legislature."
• The government resigns if it loses a vote of no confidence in the House of Commons.
• The secrecy of Cabinet discussions and the confidentiality of legal advice provided to government.

Legal Status and Enforcement

While conventions may be referenced by courts as context for interpreting legal rules or understanding the operation of the constitution, they cannot be enforced by the courts. This position was confirmed in Attorney General v Jonathan Cape (1976), R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, and Madzimbamuto v Lardner-Burke. Any attempt by a court to enforce a convention would represent an illegitimate intrusion into the political realm. The ultimate sanction for breach of a convention is political: loss of office, parliamentary censure, or the risk of constitutional crisis.

Key Term: collective ministerial responsibility
Collective ministerial responsibility is the convention that Cabinet ministers are jointly responsible for government policy and must support it publicly or resign.

Worked Example 1.3

A Prime Minister advises the monarch to refuse Royal Assent to a bill that both Houses have passed. Is the monarch likely to follow this advice?

Answer:
By strict convention, the monarch grants royal assent to all bills passed by Parliament. A refusal, even on ministerial advice, would breach one of the most established constitutional conventions and would trigger a constitutional crisis without legal recourse.

The Relationship Between Law and Politics

The UK constitution is not only about written rules and formal institutions but also about the relationships and equilibrium between law, convention, and political practice. Many parts of the constitutional system operate on the basis of shared ethical norms rather than enforceable law. This dynamic interplay means that constitutional health often depends on responsible behaviour, mutual respect among the branches of the state, and political accountability.

Key Term: separation of powers
The separation of powers is the constitutional principle that divides governmental functions amongst the legislative, executive, and judicial branches to prevent the concentration of power and ensure mutual checks and balances.

The separation of powers in the UK context is not strictly observed compared with some other systems (such as the United States). Features of the UK's constitutional structure include:

• Legislature and Executive Overlap: The executive (the government) is composed of ministers drawn mostly from the legislature, meaning that the Cabinet often controls parliamentary business. The Prime Minister, as head of government, is always a Member of Parliament. This overlap is by design and is tempered by conventions of ministerial responsibility and parliamentary procedures.
• Parliamentary Accountability: Ministers answer to Parliament and may be removed by it. Accountability mechanisms include select committees, parliamentary questions, and votes of no confidence.
• Judicial Independence: The judiciary is now more structurally and functionally independent than at any time in UK history, with reforms such as the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 establishing an independent Supreme Court and a Judicial Appointments Commission. Judges are safeguarded by security of tenure and appointment procedures designed to insulate them from political influence.
• Checks and Balances: Even in the absence of a rigid separation, numerous practical checks exist: parliamentary scrutiny holds ministers to account, courts oversee legality through judicial review, and the independence of the legal profession supports accountability.

Tensions and Checks

The executive, while dominant in practice due to majority government, is checked by Parliament through votes, questions, and select committee scrutiny. The courts, in turn, check the executive by reviewing the legality (but not the merits) of government action, including prerogative powers where justiciable. Nevertheless, the political reality of party discipline and the combination of executive and legislative personnel mean that many constitutional checks rely on a robust culture of responsible government and public scrutiny.

Key Term: proper administration of justice
The proper administration of justice is the requirement that legal powers and institutions be exercised fairly, impartially, and consistently with the rights of parties and the rule of law.

Judicial independence has been further protected by prohibiting active judges from sitting in the House of Commons (House of Commons Disqualification Act 1975) and removing the former overlap where Law Lords were members of the House of Lords' legislative chamber.

Worked Example 1.4

A Cabinet minister is found to have lied to Parliament and refuses to resign. What are the legal and constitutional consequences?

Answer:
There is no legal requirement for resignation. However, by convention, ministers who deliberately mislead Parliament are expected to resign. Failure to do so may provoke a political crisis, loss of confidence, or removal by the Prime Minister or Parliament.

Devolution and the UK's Constitutional Structure

While the UK remains a state with a centralised legislative supremacy in legal theory, in practice, the devolution settlements for Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland have created quasi-federal features. The devolved legislatures have broad legislative powers in specified areas, but ultimate sovereignty remains with Westminster. Nonetheless, the permanence and self-government provisions in the Scotland Act 2016 and Wales Act 2017, and entrenched referenda requirements for changing the status of Northern Ireland, add political—if not legal—limitations to Parliament’s theoretical supremacy.

Parliament has reserved the right to legislate on any matter, but statutory recognition of the Sewel Convention and the expectation of ongoing political consent make fundamental changes to the constitutional structure extremely difficult to achieve without wide support.

Judicial Precedent, Statutory Interpretation, and Institutional Structure

Other features of the UK’s constitutional legal environment are relevant to its structure and flexibility:

• The Doctrine of Judicial Precedent: Decisions of senior courts (Supreme Court, Court of Appeal, High Court) are binding on lower courts, subject to exceptions and the possibility of the Supreme Court departing from its own earlier decisions when right to do so. Precedent ensures legal certainty, consistency, and gradual development of law.
• Statutory Interpretation: Courts interpret statutes with the aim of giving effect to Parliament’s intention, applying rules (literal, golden, mischief, purposive) and aids (internal and external) to resolve ambiguity. Statutory interpretation supports the constitutional principle of parliamentary supremacy: courts must apply statutes, but will interpret them to avoid absurdity and, where possible, to comply with fundamental rights and established principles.
• Institutional Structure: The hierarchy of the courts (magistrates' and county courts, Crown Court, High Court, Court of Appeal, Supreme Court) and the distribution of functions across administrative, civil, and criminal jurisdictions are part of the constitution. Tribunals and the ombudsman system further provide access to justice in specialized areas.

Key Point Checklist

This article has covered the following key knowledge points:

• The UK constitution is uncodified, comprising statutes, common law, conventions, royal prerogative, and other sources; its essential rules are distributed across all these sources.
• Parliamentary sovereignty is the doctrine that Parliament can make or repeal any law it chooses and cannot be bound by previous Parliaments, though this is moderated by constitutional statutes, the continuing recognition of political and practical obstacles, and judicial innovation.
• The rule of law is both a formal and substantive principle, requiring that all state action is grounded in law, that everyone, including government, is subject to the law, and that the courts play a central role in ensuring legality, due process, and rationality.
• The flexibility of the UK constitution allows for ordinary statutes—including those with fundamental constitutional impact—to be amended, replaced, or repealed without special legal formality, although conventions and political practice place practical constraints on change.
• Constitutional conventions are non-legal, politically binding rules and understandings that regulate the conduct of political actors, supporting the core legal framework and supporting smooth government operations; they are recognised, not enforced, by courts.
• Although the UK does not follow a pure separation of powers, checks and balances between the legislature, executive, and judiciary have increased, especially in the wake of reforms such as the Constitutional Reform Act 2005, which clarified and protected the independence of the judiciary.
• The ongoing operation of the UK constitution depends heavily on the interplay of law, convention, political accountability, public scrutiny, and a changing institutional structure.

Key Terms and Concepts

• uncodified constitution
• constitutional convention
• parliamentary sovereignty
• rule of law
• flexibility (of the constitution)
• collective ministerial responsibility
• proper administration of justice
• separation of powers
• legality (principle of legality)
• enrolled bill rule