Most people understand "a constitution" to mean something written down that you can point to, that has the force of <something> behind it, that cannot be trivially elided by a government.
None of these are true of the UK "constitution", whether it is one document or 5000 precedents.
Any document written in a spoken human language will be open to interpretation - there's no getting away from that, regardless of the language, culture or country the document comes from. I still consider that a step up from the bullshit assemblage of "constitutional law" that claimed to be "the UK constitution".
None of these are true of the UK "constitution", whether it is one document or 5000 precedents.
Any document written in a spoken human language will be open to interpretation - there's no getting away from that, regardless of the language, culture or country the document comes from. I still consider that a step up from the bullshit assemblage of "constitutional law" that claimed to be "the UK constitution".