Constitution: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 00:53, 18 April 2007

Latest revision as of 07:36, 6 August 2025

Line 1:

{{Short description|Fundamental principles that govern a state}}

{{otheruses4|constitutional concepts|specific constitutions and other uses}}

{{Hatnote|For other uses, see [[Constitution (disambiguation)]]}}

[[Image:Constitution-Print-C10314518.jpeg|thumb|800px|''The [[Constitution of the United States|Constitution of the United States of America]]]]''

{{pp-vandalism|small=yes}}

{{Use mdy dates|date=January 2016}}

[[File:Constitution de l'an XII. Page 1 - Archives Nationales - AE-II-1512.jpg|thumb|[[Constitution of the Year XII]] ([[First French Republic]])]]

[[File:Costituzione del Regno di Napoli del 1848.jpg|thumb|alt=Constitution in 1848.|Constitution of the [[Kingdom of the Two Sicilies]] in 1848]]

A '''constitution''', or '''supreme law''', is the aggregate of fundamental [[principle]]s or established [[precedent]]s that constitute the [[legal]] basis of a [[polity]], [[organization]] or other type of [[Legal entity|entity]], and commonly determines how that entity is to be governed.<ref>''The [[New Oxford American Dictionary]]'', Second Edn., [[Erin McKean]] (editor), 2051 pp., 2005, Oxford University Press, {{ISBN|0-19-517077-6}}.</ref>

When these principles are written down into a single document or set of legal documents, those documents may be said to embody a ''written constitution''; if they are encompassed in a single comprehensive document, it is said to embody a ''codified constitution''. [[The Constitution of the United Kingdom]] is a notable example of an ''uncodified constitution''; it is instead written in numerous fundamental acts of a legislature, court cases, and treaties.<ref>''[[R (HS2 Action Alliance Ltd) v Secretary of State for Transport]]'' [2014] [http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKSC/2014/3.html UKSC 3] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170305110736/http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKSC/2014/3.html |date=March 5, 2017 }}, [207]</ref>

A '''constitution''' is a system, often [[codified]] as a written document, that establishes the rules and principles that govern an organization or political entity. In the case of countries, this term refers specifically to a national constitution defining the fundamental [[politics|political]] principles, and establishing the structure, procedures, [[power (sociology)|power]]s and [[duty|duties]], of a [[government]]. Most national constitutions also guarantee certain [[right]]s to the people. Historically, before the evolution of modern-style, codified national constitutions, the term ''constitution'' could be applied to any important [[law]] that governed the functioning of a government.

Constitutions concern different levels of organizations, from [[Sovereign state|sovereign countries]] to [[Company|companies]] and unincorporated [[Club (organization)|associations]]. A [[treaty]] that establishes an [[international organization]] is also its constitution, in that it would define how that organization is constituted. Within [[state (polity)|states]], a constitution defines the principles upon which the state is based, the procedure in which laws are made, and by whom. Some constitutions, especially codified constitutions, also act as limiters of state power, by establishing lines which a state's rulers cannot cross, such as [[fundamental rights]]. Changes to constitutions frequently require [[consensus democracy|consensus]] or [[supermajority]].<ref>[https://heinonline.org/HOL/P?h=hein.journals/shclj8&i=371 King, Brett W. "The Use of Supermajority Provisions in the Constitution: The Framers, The Federalist Papers and the Reinforcement of a Fundamental Principle." Seton Hall Const. LJ 8 (1997): 363.]</ref>

Constitutions are found in many organizations. They are found extensively in government, at [[supranational]] (e.g. [[United Nations Charter]]), [[nation]]al (e.g. [[United States Constitution]]), and [[administrative division|sub-national]] or [[provincial]] (e.g. [[Maryland Constitution|Constitution of Maryland]]) levels. They are found in many political groups, such as [[political party|political parties]], [[pressure group]]s, and [[trade union]]s. Non-political entities may also have constitutions, for example, [[company (law)|companies]] and [[voluntary association|voluntary organisations]].

The [[Constitution of India]] is the longest written constitution of any country in the world,<ref name="longest">{{cite book | last = Pylee | first = M.V. | title = India's Constitution | publisher = S. Chand & Co. |page=3 | year = 1997 | isbn = 978-81-219-0403-2 }}</ref> with 146,385 words<ref name=":0" /> in its [[Indian English|English-language]] version,<ref name="lawmin_info">{{cite web |url=http://indiacode.nic.in/coiweb/welcome.html |title=Constitution of India |access-date=December 17, 2008 |publisher=Ministry of Law and Justice of India |date=July 2008 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150223171017/http://indiacode.nic.in/coiweb/welcome.html |archive-date=February 23, 2015 |df=mdy-all }}</ref> while the [[Constitution of Monaco]] is the shortest written constitution with 3,814 words.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Monaco_2002|title= Monaco 1962 (rev. 2002) |website=www.constituteproject.org|access-date=2016-06-05}}</ref><ref name=":0">{{Cite web|url=http://comparativeconstitutionsproject.org/ccp-rankings/|title=Constitution Rankings |website=Comparative Constitutions Project|language=en-US|access-date=2016-06-05}}</ref> The [[Constitution of San Marino]] might be the world's oldest active written constitution, since some of its core documents have been in operation since 1600, while the [[Constitution of the United States]] is the oldest active codified constitution. The historical life expectancy of a written constitution since 1789 is approximately 19 years.<ref>{{Citation|last1=Elkins|first1=Zachary|title=The Endurance of National Constitutions|chapter-url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511817595.004|work=|pages=36–64|place=Cambridge|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=978-0-511-81759-5|access-date=|last2=Ginsburg|first2=Tom|last3=Melton|first3=James|chapter=Conceptualizing Constitutions|year=2009|doi=10.1017/cbo9780511817595.004}}</ref>

== Etymology ==

The term ''constitution'' comes from [[Latin]], referring to issuing any important law, usually by the Roman emperor. Later, the term was widely used in [[canon law]] to indicate certain relevant decisions, mainly from the [[pope]].

==Etymology==

== General features ==

The term ''constitution'' comes through [[French (language)|French]] from the [[Latin language|Latin]] word {{Lang|la|constitutio}}, used for regulations and orders, such as the [[Roman Empire|imperial]] enactments (''constitutiones principis'': edicta, mandata, decreta, rescripta).<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=2MqfUsMiDbYC&q=%22constitutiones+principis%22&pg=PA243|title=The Historical and Institutional Context of Roman Law|first=George|last=Mousourakis|date=December 12, 2003|publisher=Ashgate|isbn=9780754621140|via=Google Books}}</ref> Later, the term was widely used in [[canon law]] for an important determination, especially a decree issued by the [[Pope]], now referred to as an ''[[apostolic constitution]]''.

Generally, all constitutions confer specific powers to an organization on the condition that it abides by this constitution or charter limitation.

[[William Blackstone]] used the term for significant and egregious violations of public trust, of a nature and extent that the transgression would justify a [[revolutionary]] response. The term as used by Blackstone was not for a legal text, nor did he intend to include the later American concept of [[judicial review]]: "for that were to set the judicial power above that of the legislature, which would be subversive of all government".<ref>{{cite book |title=Oxford Handbook of Comparative Constitutional Law|date=May 17, 2012 |publisher=Oxford University Press |page=17 |isbn=978-0-19-957861-0 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=uP3VWeTMnxsC}}</ref>

The Latin term ''[[ultra vires]]'' describes activities of officials within an organization or polity that fall outside the constitutional or statutory authority of those officials. For example, a [[students' union]] may be prohibited as an organization from engaging in activities not concerning students; if the union becomes involved in non-student activities these activities are considered ''ultra vires'' of the union's charter. An example from the constitutional law of nation-states would be a provincial government in a federal state trying to legislate in an area exclusively enumerated to the federal government in the constitution, such as ratifying a treaty. ''Ultra vires'' gives a legal justification for the forced cessation of such action, which might be enforced by the people with the support of a decision of the [[judiciary]], in a case of [[judicial review]]. A violation of rights by an official would be ''ultra vires'' because a (constitutional) right is a restriction on the powers of government, and therefore that official would be exercising powers he doesn't have.

==General features==

When an official act is found to be unconstitutional, perhaps by a court, that act is considered ''null and void'', and the nullification is ''ab initio'', that is, from inception, not from the date of the finding. It was never "law", even though, if it was a statute or statutory provision, it might have been adopted according to the procedures for adopting legislation. Sometimes the problem is not that a statute is unconstitutional, but the application of it is, on a particular occasion, and a court may decide that while there are ways it could be applied that are constitutional, that instance was not allowed or legitimate. In such a case, only the application may be ruled unconstitutional. Historically, the remedy for such violations have been petitions for common law [[writ]]s, such as ''[[quo warranto]]''.

Generally, every modern written constitution confers specific powers on an organization or institutional entity, on the primary condition that it abides by the constitution’s limitations. According to Scott Gordon, a political organization is constitutional to the extent that it "contain[s] [[institution]]alized mechanisms of power control for the protection of the interests and [[Liberty|liberties]] of the [[citizenry]], including those that may be in the [[Minority group|minority]]".<ref name="Gordon1999">{{cite book |last=Gordon |first=Scott |title=Controlling the State: Constitutionalism from Ancient Athens to Today |url=https://archive.org/details/controllingstate00gord_656 |url-access=limited |publisher=Harvard University Press |year=1999 |page=[https://archive.org/details/controllingstate00gord_656/page/n16 4] |isbn=978-0-674-16987-6}}</ref>

Activities of officials within an organization or polity that fall within the constitutional or statutory authority of those officials are termed "within power" (or, in Latin, ''intra vires''); if they do not, they are termed "beyond power" (or, in Latin, ''[[ultra vires]]''). For example, a [[students' union]] may be prohibited as an organization from engaging in activities not concerning students; if the union becomes involved in non-student activities, these activities are considered to be ''ultra vires'' of the union's charter, and nobody would be compelled by the charter to follow them. An example from the constitutional law of [[sovereign state]]s would be a provincial [[parliament]] in a [[federal state]] trying to legislate in an area that the constitution allocates exclusively to the federal parliament, such as ratifying a treaty. Action that appears to be beyond power may be [[judicial review|judicially reviewed]] and, if found to be beyond power, must cease. Legislation that is found to be beyond power will be "invalid" and of no force; this applies to primary legislation, requiring constitutional authorization, and secondary legislation, ordinarily requiring statutory authorization. In this context, "within power", ''intra vires'', "authorized" and "valid" have the same meaning; as do "beyond power", ''ultra vires'', "not authorized" and "invalid".

In most but not all modern states the constitution has supremacy over ordinary [[statutory law]] (see [[#Uncodified constitution|Uncodified constitution]] below); in such states when an official act is unconstitutional, i.e. it is not a power granted to the government by the constitution, that act is ''null and void'', and the nullification is ''[[ab initio]]'', that is, from inception, not from the date of the finding. It was never "law", even though, if it had been a statute or statutory provision, it might have been adopted according to the procedures for adopting legislation. Sometimes the problem is not that a statute is unconstitutional, but that the application of it is, on a particular occasion, and a court may decide that while there are ways it could be applied that are constitutional, that instance was not allowed or legitimate. In such a case, only that application may be ruled unconstitutional. Historically, the remedies for such violations have been petitions for common law [[writ]]s, such as ''[[quo warranto]]''.

Scholars debate whether a constitution must necessarily be [[Autochthon (ancient Greece)|autochthonous]], resulting from the nation's "spirit". [[Hegel]] said "A constitution...is the work of centuries; it is the idea, the consciousness of rationality so far as that consciousness is developed in a particular nation."<ref>{{cite book |title=Oxford Handbook of Comparative Constitutional Law|date=May 17, 2012 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-957861-0 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=uP3VWeTMnxsC}}</ref>

==History and development==

Since 1789, along with the [[Constitution of the United States of America]] (U.S. Constitution), which is the oldest and shortest written constitution still in force,<ref>({{cite book|last=Jordan|first=Terry L.|title=The U.S. Constitution and Fascinating Facts About It|edition=8th|publisher=Oak Hill Publishing Company|year=2013|place=Naperville, IL|page=25}})</ref> close to 800 constitutions have been adopted and subsequently amended around the world by independent states.<ref name="auto3" />

Excavations in modern-day [[Iraq]] by [[Ernest de Sarzec]] in 1877 found evidence of the earliest known code of justice, issued by the [[Sumer]]ian king [[Urukagina]] of [[Lagash]] ca. 2300 BC. Perhaps the earliest prototype for a law of government, this document itself has not yet been discovered; however it is known that it allowed some [[right]]s to his citizens. For example, it is known that it relieved tax for widows and orphans, and protected the poor from the [[usury]] of the rich.

[[Image:Hammurabi.jpg|thumb|200px|Detail from Hammurabi's stele shows him receiving the laws of Babylon from the seated sun deity.]]

After that, many governments ruled by special codes of written laws. The oldest such document still known to exist seems to be that of [[Ur-Nammu]] of [[Ur]] (ca. 2050 BC). Some of the more well known among these include the [[code of Hammurabi]] of [[Babylonia]], the [[Hittites|Hittite]] code, the [[Assyria]]n code, [[Mosaic law]], and likewise the commandments of [[Cyrus the Great]] of [[Persia]].

In the late 18th century, [[Thomas Jefferson]] predicted that a period of 20 years would be the optimal time for any constitution to be still in force, since "the earth belongs to the living, and not to the dead".<ref>({{cite web|date=6 September 1789|title=Thomas Jefferson to James Madison|url=http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch2s23.html/|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181014001321/http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch2s23.html|archive-date=14 October 2018|access-date=29 July 2015|website=Popular Basis of Political Authority|pages=392–97}})</ref> Indeed, according to recent studies,<ref name="auto3">({{cite book|last1=Zachary|first1=Elkins|title=The Endurance of National Constitutions|last2=Ginsburg|first2=Tom|last3=Melton|first3=James|publisher=Cambridge University Press|year=2009|place=New York}})</ref> the average life of any newly written constitution is around 19 years. However, a great number of constitutions do not last more than 10 years, and around 10% do not last more than one year, as was the case of the [[French Constitution of 1791]].<ref name="auto3"/> By contrast, some constitutions, notably that of the United States, have remained in force for several centuries, often without major revision for long periods.

In 621 BC, a scribe named [[Draco (lawgiver)|Draco]] wrote the laws of the city-state of [[Athens]]; and being quite cruel, this code prescribed the death penalty for any offense. In 594 BC, [[Solon]], the ruler of Athens, created the new [[Solonian Constitution]]. It eased the burden of the workers, however it made the ruling class to be determined by wealth, rather than by birth. [[Cleisthenes of Athens|Cleisthenes]] again reformed the Athenian constitution and set it on a democratic footing in [[508]] BC.

The most common reasons for these frequent changes are the political desire for an immediate outcome{{clarify|date=December 2021}} and the short time devoted to the constitutional drafting process.<ref name="auto">({{cite web|last1=Ginsburg|first1=Tom|last2=Melton|first2=James|title=Innovation in Constitutional Rights|url=http://www.law.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/upload_documents/November%2019%20Ginsburg%20Melton%20Innovation%20in%20Constitutional%20Rights%20.pdf/|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140717043443/http://www.law.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/upload_documents/November%2019%20Ginsburg%20Melton%20Innovation%20in%20Constitutional%20Rights%20.pdf|archive-date=17 July 2014|access-date=29 July 2015|website=NYU|publisher=Draft for presentation at NYU Workshop on Law, Economics and Politics}})</ref> A study in 2009 showed that the average time taken to draft a constitution is around 16 months,<ref name=":1">({{cite web|last1=Ginsburg|first1=Tom|last2=Zachary|first2=Elkins|last3=Blount|first3=Justin|date=2009|title=Does the Process of Constitution-Making Matter?|url=http://lexglobal.org/files/Does%20the%20Process%20of%20Constitution-Making%20Matter.pdf/|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180417025418/http://lexglobal.org/files/Does%20the%20Process%20of%20Constitution-Making%20Matter.pdf|archive-date=17 April 2018|access-date=29 July 2015|website=University of Chicago Law School|publisher=Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci.5|pages=201–23 [209]|place=Chicago, IL}})</ref> however there were also some extreme cases registered. For example, the [[Myanmar]] 2008 Constitution was being secretly drafted for more than 17 years,<ref name=":1" /> whereas at the other extreme, during the drafting of [[Japan]]'s 1946 Constitution, the bureaucrats drafted everything in no more than a week. Japan has the oldest unamended constitution in the world.<ref name="anomalous-constitution">{{cite news|title=The Anomalous Life of the Japanese Constitution |url=https://www.nippon.com/en/in-depth/a05602/the-anomalous-life-of-the-japanese-constitution.html |date=15 August 2017 |access-date=11 August 2019 |website=Nippon.com |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190811213143/https://www.nippon.com/en/in-depth/a05602/the-anomalous-life-of-the-japanese-constitution.html |url-status=live |archive-date=11 August 2019}}</ref> The record for the shortest overall process of drafting, adoption, and ratification of a national constitution belongs to [[Romania]]'s 1938 constitution, which installed a royal dictatorship in less than a month.<ref>({{cite web|last1=Ginsburg|first1=Tom|last2=Zachary|first2=Elkins|last3=Blount|first3=Justin|date=2009|title=Does the Process of Constitution-Making Matter?|url=http://lexglobal.org/files/Does%20the%20Process%20of%20Constitution-Making%20Matter.pdf/|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180417025418/http://lexglobal.org/files/Does%20the%20Process%20of%20Constitution-Making%20Matter.pdf|archive-date=17 April 2018|access-date=29 July 2015|website=University of Chicago Law School|publisher=Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci.5 |pages=201–23 [204]|place=Chicago, IL}})</ref> Studies showed that typically extreme cases where the constitution-making process either takes too long or is extremely short were non-democracies.<ref>({{cite web|last1=Ginsburg|first1=Tom|last2=Zachary|first2=Elkins|last3=Blount|first3=Justin|date=2009|title=Does the Process of Constitution-Making Matter?|url=http://lexglobal.org/files/Does%20the%20Process%20of%20Constitution-Making%20Matter.pdf/|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180417025418/http://lexglobal.org/files/Does%20the%20Process%20of%20Constitution-Making%20Matter.pdf|archive-date=17 April 2018|access-date=29 July 2015|website=University of Chicago Law School|publisher=Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci.5:201–23|page=203|place=Chicago, IL}})</ref>

[[Aristotle]] (c. 350 BC) was one of the first in recorded history to make a formal distinction between ordinary law and constitutional law, establishing ideas of constitution and [[constitutionalism]], and attempting to classify different forms of constitutional government. The most basic definition he used to describe a constitution in general terms was "the arrangement of the offices in a state". In his works ''[[Constitution of Athens]]'', [[Politics (Aristotle)|Politics]], and [[Nicomachean Ethics]] he explored different forms of constitutions, especially those of [[Constitution of Athens|Athens]] and [[Lycurgus|Sparta]]. He classified both what he regarded as good and bad constitutions, and came to the conclusion that the best constitution was a mixed system, including monarchic, aristocratic, and democratic elements. He also distinguished between citizens, who had the exclusive opportunity to participate in the state, and non-citizens and slaves who did not.

In principle, constitutional rights are not a specific characteristic of democratic countries. Autocratic states have constitutions, such as that of [[North Korea]], which officially grants every citizen, among other things, the [[freedom of expression]].<ref>({{cite journal|last1=Chilton|first1=Adam S.|last2=Versteeg|first2=Mila|date=2014|title=Do Constitutional Rights Make a Difference?|publisher=Coase-Sandor Institute for Law & Economics Working Paper No. 694|ssrn=2477530|website=Coase-Sandor Institute for Law & Economics}})</ref> However, the extent to which governments abide by their own constitutional provisions varies. In North Korea, for example, the [[Ten Principles for the Establishment of a Monolithic Ideological System]] are said to have eclipsed the constitution in importance as a frame of government in practice. Developing a legal and political tradition of strict adherence to constitutional provisions is considered foundational to the [[rule of law]].

The Romans first codified their constitution in 449 BC as the ''[[Twelve Tables]]''. They operated under a series of laws that were added from time to time, but [[Roman law]] was never reorganised into a single code until the ''[[Codex Theodosianus]]'' (AD 438); later, in the Eastern Empire the ''[[Codex Justinianus]]'' (534) was highly influential throughout Europe. This was followed in the east by the ''Ecloga'' of [[Leo III the Isaurian]] (740) and the ''Basilica'' of [[Basil I]] (878).

===Pre-modern constitutions===

Many of the Germanic peoples that filled the power vacuum left by the Western Roman Empire in the [[Early Middle Ages]] codified their laws. One of the first of these [[Germanic tribal laws|Germanic law codes]] to be written was the Visigothic ''Code of [[Euric]]'' (471). This was followed by the ''[[Lex Burgundionum]]'', applying separate codes for Germans and for Romans; the ''[[Lex Alamannorum|Pactus Alamannorum]]''; and the [[Salic Law]] of the [[Franks]], all written soon after 500. In 506, the [[Breviary of Alaric|''Breviarum'']] or ''"Lex Romana"'' of [[Alaric II]], king of the Visigoths, adopted and consolidated the ''Codex Theodosianus'' together with assorted earlier Roman laws. Systems that appeared somewhat later include the ''[[Edictum Rothari]]'' of the [[Lombards]] (643), the ''[[Lex Visigothorum]]'' (654), the ''[[Lex Alamannorum]]'' (730) and the ''[[Lex Frisionum]]'' (c. 785).

====Ancient====

[[File:Hammurabi.jpg|thumb|upright|Detail from [[Hammurabi]]'s [[stele]] shows him receiving the laws of [[Babylon]] from the seated [[sun deity]].]]

Excavations in modern-day [[Iraq]] by [[Ernest de Sarzec]] in 1877 found evidence of the earliest known [[code of justice]], issued by the [[Sumer]]ian king [[Urukagina]] of [[Lagash]] {{Circa|2300 BC}}. Perhaps the earliest prototype for a law of government, this document itself has not yet been discovered; however, it is known that it allowed some rights to his citizens. For example, it is known that it relieved tax for widows and orphans, and protected the poor from the [[usury]] of the rich.

After that, many [[Forms of government|governments]] ruled by special codes of written laws. The oldest such document still known to exist seems to be the [[Code of Ur-Nammu]] of [[Ur]] (c. 2050 BC). Some of the better-known ancient law codes are the [[code of Lipit-Ishtar]] of [[Isin]], the [[code of Hammurabi]] of [[Babylonia]], the [[Hittite laws|Hittite code]], the [[Assyrian law|Assyrian code]], and [[613 Commandments|Mosaic law]].

[[Japan]]'s ''[[Seventeen-article constitution]]'' written in [[604]], reportedly by [[Prince Shotoku|Prince Shōtoku]], is an early example of a constitution in Asian political history. Influenced by [[Buddhism|Buddhist]] teachings, the document focuses more on social morality than institutions of government ''per se'' and remains a notable early attempt at a government constitution. Another is the ''[[Constitution of Medina]]'', drafted by the prophet of [[Islam]], [[Muhammad]], in [[622]].

In 621 BC, a scribe named [[Draco (lawgiver)|Draco]] codified the oral laws of the [[city-state]] of [[Athens]]; this code prescribed the [[death penalty]] for many offenses (thus creating the modern term "draconian" for very strict rules). In 594 BC, [[Solon]], the ruler of Athens, created the new ''[[Solonian Constitution]]''. It eased the burden of the workers and determined that membership of the ruling class was to be based on wealth ([[plutocracy]]), rather than on birth ([[aristocracy]]). [[Cleisthenes of Athens|Cleisthenes]] again reformed the Athenian constitution and set it on a democratic footing in 508 BC.

The ''[[Gayanashagowa]]'', or 'oral' constitution of the [[Iroquois]] nation, has been estimated to date from between 1090 and 1150, and is also thought by some to have provided a partial inspiration for the US Constitution.

[[File:Aristotle's constitutions diagram.png|thumb|left|upright=1.35|Diagram illustrating the classification of constitutions by [[Aristotle]]]]

In [[England]], [[Henry I of England|King Henry I's]] proclamation of the [[Charter of Liberties]] in [[1100]] bound the king for the first time in his treatment of the clergy and the nobility. This idea was extended and refined by the English barony when they forced [[John of England|John]] to sign the ''[[Magna Carta]]'' in [[1215]]. The most important single article of the ''Magna Carta'', related to "''[[habeas corpus]]''", provided that the king was not permitted to imprison, outlaw, exile or kill anyone at a whim -- there must be [[due process]] of law first. This article, Article 39, of the ''Magna Carta'' read:

[[Aristotle]] (c. 350 BC) was the first to make a formal distinction between ordinary law and constitutional law, establishing ideas of constitution and [[constitutionalism]], and attempting to classify different forms of constitutional government. The most basic definition he used to describe a constitution in general terms was "the arrangement of the offices in a state". In his works ''[[Constitution of the Athenians (Aristotle)|Constitution of Athens]]'', ''[[Politics (Aristotle)|Politics]]'', and ''[[Nicomachean Ethics]]'', he explores different constitutions of his day, including those of Athens, [[Lycurgus of Sparta|Sparta]], and [[Carthage]]. He classified both what he regarded as good and what he regarded as bad constitutions, and came to the conclusion that the best constitution was a mixed system including monarchic, aristocratic, and democratic elements. He also distinguished between citizens, who had the right to participate in the state, and non-citizens and slaves, who did not.

The Romans initially codified their constitution in 450 BC as the ''[[Twelve Tables]]''. They operated under a series of laws that were added from time to time, but [[Roman law]] was not reorganized into a single code until the ''[[Codex Theodosianus]]'' (438 AD); later, in the Eastern Empire, the ''[[Corpus Juris Civilis|Codex repetitæ prælectionis]]'' (534) was highly influential throughout Europe. This was followed in the east by the ''Ecloga'' of [[Leo III the Isaurian]] (740) and the ''Basilica'' of [[Basil I]] (878).

''No free man shall be arrested, or imprisoned, or deprived of his property, or outlawed, or exiled, or in any way destroyed, nor shall we go against him or send against him, unless by legal judgement of his peers, or by the law of the land.''

The ''[[Edicts of Ashoka]]'' established constitutional principles for the 3rd century BC [[Maurya Empire|Maurya]] king's rule in [[History of India|India]]. For constitutional principles almost lost to antiquity, see the [[code of Manu]].

[[Image:Konstytucja 3 Maja.jpg|left|thumb|350px|''[[Constitution of May 3, 1791]]'' (painting by [[Jan Matejko]], [[1891]]). King Stanisław August (left, in regal [[ermine]]-trimmed cloak), enters [[St. John's Cathedral]], where [[Sejm]] [[Chamber of Deputies|deputies]] will swear to uphold the new Constitution; in background, [[Warsaw's Royal Castle]], where the Constitution has just been adopted.]]

====Early Middle Ages====

This provision became the cornerstone of English liberty after that point. The [[social contract]] in the original case was between the king and the nobility, but was gradually extended to all of the people. It led to the system of [[Constitutional Monarchy]], with further reforms shifting the balance of power from the monarchy and nobility to the [[British House of Commons|House of Commons]].

Many of the Germanic peoples that filled the power vacuum left by the [[Western Roman Empire]] in the [[Early Middle Ages]] codified their laws. One of the first of these [[Germanic tribal laws|Germanic law codes]] to be written was the Visigothic ''Code of [[Euric]]'' (471 AD). This was followed by the ''[[Lex Burgundionum]]'', applying separate codes for Germans and for Romans; the ''[[Lex Alamannorum|Pactus Alamannorum]]''; and the [[Salic Law]] of the [[Franks]], all written soon after 500. In 506, the ''[[Breviary of Alaric|Breviarum]]'' or ''"Lex Romana"'' of [[Alaric II]], king of the Visigoths, adopted and consolidated the ''Codex Theodosianus'' together with assorted earlier Roman laws. Systems that appeared somewhat later include the ''[[Edictum Rothari]]'' of the [[Lombards]] (643), the ''[[Lex Visigothorum]]'' (654), the ''Lex Alamannorum'' (730), and the ''[[Lex Frisionum]]'' (c. 785). These continental codes were all composed in Latin, while [[Anglo-Saxon language|Anglo-Saxon]] was used for those of England, beginning with the Code of [[Æthelberht of Kent]] (602). Around 893, [[Alfred the Great]] combined this and two other earlier Saxon codes, with various Mosaic and Christian precepts, to produce the ''[[Doom book]]'' code of laws for England.

Between 1220 and 1230, a Saxon administrator, [[Eike von Repgow]], composed the ''[[Sachsenspiegel]]'', which became the supreme law used in parts of Germany as late as 1900.

[[Japan]]'s ''[[Seventeen-article constitution]]'' written in 604, reportedly by [[Prince Shotoku|Prince Shōtoku]], is an early example of a constitution in Asian political history. Influenced by [[Buddhism|Buddhist]] teachings, the document focuses more on social morality than on institutions of government, and remains a notable early attempt at a government constitution.

In 1236, [[Sundiata Keita]] presented an oral constitution federating the [[Mali Empire]], called the ''[[Kouroukan Fouga]]''.

The [[Constitution of Medina]] ({{langx|ar|صحیفة المدینه}}, Ṣaḥīfat al-Madīna), also known as the Charter of Medina, was drafted by the [[Islamic prophet]] [[Muhammad]] after his flight ([[Hegira|hijra]]) to Yathrib where he became political leader. It constituted a formal agreement between Muhammad and all of the significant tribes and families of Yathrib (later known as [[Medina]]), including [[Muslim]]s, [[Jew]]s, and [[pagan]]s.<ref>See:

Meanwhile, around 1240, the [[Copt]]ic Egyptian Christian writer, [['Abul Fada'il Ibn al-'Assal]], wrote the ''[[Fetha Negest]]'' in [[Arabic language|Arabic]]. 'Ibn al-Assal took his laws partly from apostolic writings and Mosaic law, and partly from the former Byzantine codes. There are a few historical records claiming that this law code was translated into [[Ge'ez]] and entered Ethiopia around [[1450]] in the reign of [[Zara Yaqob]]. Even so, its first recorded use in the function of a constitution (supreme law of the land) is with [[Sarsa Dengel]] beginning in 1563. The ''Fetha Negest'' remained the supreme law in Ethiopia until 1931, when a modern-style Constitution was first granted by Emperor [[Haile Selassie]] I.

* Reuven Firestone, ''Jihād: the origin of holy war in Islam'' (1999) p. 118;

* "Muhammad", ''Encyclopedia of Islam Online''</ref><ref>Watt. Muhammad at Medina and R.B. Serjeant "The Constitution of Medina." ''Islamic Quarterly'' 8 (1964) p. 4.</ref> The document was drawn up with the explicit concern of bringing to an end the bitter intertribal fighting between the clans of the Aws ([[Banu Aus|Aus]]) and [[Khazraj]] within Medina. To this effect it instituted a number of rights and responsibilities for the Muslim, Jewish, and pagan communities of Medina bringing them within the fold of one community&nbsp;– the [[Ummah]].<ref>R.B. Serjeant, ''The Sunnah Jami'ah, pacts with the Yathrib Jews, and the Tahrim of Yathrib: Analysis and translation of the documents comprised in the so-called "Constitution of Medina."'' Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, Vol. 41, No. 1. (1978), p. 4.</ref> The precise dating of the Constitution of Medina remains debated, but generally, scholars agree it was written shortly after the [[Hijra (Islam)|Hijra]] (622).<ref>Watt. ''Muhammad at Medina''. pp. 227–228 Watt argues that the initial agreement was shortly after the hijra and the document was amended at a later date specifically after the battle of Badr (AH [anno hijra] 2, = AD 624). Serjeant argues that the constitution is in fact 8 different treaties which can be dated according to events as they transpired in Medina with the first treaty being written shortly after Muhammad's arrival. R. B. Serjeant. "The Sunnah Jâmi'ah, Pacts with the Yathrib Jews, and the Tahrîm of Yathrib: Analysis and Translation of the Documents Comprised in the so-called 'Constitution of Medina'." in ''The Life of Muhammad: The Formation of the Classical Islamic World'': Volume iv. Ed. Uri Rubin. Brookfield: Ashgate, 1998, p. 151 and see the same article in BSOAS 41 (1978): 18 ff. See also Caetani. ''Annali dell'Islam, Volume I''. Milano: Hoepli, 1905, p. 393. Julius Wellhausen. ''Skizzen und Vorabeiten'', IV, Berlin: Reimer, 1889, pp. 82ff who argue that the document is a single treaty agreed upon shortly after the hijra. Wellhausen argues that it belongs to the first year of Muhammad's residence in Medina, before the battle of Badr in 2/624. Wellhausen bases this judgement on three considerations; first Muhammad is very diffident about his own position, he accepts the Pagan tribes within the Umma, and maintains the Jewish clans as clients of the Ansars see Wellhausen, Excursus, p. 158. Even Moshe Gil a skeptic of Islamic history argues that it was written within 5 months of Muhammad's arrival in Medina. Moshe Gil. "The Constitution of Medina: A Reconsideration." ''Israel Oriental Studies'' 4 (1974): p. 45.</ref>

In [[Wales]], the [[Cyfraith Hywel]] (Law of Hywel) was codified by [[Hywel Dda]] c. 942–950. It served as the main law code in Wales until it was superseded by the [[Laws in Wales Acts 1535 and 1542]].

The earliest written constitution still governing a sovereign nation today may be that of [[San Marino]]. The ''[[Constitution of San Marino|Leges Statutae Republicae Sancti Marini]]'' was written in [[Latin]] and consists of six books. The first book, with 62 articles, establishes councils, courts, various executive officers and the powers assigned to them. The remaining books cover criminal and civil [[law]], judicial procedures and remedies. Written in [[1600]], the document was based upon the ''Statuti Comunali'' (Town Statute) of [[1300]], itself influenced by the ''Codex Justinianus'', and it remains in force today.

====Middle Ages after 1000====

In 1639, the [[Colony of Connecticut]] adopted the [[Fundamental Orders]], which is considered the first North American constitution, and is the basis for every new Connecticut constitution since, and is also the reason for [[Connecticut]]'s nickname, the [[Constitution State]].

The ''Pravda Yaroslava'', originally combined by [[Yaroslav the Wise]] the [[Grand Prince of Kiev]], was granted to [[Great Novgorod]] around 1017, and in 1054 was incorporated into the ''[[Russkaya Pravda]]''; it became the law for all of [[Kievan Rus']]. It survived only in later editions of the 15th century.

In England, [[Henry I of England|Henry I's]] proclamation of the [[Charter of Liberties]] in 1100 bound the king for the first time in his treatment of the clergy and the nobility. This idea was extended and refined by the English barony when they forced [[John of England|King John]] to sign [[Magna Carta]] in 1215. The most important single article of Magna Carta, related to "''[[habeas corpus]]''", provided that the king was not permitted to imprison, outlaw, exile or kill anyone at a whim&nbsp;– there must be [[due process]] of law first. This article, Article 39, of Magna Carta read:

The [[Massachusetts|Commonwealth of Massachusetts]] adopted its constitution in [[1780]], before the ratification of the [[Articles of Confederation]] and the United States Constitution. It is probably the oldest still-functioning ''nominal'' constitution, that is, where the document specifically declares itself to be a constitution. The [[United States Constitution]], ratified [[1789]], was influenced by the British constitutional system and the political system of the [[United Provinces]], plus the writings of [[Polybius]], [[John Locke|Locke]], [[Charles de Secondat, Baron de Montesquieu|Montesquieu]], and others. The document became a benchmark for [[republicanism|republican]] and codified constitutions written thereafter and is commonly believed to be the oldest modern, national, codified constitution in the world.

{{Blockquote|text=No free man shall be arrested, or imprisoned, or deprived of his property, or outlawed, or exiled, or in any way destroyed, nor shall we go against him or send against him, unless by the legal judgement of his peers, or by the law of the land.|author=|title=|source=}}

== Principles of constitutional design ==

This provision became the cornerstone of English liberty after that point. The [[social contract]] in the original case was between the king and the nobility but was gradually extended to all of the people. It led to the system of [[Constitutional Monarchy]], with further reforms shifting the balance of power from the monarchy and nobility to the [[British House of Commons|House of Commons]].

Government in some form goes back to when people were hunter-gatherers and lived in villages, and a common design consisting of a 'council of elders", a "chief" who led hunting or war-making activities, and one or more "priests" who provided a religious guidance or sanction to various activities.<ref>Fried, Morton H. ''The Notion of Tribe''. Cummings Publishing Company, [[1975]]. ISBN 0-8465-1548-2</ref> As people began to establish nations or empires and lived in cities, this design evolved into monarchical or feudal patterns, with conquerors or strongmen claiming to rule by "[[Divine Right of Kings|divine right]]". Such rule led some thinkers to take the position that what mattered was not the design of governmental institutions and operations, but the character of the rulers. This view can be seen in [[Plato]], who called for rule by "philosopher-kings".<ref>''[http://www.constitution.org/pla/repub_07.htm Republic]'', Book VII, Plato (360 BC).</ref>

The [[Nomocanon]] of [[Saint Sava]] ({{langx|sr|Законоправило/Zakonopravilo}})<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=QDFVUDmAIqIC&pg=PA118 ''The Late Medieval Balkans: A Critical Survey from the Late Twelfth Century'' John Van Antwerp Fine ] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221227154539/https://books.google.com/books?id=QDFVUDmAIqIC&pg=PA118 |date=December 27, 2022 }}. Google Books. Retrieved July 12, 2013.</ref><ref>[http://www.search.com/reference/Nomocanon Metasearch Search Engine] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171010145226/https://www.search.com/reference/Nomocanon |date=October 10, 2017 }}. Search.com. Retrieved July 12, 2013.</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.emu.co.uk/short-term-loans/|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111125010613/http://www.alanwatson.org/sr/petarzoric.pdf|url-status=dead|title=Short Term Loans|archive-date=November 25, 2011}}</ref> was the first [[Serbia]]n constitution from 1219. [[St. Sava's Nomocanon]] was the compilation of [[Civil law (legal system)|civil law]], based on [[Roman Law]], and [[canon law]], based on [[Ecumenical Councils]]. Its basic purpose was to organize the functioning of the young [[Kingdom of Serbia (medieval)|Serbian kingdom]] and the [[Serbian Ortodox Church|Serbian church]]. Saint Sava began the work on the Serbian Nomocanon in 1208 while he was at [[Mount Athos]], using ''The Nomocanon in Fourteen Titles'', ''Synopsis of Stefan the Efesian'', ''Nomocanon of [[John Scholasticus]]'', and Ecumenical Council documents, which he modified with the canonical commentaries of Aristinos and [[Joannes Zonaras]], local church meetings, rules of the [[Holy Fathers]], the law of [[Moses]], the translation of Prohiron, and the [[Byzantine emperors]]' [[Novellae Constitutiones|Novellae]] (most were taken from [[Justinian]]'s Novellae). The Nomocanon was a completely new compilation of civil and canonical regulations, taken from [[Byzantine Empire|Byzantine]] sources but completed and reformed by St. Sava to function properly in Serbia. Besides decrees that organized the life of the church, there are various norms regarding civil life; most of these were taken from Prohiron. [[Legal transplants]] of [[Roman Law|Roman]]-[[Byzantine law]] became the basis of the Serbian medieval law. The essence of Zakonopravilo was based on [[Corpus Iuris Civilis]].

[[Image:Francesco Hayez 001.jpg|thumb|left|Aristotle, by Francesco Hayez]]

[[Aristotle]] (c. 350 BC) was one of the first in recorded history to make a formal distinction between ordinary law and constitutional law, establishing ideas of constitution and [[constitutionalism]], and attempting to classify different forms of constitutional government. The most basic definition he used to describe a constitution in general terms was "the arrangement of the offices in a state". In his works ''[[Constitution of Athens]]'', [[Politics (Aristotle)|Politics]], and [[Nicomachean Ethics]] he explored different forms of constitutions, especially those of [[Constitution of Athens|Athens]] and [[Lycurgus|Sparta]]. He classified both what he regarded as good and bad constitutions, and came to the conclusion that the best constitution was a mixed system, including monarchic, aristocratic, and democratic elements. He also distinguished between citizens, who had the exclusive opportunity to participate in the state, and non-citizens and slaves who did not. Later writers, such as [[Cicero]] and [[Plutarch]], would examine designs for government from a legal and historical standpoint.

[[Stefan Dušan]], emperor of Serbs and Greeks, enacted [[Dušan's Code]] ({{langx|sr|Душанов Законик/Dušanov Zakonik}})<ref>{{usurped|1=[https://web.archive.org/web/20100803074722/http://www.dusanov-zakonik.com/indexe.html Dusanov Zakonik]}}. Dusanov Zakonik. Retrieved July 12, 2013.</ref> in [[Serbia]], in two state congresses: in 1349 in [[Skopje]] and in 1354 in [[Serres]]. It regulated all social spheres, so it was the second Serbian constitution, after St. Sava's Nomocanon (Zakonopravilo). The Code was based on [[Roman Law|Roman]]-[[Byzantine law]]. The legal [[Legal transplants|transplanting]] within articles 171 and 172 of Dušan's Code, which regulated juridical independence, is notable. They were taken from the Byzantine code [[Basilika]] (book VII, 1, 16–17).

The [[Renaissance]] brought a series of political philosophers who wrote implied criticisms of the practices of monarchs and sought to identify principles of constitutional design that would be likely to yield more effective and just governance from their viewpoints. This began with revival of the Roman [[law of nations]] concept<ref>''[http://www.constitution.org/victoria/victoria_.htm Relectiones]'', Franciscus de Victoria (lect. 1532, first pub. 1557).</ref> and its application to the relations among nations, and they sought to establish customary "laws of war and peace"<ref>''[http://www.constitution.org/gro/djbp.htm The Law of War and Peace]'', Hugo Grotius (1625)</ref> to ameliorate wars and make them less likely. This led to considerations of what authority monarchs or other officials have and don't have, from where that authority derives, and the remedies for abusing such suthority.<ref>''[http://www.constitution.org/vct/vct.htm Vindiciae Contra Tyrannos (Defense of Liberty Against Tyrants)]'', "Junius Brutus" (Orig. Fr. 1581, Eng. tr. 1622, 1689) </ref>

In 1222, Hungarian King [[Andrew II of Hungary|Andrew II]] issued the [[Golden Bull of 1222]].

A seminal juncture in this line of discourse arose in England from the [[English Civil War|Civil War]], the [[Oliver Cromwell|Cromwellian Protectorate]], the writings of [[Thomas Hobbes]], [[Samuel Rutherford]], the [[Levellers]], [[John Milton]], and [[James Harrington]], leading to the debate between [[Robert Filmer]], arguing for the divine right of monarchs, on the one side, and on the other, [[Henry Neville (writer)|Henry Neville]], [[James Tyrrell (writer)|James Tyrrell]], [[Algernon Sidney]], and [[John Locke]]. What arose from the latter was a concept of government being erected on the foundations of first, a state of nature governed by natural laws, then a state of society, established by a [[social contract]] or compact, which bring underlying natural or social laws, before governments are formally established on them as foundations.

Between 1220 and 1230, a [[Saxony|Saxon]] administrator, [[Eike von Repgow]], composed the ''[[Sachsenspiegel]]'', which became the supreme law used in parts of Germany as late as 1900.

Along the way several writers examined how the design of government was important, even if the government were headed by a monarch. They also classified various historical examples of governmental designs, typically into democracies, aristocracies, or monarchies, and considered how just and effective each tended to be and why, and how the advantages of each might be obtained by combining elements of each into a more complex design that balanced competing tendencies. Some, such as [[Montesquieu]], also examined how the functions of government, such as legislative, executive, and judicial, might appropriately be separated into branches. The prevailing theme among these writers was that the design of constitutions is not completely arbitrary or a matter of taste. They generally held that there are underlying principles of design that constrain all constitutions for every polity or organization. Each built on the ideas of those before concerning what those principles might be.

Around 1240, the [[Copt]]ic Egyptian Christian writer, [['Abul Fada'il Ibn al-'Assal]], wrote the ''[[Fetha Negest]]'' in [[Arabic language|Arabic]]. 'Ibn al-Assal took his laws partly from apostolic writings and Mosaic law and partly from the former [[Byzantine Empire|Byzantine]] codes. There are a few historical records claiming that this law code was translated into [[Ge'ez language|Ge'ez]] and entered Ethiopia around 1450 in the reign of [[Zara Yaqob]]. Even so, its first recorded use in the function of a constitution (supreme law of the land) is with [[Sarsa Dengel]] beginning in 1563. The ''Fetha Negest'' remained the supreme law in Ethiopia until 1931, when a modern-style [[Constitution of Ethiopia|Constitution]] was first granted by Emperor [[Haile Selassie]] I.

The later writings of [[Orestes Brownson|O.A. Brownson]]<ref>[http://www.constitution.org/oab/am_rep.htm ''The American Republic: its Constitution, Tendencies, and Destiny'', O. A. Brownson (1866)]</ref> would try to explain what constitutional designers were trying to do. According to Brownson there are, in a sense, three "constitutions" involved: The first the ''constitution of nature'' that includes all of what was called "natural law". The second is the ''constitution of society'', an unwritten and commonly understood set of rules for the society formed by a [[social contract]] before it establishes a government, by which it establishes the third, a ''constitution of government''. The second would include such elements as the making of decisions by public [[Convention (meeting)|convention]]s called by [[public notice]] and conducted by established [[Parliamentary procedure|rules of procedure]]. Each constitution must be consistent with, and derive its authority from, the ones before it, as well as from a historical act of society formation or constitutional ratification. Brownson argued that a [[state]] is a society with effective dominion over a well-defined territory, that consent to a well-designed constitution of government arises from presence on that territory, and that it is possible for provisions of a written constitution of government to be "unconstitutional" if they are inconsistent with the constitutions of nature or society. Brownson argued that it is not ratification alone that makes a written constitution of government legitimate, but that it must also be competently designed and applied.

[[File:ConstCATMonso1535.png|thumb|upright=0.75|left|Third volume of the compilation of Catalan Constitutions of 1585]]

Other writers<ref>''Principles of Constitutional Design'', Donald S. Lutz (2006) ISBN 0521861683</ref> have argued that such considerations apply not only to all national constitutions of government, but also to the constitutions of private organizations, that it is not an accident that the constitutions that tend to satisfy their members contain certain elements, as a minimum, or that their provisions tend to become very similar as they are amended after experience with their use. Provisions that give rise to certain kinds of questions are seen to need additional provisions for how to resolve those questions, and provisions that offer no course of action may best be omitted and left to policy decisions. Provisions that conflict with what Brownson and others can discern are the underlying "constitutions" of nature and society tend to be difficult or impossible to execute, or to lead to unresolvable disputes.

In the [[Principality of Catalonia]], the [[Catalan constitutions]] were promulgated by the Court from 1283 (or even two centuries before, if [[Usatges of Barcelona]] is considered part of the compilation of Constitutions) until 1716, when [[Philip V of Spain]] gave the [[Nueva Planta decrees]], finishing with the historical laws of [[Catalonia]]. These Constitutions were usually made formally as a royal initiative, but required for its approval or repeal the favorable vote of the [[Catalan Courts]], the medieval antecedent of the modern Parliaments. These laws, like other modern constitutions, had preeminence over other laws, and they could not be contradicted by mere decrees or edicts of the king.

The ''[[Kouroukan Fouga|Kouroukan Founga]]'' was a 13th-century charter of the [[Mali Empire]] in [[West Africa]], reconstructed from oral tradition in 1988 by [[Siriman Kouyaté]].<ref>Mangoné Naing, [http://www.oecd.org/swac/events/38516561.pdf SAH/D(2006)563 The Kurukan Fuga Charter: An example of an Endogenous Governance Mechanism for Conflict Prevention] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171010064658/http://www.oecd.org/swac/events/38516561.pdf |date=October 10, 2017 }}, Inter-generational Forum on Endogenous Governance in West Africa organized by Sahel and West Africa Club / [[OECD]], Ouagadougou (Burkina Faso), June 26 to 28, 2006. pp. 71–82.</ref> It included the "right to life and to the preservation of physical integrity" and significant protections for women.<ref>{{Citation |last1=Adewale |first1=Adeyinka |title=Pre-colonial Political Order in Africa |date=2023 |work=Reimaging Africa: Lifting the Veil of Ignorance |pages=9–38 |editor-last=Adewale |editor-first=Adeyinka |url=https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-031-40360-6_2 |access-date=2024-10-05 |place=Cham |publisher=Springer Nature Switzerland |language=en |doi=10.1007/978-3-031-40360-6_2 |isbn=978-3-031-40360-6 |last2=Schepers |first2=Stefan |editor2-last=Schepers |editor2-first=Stefan|url-access=subscription }}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=y2AFmBOiLRAC&dq=kouroukan+fouga+human+rights&pg=PA334 |title=Frontiers of Language and Teaching, Vol.2: Proceedings of the 2011 International Online Language Conference (IOLC 2011) |publisher=Universal-Publishers |isbn=978-1-61233-559-9 |language=en}}</ref>{{Rp|page=334}}

== Governmental constitutions ==

Most commonly, the term ''constitution'' refers to a set of rules and principles that define the nature and extent of government. Most constitutions seek to regulate the relationship between institutions of the state, in a basic sense the relationship between the executive, legislature and the judiciary, but also the relationship of institutions within those branches. For example, executive branches can be divided into a head of government, government departments/ministries, executive agencies and a [[civil service]]/bureaucracy. Most constitutions also attempt to define the relationship between individuals and the state, and to establish the broad rights of individual citizens. It is thus the most basic law of a territory from which all the other laws and rules are hierarchically derived; in some territories it is in fact called "[[Basic Law]]".

The [[Golden Bull of 1356]] was a decree issued by a ''[[Imperial Diet (Holy Roman Empire)|Reichstag]]'' in Nuremberg headed by Emperor [[Charles IV, Holy Roman Emperor|Charles IV]] that fixed, for a period of more than four hundred years, an important aspect of the constitutional structure of the [[Holy Roman Empire]].

===Key features===

The following are features of democratic constitutions that have been identified by political scientists to exist, in one form or another, in virtually all national constitutions.

In [[China]], the [[Hongwu Emperor]] created and refined a document he called ''[[Huang Ming Zu Xun|Ancestral Injunctions]]'' (first published in 1375, revised twice more before he died in 1398). These rules served as a constitution for the [[Ming dynasty]] for the next 250 years.

====Codification====

A fundamental classification is codification or lack of codification. A codified constitution is one that is contained in a single document, which is the single source of constitutional law in a state. An uncodified constitution is one that is not contained in a single document, consisting of several different sources, which may be written or unwritten.

The oldest written document still governing a sovereign nation today is that of [[San Marino]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/aug/08/jon-huntsman/oldest-surviving-one-document-text/ |title=The United States has "the longest surviving constitution". |publisher=PolitiFact.com |access-date=November 10, 2013}}</ref> The ''[[Constitution of San Marino|Leges Statutae Republicae Sancti Marini]]'' was written in Latin and consists of six books. The first book, with 62 articles, establishes councils, courts, various executive officers, and the powers assigned to them. The remaining books cover criminal and civil law and judicial procedures and remedies. Written in 1600, the document was based upon the ''Statuti Comunali'' (Town Statute) of 1300, itself influenced by the ''Codex Justinianus'', and it remains in force today.

===== Codified constitution =====

Most states in the world have a codified constitution. Only three nations, [[Israel]], [[New Zealand]] and the [[United Kingdom]], have uncodified constitutions as of [[October]] [[as of 2006|2006]]. The most obvious advantage of a codified constitution is the coherent and easily understood body of rules. A codified constitution is simple to read, being a single document. Although (entrenched) codified constitutions are relatively rigid, codified constitutions still yield a potentially wide range of interpretations by [[constitutional court]]s (see [[Constitution#Constitutional courts|below]]).

In 1392 the ''[[Carta de Logu]]'' was [[legal code]] of the [[Giudicato of Arborea]] promulgated by the ''giudicessa'' [[Eleanor of Arborea|Eleanor]]. It was in force in [[Sardinia]] until it was superseded by the code of [[Charles Felix of Sardinia|Charles Felix]] in April 1827. The Carta was a work of great importance in [[Sardinia]]n history. It was an organic, coherent, and systematic work of legislation encompassing the [[Civil law (area)|civil]] and [[penal law]].

Codified constitutions are usually the product of dramatic political change, such as a [[revolution]] {{Fact|date=April 2007}}. For example, the US constitution was written and subsequently ratified less than 25 years after the [[American Revolution]]. The process by which a country adopts a constitution is closely tied to the historical and political context driving this fundamental change. This becomes evident when one compares the elaborate convention method adopted in the United States with the [[Douglas MacArthur|MacArthur]] inspired post war constitution foisted on Japan (see [[Constitution of Japan]]). Arguably the legitimacy (and often the longevity) of codified constitutions are tied to the process by which they are initially adopted.

The ''[[Great Law of Peace|Gayanashagowa]]'', the oral constitution of the [[Haudenosaunee]] nation also known as the Great Law of Peace, established a system of governance as far back as 1190 AD (though perhaps more recently at 1451) in which the [[Sachem]]s, or tribal chiefs, of the Iroquois League's member nations made decisions based on universal consensus of all chiefs following discussions that were initiated by a single nation. The position of Sachem descends through families and are allocated by the senior female clan heads, though, prior to the filling of the position, candidacy is ultimately democratically decided by the community itself.<ref name = Tooker>{{cite book |editor=Clifton JA |title=The Invented Indian: cultural fictions and government policies |publisher=Transaction Publishers |___location=New Brunswick, NJ|year=1990 |pages= [https://books.google.com/books?id=ARbVmr941TsC&pg=PA107 107–128] | chapter = The United States Constitution and the Iroquois League |isbn=978-1-56000-745-6 | author = Tooker E}}</ref>

States that have codified constitutions normally give the constitution supremacy over ordinary [[statute]] law. That is, if there is a conflict between a legal statute and the codified constitution, all or part of the statute can be declared ''[[ultra vires]]'' by a court and struck down as [[Constitutionality|unconstitutional]]. In addition, an extraordinary procedure is often required to make a [[constitutional amendment]]. These procedures may involve: obtaining ⅔ majorities in the national legislature, the consent of regional legislatures, a [[referendum]] process or some other procedure that makes obtaining a constitutional amendment more difficult than passing a simple law.

===Modern constitutions===

The [[Constitution of Australia]] is an example of a constitution in which constitutional law mainly derives from a single written document, but other written documents are also considered part of the constitution. The [[Constitution of India]] is the longest codified constitution in the world.<ref>President Kermit L. Hall - The Power of Comparison in Teaching Civic Literacy. Accessed March 3, 2007. http://www.albany.edu/president/speeches/power_of_comparison0706.shtml</ref> It is unique in that it incorporates codes from many other constitutions like those of Japan, Malaysia, and Anglican countries.<ref>Constitution Of India, 2007. Accessed March 3, 2007. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_India</ref>

[[File:Filip_Orliks_konstitution_front_1-crop.tif|thumb|upright|The Cossack [[Constitution of Pylyp Orlyk]], 1710]]

[[File:Washington Constitutional Convention 1787.jpg|thumb|upright=1.35|A painting depicting George Washington at the [[Constitutional Convention (United States)|Constitutional Convention]] of 1787 signing of the U.S. Constitution]]

In 1634 the [[Kingdom of Sweden]] adopted the [[Instrument of Government (1634)|1634 Instrument of Government]], drawn up under the [[Lord High Chancellor of Sweden]] [[Axel Oxenstierna]] after the death of king [[Gustavus Adolphus]]. This can be seen as the first written constitution adopted by a modern state.

=====English Uncodifiedcivil constitutionwar =era====

On 4 January 1649, the [[Rump Parliament]] declared "that the people are, under God, the original of all just power; that the Commons of England, being chosen by and representing the people, have the supreme power in this nation".<ref name=Fritze>Fritze, Ronald H. & Robison, William B. (1996). ''Historical Dictionary of Stuart England, 1603–1689'', Greenwood Publishing Group, {{ISBN|0-313-28391-5}} [https://books.google.com/books?id=8goko0Lpr5sC&pg=PA118 p. 228] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221227154532/https://books.google.com/books?id=8goko0Lpr5sC&pg=PA118&f=false |date=December 27, 2022 }}</ref>

[[Image:Magna_Carta.jpg|thumb|Magna Carta]]

Uncodified constitutions are the product of an "evolution" of laws and conventions over centuries. By contrast to codified constitutions, in the [[Westminster System|Westminster]] tradition that originated in [[England]], uncodified constitutions include written sources: e.g. constitutional statutes enacted by the Parliament ([[House of Commons Disqualification Act 1975]], Northern Ireland Act 1998, [[Scotland Act 1998]], [[Government of Wales Act 1998]], [[European Communities Act 1972]] and [[Human Rights Act 1998]]); and also unwritten sources: [[Constitutional convention (political custom)|constitutional conventions]], observation of [[precedent]]s, [[royal prerogative]]s, [[convention (norm)|custom]] and tradition, such as always holding the General Election on Thursdays; together these constitute the [[British constitutional law]]. In the days of the [[British Empire]], the [[Judicial Committee of the Privy Council]] acted as the constitutional court for many of the British colonies such as [[Canada]] and [[Australia]] which had federal constitutions.

The [[English Protectorate]] set up by [[Oliver Cromwell]] after the [[English Civil War]] promulgated the first detailed written constitution adopted by a modern state;<ref>[https://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/240140/Instrument-of-Government]{{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150522182843/http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/240140/Instrument-of-Government|date=May 22, 2015}} Instrument of Government (England [1653]). ''Encyclopædia Britannica''. Retrieved July 12, 2013.</ref> it was called the [[Instrument of Government]]. This formed the basis of government for the short-lived republic from 1653 to 1657 by providing a legal rationale for the increasing power of Cromwell after Parliament consistently failed to govern effectively. Most of the concepts and ideas embedded into modern constitutional theory, especially [[bicameralism]], [[separation of powers]], the written constitution, and [[judicial review]], can be traced back to the experiments of that period.<ref>{{cite book|url=http://www.constitution.org/cmt/wormuth/wormuth.htm|title=The Origins of Modern Constitutionalism|author=Francis D. Wormuth|year=1949|publisher=Harper & Brothers}}</ref> Drafted by [[John Lambert (General)|Major-General John Lambert]] in 1653, the ''Instrument of Government'' included elements incorporated from an earlier document "[[Heads of Proposals]]",<ref>Tyacke [https://books.google.com/books?id=McvcmiZ6h8gC&dq=%22Heads+of+Proposals%22+++%22Instrument+of+Government%22&pg=PA69 p. 69]</ref><ref>Farr [https://books.google.com/books?id=MmxFHPk0MSUC&dq=%22Heads+of+Proposals%22+++%22Instrument+of+Government%22&pg=PA81 pp. 80,81] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221227154533/https://books.google.com/books?id=MmxFHPk0MSUC&pg=PA81&dq=%22Heads+of+Proposals%22+++%22Instrument+of+Government%22&as_brr=3#v=onepage&q=%22Heads%20of%20Proposals%22%20%20%20%22Instrument%20of%20Government%22&f=false |date=December 27, 2022 }}. See ''Declaration of Representation'' of June 14, 1647</ref> which had been agreed to by the [[Army Council (1647)|Army Council]] in 1647, as a set of propositions intended to be a basis for a constitutional settlement after King [[Charles I of England|Charles I]] was defeated in the [[First English Civil War]]. Charles had rejected the propositions, but before the start of the Second Civil War, the [[Grandee (New Model Army)|Grandees]] of the [[New Model Army]] had presented the ''Heads of Proposals'' as their alternative to the more radical [[Agreement of the People]] presented by the Agitators and their civilian supporters at the [[Putney Debates]]. The ''Instrument of Government'' was adopted by Parliament on 15 December 1653, and [[Oliver Cromwell]] was installed as [[Lord Protector]] on the following day. The constitution set up a state council consisting of 21 members while executive authority was vested in the office of "[[Lord Protector of the Commonwealth]]." This position was designated as a non-hereditary life appointment. The ''Instrument'' also required the calling of triennial [[Parliament]]s, with each sitting for at least five months.

In states using uncodified constitutions, the difference between constitutional law and [[Statute|statutory]] law (i.e. law applying to any area of governance) in legal terms is nil. Both can be altered or repealed by a simple majority in Parliament. In practice, democratic governments do not use this opportunity to abolish all civil rights, which in theory they could do, but the distinction between regular and constitutional law is still somewhat arbitrary, usually depending on the traditional devotion of popular opinion to historical principles embodied in important past legislation. For example, several [[Acts of Parliament]] such as the [[English Bill of Rights|Bill of Rights]], [[Human Rights Act 1998|Human Rights Act]] and, prior to the creation of Parliament, [[Magna Carta]] are regarded as granting fundamental rights and principles which are treated as almost constitutional.

The ''Instrument of Government'' was replaced in May 1657 by England's second, and last, codified constitution, the [[Humble Petition and Advice]], proposed by Sir [[Christopher Packe (politician)|Christopher Packe]].<ref>[[Sidney Lee|Lee, Sidney]] (1903), Dictionary of National Biography [https://archive.org/details/dictionaryofnati00leesuoft#page/991/mode/1up Index and Epitome p. 991].</ref> The Petition offered hereditary [[monarchy]] to [[Oliver Cromwell]], asserted [[Parliament of England|Parliament]]'s control over issuing new [[taxation]], provided an independent council to advise the king and safeguarded "Triennial" meetings of Parliament. A modified version of the Humble Petition with the clause on kingship removed was ratified on 25 May. This finally met its demise in conjunction with the death of Cromwell and the [[Restoration (England)|Restoration]] of the monarchy.

''See also'': [[Fundamental Laws of England]]

=====British Writtencolonies versusin codifiedNorth =America====

In 1639, the [[Colony of Connecticut]] adopted the [[Fundamental Orders of Connecticut|Fundamental Orders]], which was the first [[North America]]n constitution. It is the basis for every new Connecticut constitution since, and is also the reason for [[Connecticut]]'s nickname, "the [[Constitution State]]".

All of the British colonies in North America that were to become the 13 original United States, adopted their own constitutions in 1776 and 1777, during the American Revolution (and before the later [[Articles of Confederation]] and [[United States Constitution]]), with the exceptions of Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island. The [[Massachusetts|Commonwealth of Massachusetts]] adopted [[Constitution of Massachusetts|its Constitution]] in 1780, the oldest still-functioning constitution of any U.S. state; while Connecticut and Rhode Island officially continued to operate under their old colonial charters, until they adopted their first state constitutions in 1818 and 1843, respectively.

The term ''written constitution'' is used to describe a constitution that is entirely written, which by definition includes every codified constitution. However, some constitutions are entirely written but, strictly speaking, not entirely codified. For example, in the [[Constitution of Australia]], most of its fundamental political principles and regulations concerning the relationship between branches of government, and concerning the government and the individual are codified in a single document, the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia. However, the presence of statutes with constitutional significance, namely the [[Statute of Westminster]], as adopted by the Commonwealth in the [[Statute of Westminster Adoption Act 1942]], and the [[Australia Act 1986]] means that Australia's constitution is not contained in a single constitutional document. The [[Constitution of Canada]], which evolved from the [[British North America Acts]] until severed from nominal British control by the [[Canada Act 1982]] (analogous to the Australia Act 1986), is a similar example.

===Democratic constitutions: 18th century===

The term ''written constitution'' is often used interchangeably with ''codified constitution'', and similarly ''unwritten constitution'' is used interchangeably with ''uncodified constitution''. As shown above, this usage with respect to written and codified constitutions can be inaccurate. Strictly speaking, ''unwritten constitution'' is never an accurate synonym for ''uncodified constitution'', because all modern democratic constitutions consist of some written sources, even if they have no different technical status than ordinary statutes. Another term used is ''formal (written) constitution'', for example in the following context: "The United Kingdom has no formal constitution". This usage is correct, but it should be construed to mean that the United Kingdom does not have a written constitution, not that the UK has no constitution of any kind, which would not be correct.

[[File:Konstytucja 3 Maja.jpg|thumb|upright=1.5|''[[Constitution of May 3, 1791 (painting)|Constitution of 3 May 1791]]'' (painting by [[Jan Matejko]], 1891). [[Polish people|Polish]] [[Stanisław August Poniatowski|King Stanisław August]] (left, in regal [[Stoat|ermine]]-trimmed cloak), enters [[St. John's Cathedral, Warsaw|St. John's Cathedral]], where [[Sejm]] [[Chamber of Deputies|deputies]] will swear to uphold [[Constitution of May 3, 1791|the new Constitution]]; in the background, [[Warsaw's Royal Castle]], where the Constitution has just been adopted.]]

What is sometimes called the "enlightened constitution" model was developed by philosophers of the [[Age of Enlightenment]] such as [[Thomas Hobbes]], [[Jean-Jacques Rousseau]], and [[John Locke]]. The model proposed that constitutional governments should be stable, adaptable, accountable, open and should represent the people (i.e., support [[democracy]]).<ref>[https://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/134169/constitution constitution (politics and law)] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150417032859/http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/134169/constitution |date=April 17, 2015 }}. ''Encyclopædia Britannica''. Retrieved July 12, 2013.</ref>

''[[Constitution of Pylyp Orlyk|Agreements and Constitutions of Laws and Freedoms of the Zaporizian Host]]'' was written in 1710 by [[Pylyp Orlyk]], ''[[hetman]]'' of the [[Zaporozhian Host]]. It was written to establish a free [[Cossack Hetmanate|Zaporozhian-Ukrainian Republic]], with the support of [[Charles XII of Sweden]]. It is notable in that it established a democratic standard for the separation of powers in government between the legislative, executive, and judiciary branches, well before the publication of Montesquieu's ''[[Spirit of the Laws]]''. This Constitution also limited the executive authority of the ''hetman'', and established a democratically elected Cossack parliament called the General Council. However, Orlyk's project for an independent [[Ukraine|Ukrainian]] State never materialized, and his constitution, written in exile, never went into effect.

====Entrenchment====

The presence or lack of entrenchment is a fundamental feature of constitutions. Entrenchment refers to whether the constitution is legally protected from modification without a procedure of [[constitutional amendment]]. Entrenchment is an inherent feature in most written constitutions. The US constitution is an example of an entrenched constitution, and the UK constitution is an example of a constitution that is not entrenched.

[[Corsican Constitution]]s of 1755 and 1794 were inspired by [[Jean-Jacques Rousseau]]. The latter introduced [[universal suffrage]] for property owners.

The procedure for modifying a constitution is often called ''[[constitutional amendment|amending]]''. Amending an entrenched constitution requires more than the approval of the national legislature, it requires wider acceptance. Sometimes, the reason for this is that the constitution is considered supreme law, such as according to the [[supremacy clause]] in the US constitution. Regardless of whether a constitution has this technical status, all states with an entrenched constitution recognise the difference between constitutional law and ordinary statutory law {{Fact|date=February 2007}}. Procedures for ratification of constitutional amendments vary between states. In a federal system of government, the approval of a majority of state/provincial legislatures may be required. Alternatively, a national referendum may be required in some states, such as in Australia.

The [[Instrument of Government (1772)|Swedish constitution of 1772]] was enacted under King [[Gustavus III]] and was inspired by the [[separation of powers]] by [[Montesquieu]]. The king also cherished other [[Age of Enlightenment|enlightenment]] ideas (as an [[Enlightened absolutism|enlighted despot]]) and repealed torture, liberated agricultural trade, diminished the use of the [[death penalty]] and instituted a form of [[religious freedom]]. The constitution was commended by [[Voltaire]].<ref name=Borg>{{cite book |last1=Borg |first1=Ivan |last2=Nordell |first2=Erik |last3=Rodhe |first3=Sten |last4=Nordell |first4=Erik |title=Historia för gymnasiet. Årskurs 1 |edition=4th |year=1967 |publisher=AV Carlsons |___location=Stockholm |language=sv |id={{LIBRIS|10259755}} |page=410}}</ref><ref name=B>{{cite book |editor-last=Bäcklin |editor-first=Martin |title=Historia för gymnasiet: allmän och nordisk historia efter år 1000 |edition=3rd |year=1965 |publisher=Almqvist & Wiksell |___location=Stockholm |language=sv |id={{LIBRIS|1610850}} |pages=283–284}}</ref><ref name=Borg412>{{cite book |last1=Borg |first1=Ivan |last2=Nordell |first2=Erik |last3=Rodhe |first3=Sten |last4=Nordell |first4=Erik |title=Historia för gymnasiet. Årskurs 1 |edition=4th |year=1967 |publisher=AV Carlsons |___location=Stockholm |language=sv |id={{LIBRIS|10259755}} |pages=412–413}}</ref>

In constitutions that are not entrenched, no special procedure is required for modification. In the small number of countries with un-entrenched constitutions, the lack of entrenchment is because the constitution is not recognised with any higher legal status than ordinary [[statutes]]. In the UK, for example, passing laws which modify sources of the constitution, whether they are written or unwritten, are passed on a simple majority in [[Parliament of the United Kingdom|Parliament]]. The concept of "amendment" does not apply, as the constitution can be altered as easily in terms of procedure as any national law.

The [[United States Constitution]], ratified 21 June 1788, was influenced by the writings of [[Polybius]], [[John Locke|Locke]], [[Charles de Secondat, Baron de Montesquieu|Montesquieu]], and others. The document became a benchmark for [[republicanism]] and codified constitutions written thereafter.<ref name="auto2">{{Cite web|title=Goodlatte says U.S. has the oldest working national constitution|url=https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2014/sep/22/bob-goodlatte/goodlatte-says-us-has-oldest-working-national-cons/|website=PolitiFact}}</ref>

====Distribution of sovereignty====

Constitutions also establish where sovereignty is located in the state. There are three basic types of distribution of sovereignty: federal, unitary and confederal. A [[federalism|federal system of government]] will inevitably have a constitution that recognizes the division of sovereignty between the centre and peripheral/provincial regions of the state. The [[Canadian Constitution]] is an example of this, dividing power between the federal government and the provinces. A unitary constitution recognises that sovereignty resides only in the centre of the state. In the UK, the constitutional doctrine of [[Parliamentary sovereignty]] dictates than sovereignty is ultimately contained at the centre. Confederal constitutions are rare, and there is often dispute to whether so-called "confederal" states are actually federal. In a confederacy, sovereignty is located in peripheral regions/provinces and only limited power is granted to the centre. A historical example of a confederal constitution is the [[Swiss Federal Constitution]].

The [[Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth]] [[Constitution of May 3, 1791|Constitution]] was passed on 3 May 1791.<ref>{{cite book|title=Constitutions of the World|first=Albert|last=Blaustein|author-link=Albert Blaustein|publisher=Fred B. Rothman & Company|date=January 1993|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=2xCMVAFyGi8C&q=May+second+constitution+1791&pg=PA15|isbn=978-0-8377-0362-6}}</ref><ref>Isaac Kramnick, ''Introduction'', {{cite book|title=The Federalist Papers|first=James|last=Madison|url=https://archive.org/details/federalistpapers00madi|url-access=registration|page=[https://archive.org/details/federalistpapers00madi/page/13 13]|quote=May second oldest constitution.|publisher=Penguin Classics|year=1987|isbn=978-0-14-044495-7|author-link=James Madison}}</ref><ref name="Markoff">"The first European country to follow the U.S. example was Poland in 1791." [[John Markoff (professor)|John Markoff]], ''[[iarchive:wavesofdemocracy0000mark/page/121/mode/2up|Waves of Democracy]]'', 1996, {{ISBN|0-8039-9019-7}}, p. 121.</ref> Its draft was developed by the leading minds of the [[Enlightenment in Poland]] such as King [[Stanislaw August Poniatowski]], [[Stanisław Staszic]], [[Scipione Piattoli]], [[Julian Ursyn Niemcewicz]], [[Ignacy Potocki]] and [[Hugo Kołłątaj]].<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.communications-unlimited.nl/the-polish-constitution-of-may-3rd-a-milestone-in-the-history-of-law-and-the-rise-of-democracy/ |title=The Polish Constitution of May 3rd – a milestone in the history of law and the rise of democracy |access-date=2018-09-14}}</ref> It was adopted by the [[Great Sejm]] and is considered the first constitution of its kind in Europe and the world's second oldest one after the American Constitution.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.postdiploma.pl/ConstENA5.pdf |title=The Constitution of May 3 (1791) |access-date=2018-09-14 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171116194049/http://www.postdiploma.pl/ConstENA5.pdf |archive-date=November 16, 2017 |url-status=dead }}</ref>

====Separation of powers====

Constitutions usually explicitly divide power between various branches of government. The standard model, described by [[Charles de Secondat, baron de Montesquieu|Baron de Montesquieu]], involves three branches of government: [[executive branch|executive]], [[legislature|legislative]] and [[judiciary|judicial]]. Some constitutions include additional branches, such as an [[audit|auditory branch]]. Constitutions vary extensively as to the degree of [[separation of powers]] between these branches.

Another landmark document was the [[French Constitution of 1791]].

====Lines of accountability====

In [[presidential]] and [[semi-presidential]] systems of government, department secretaries/ministers are accountable to the [[president]], who has patronage powers to appoint and dismiss ministers. The president is accountable to the people in an election.

The [[1811 Constitution of Venezuela]] was the first [[Constitution of Venezuela|Constitution]] of [[Venezuela]] and Latin America, promulgated and drafted by [[Cristóbal Mendoza]]<ref name="Diccionario_Perozo_1999">Briceño Perozo, Mario. "Mendoza, Cristóbal de" in ''Diccionario de Historia de Venezuela'', Vol. 3. Caracas: Fundación Polar, 1999. {{ISBN|980-6397-37-1}}</ref> and [[Juan Germán Roscio]] and in [[Caracas]]. It established a federal government but was repealed one year later.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://research.kent.ac.uk/warandnation/1811-miranda-declares-independence-in-venezuela-and-civil-war-begins/|title=1811 Miranda Declares Independence in Venezuela and Civil War Begins|website=War and Nation: identity and the process of state-building in South America (1800-1840)|language=en-GB|access-date=2020-02-01}}</ref>

In [[parliamentary]] systems, ministers are accountable to [[Parliament]], but it is the [[prime minister]] who appoints and dismisses them. In [[Westminster]] systems, this power derives from the monarch, a component of Parliament. There is the concept of a [[vote of no confidence]] in many countries with parliamentary systems, which means that if a majority of the legislature vote for a no confidence motion, then the government must resign, and a new one will be formed, or parliament will be dissolved and a general election called.

On 19 March 1812, the [[Spanish Constitution of 1812]] was ratified by a [[Cortes Generales|parliament]] gathered in [[Cadiz]], the only Spanish continental city which was safe from [[Peninsular War|French occupation]]. The Spanish Constitution served as a model for other liberal constitutions of several [[South Europe]]an and [[Latin America]]n nations, for example, the [[Liberal Revolution of 1820|Portuguese Constitution of 1822]], constitutions of various [[Italy|Italian]] states during [[Carbonari]] revolts (i.e., in the [[Kingdom of the Two Sicilies]]), [[Constitution of Norway|the Norwegian constitution of 1814]], or the [[1824 Constitution of Mexico|Mexican Constitution of 1824]].<ref>{{cite book |last=Payne |first=Stanley G. |author-link=Stanley G. Payne |title=A History of Spain and Portugal: Eighteenth Century to Franco |url=https://archive.org/details/historyofspainpo00payn/page/432 |volume=2 |year=1973 |publisher=University of Wisconsin Press |___location=Madison |isbn=978-0-299-06270-5 |pages=[https://archive.org/details/historyofspainpo00payn/page/432 432–433] |quote=The Spanish pattern of conspiracy and revolt by liberal army officers ... was emulated in both Portugal and Italy. In the wake of Riego's successful rebellion, the first and only pronunciamiento in Italian history was carried out by liberal officers in the kingdom of the Two Sicilies. The Spanish-style military conspiracy also helped to inspire the beginning of the Russian revolutionary movement with the revolt of the [[Decembrist revolt|Decembrist army officers]] in 1825. Italian liberalism in 1820–1821 relied on junior officers and the provincial middle classes, essentially the same social base as in Spain. It even used a Hispanized political vocabulary, for it was led by ''giunte'' (juntas), appointed local ''capi politici'' (''jefes políticos''), used the terms of ''liberali'' and ''servili'' (emulating the Spanish word serviles applied to supporters of absolutism), and in the end talked of resisting by means of a ''guerrilla''. For both Portuguese and Italian liberals of these years, the Spanish constitution of 1812 remained the standard document of reference. }}</ref>

===Façade constitutions===

Italian political theorist [[Giovanni Sartori]] noted the existence of national constitutions which are a façade for authoritarian sources of power. While such documents may express respect for [[human rights]] or establish an independent judiciary, they may be ignored when the government feels threatened or entirely dishonoured in practice. An extreme example was the [[Constitution of the Soviet Union]] that on paper supported [[freedom of assembly]] or [[freedom of speech]]; however, citizens who acted accordingly were summarily [[Political prisoner|imprisoned]]. The example demonstrates that the protections and benefits of a constitution are provided less through its written terms, but more through deference by government and society to its principles.

In [[Brazil]], the [[Brazilian Constitution of 1824|Constitution of 1824]] expressed the option for the monarchy as a political system after Brazilian Independence. The leader of the national emancipation process was the Portuguese prince [[Pedro I of Brazil|Pedro I]], the elder son of the king of Portugal. Pedro was crowned in 1822 as the first emperor of Brazil. The country was ruled by a Constitutional Monarchy until 1889 when it adopted the Republican model.

In [[Denmark]], as a result of the [[Napoleonic Wars]], the [[absolute monarchy]] lost its personal possession of [[Norway]] to [[Sweden]]. Sweden had already enacted its [[Instrument of Government (1809)|1809 Instrument of Government]], which saw the division of power between the [[Riksdag of Sweden|Riksdag]], the king and the [[judiciary]].<ref>{{cite journal |first=Leif |last=Lewin |title=Majoritarian and Consensus Democracy: the Swedish Experience |journal=Scandinavian Political Studies |volume=21 |issue=3 |date=1 May 2007 |pages=195–206 |doi=10.1111/j.1467-9477.1998.tb00012.x | issn = 0080-6757}}</ref> However the Norwegians managed to infuse a radically democratic and liberal [[Constitution of Norway|constitution]] in 1814, adopting many facets from the American constitution and the revolutionary French ones, but maintaining a hereditary [[Constitutional monarchy|monarch]] limited by the constitution, like the Spanish one.

The first [[Swiss Federal Constitution]] was put in force in September 1848 (with official revisions in 1878, 1891, 1949, 1971, 1982 and 1999).

The [[Serbian revolution]] initially led to a proclamation of a proto-constitution in 1811; the full-fledged Constitution of Serbia followed few decades later, in 1835. The first Serbian constitution (Sretenjski ustav) was adopted at the national assembly in [[Kragujevac]] on 15 February 1835.

The [[Constitution of Canada]] came into force on 1 July 1867, as the British North America Act, an act of the British Parliament. Over a century later, the BNA Act was patriated to the Canadian Parliament and augmented with the [[Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms]].<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/schedule-b-to-the-canada-act-1982-uk-1982-c-11/latest/schedule-b-to-the-canada-act-1982-uk-1982-c-11.html#sec60|title=Constitution Act, 1982, s. 60}}</ref> Apart from the ''Constitution Acts, 1867 to 1982'', Canada's constitution also has unwritten elements based in common law and convention.<ref>The Constitutional Law Group, Canadian Constitutional Law. 3rd ed. Toronto: Emond Montgomery Publications Ltd., 2003, p. 5</ref><ref>Saul, John Ralston. ''The Doubter's Companion: A Dictionary of Aggressive Common Sense''. Toronto: Penguin, 1995.</ref>

==Principles of constitutional design==

After tribal people first began to live in cities and establish nations, many of these functioned according to unwritten customs, while some developed autocratic, even tyrannical monarchs, who [[rule by decree|ruled by decree]], or mere personal whim. Such rule led some thinkers to take the position that what mattered was not the design of governmental institutions and operations, as much as the character of the rulers. This view can be seen in [[Plato]], who called for rule by "philosopher-kings".<ref>''Aristotle'', by Francesco Hayez</ref> Later writers, such as [[Aristotle]], [[Cicero]] and [[Plutarch]], would examine designs for the government from a legal and historical standpoint.

The [[Renaissance]] brought a series of political philosophers who wrote implied criticisms of the practices of monarchs and sought to identify principles of constitutional design that would be likely to yield more effective and just governance from their viewpoints. This began with revival of the Roman [[law of nations]] concept<ref>''[http://www.constitution.org/victoria/victoria_.htm Relectiones] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161221185718/http://constitution.org/victoria/victoria_.htm |date=December 21, 2016 }}'', Franciscus de Victoria (lect. 1532, first pub. 1557).</ref> and its application to the relations among nations, and they sought to establish customary "laws of war and peace"<ref>''[[The Law of War and Peace]]'', Hugo Grotius (1625)</ref> to ameliorate wars and make them less likely. This led to considerations of what authority monarchs or other officials have and don't have, from where that authority derives, and the remedies for the abuse of such authority.<ref>''[http://www.constitution.org/vct/vct.htm Vindiciae Contra Tyrannos (Defense of Liberty Against Tyrants)] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170202051813/http://www.constitution.org/vct/vct.htm |date=February 2, 2017 }}'', "Junius Brutus" (Orig. Fr. 1581, Eng. tr. 1622, 1688)</ref>

A seminal juncture in this line of discourse arose in England from the [[English Civil War|Civil War]], the [[Oliver Cromwell|Cromwellian]] [[Commonwealth of England|Protectorate]], the writings of [[Thomas Hobbes]], [[Samuel Rutherford]], the [[Levellers]], [[John Milton]], and [[James Harrington (author)|James Harrington]], leading to the debate between [[Robert Filmer]], arguing for the divine right of monarchs, on the one side, and on the other, [[Henry Neville (writer)|Henry Neville]], [[James Tyrrell (writer)|James Tyrrell]], [[Algernon Sidney]], and [[John Locke]]. What arose from the latter was a concept of government being erected on the foundations of first, a state of nature governed by natural laws, then a state of society, established by a social contract or compact, which bring underlying natural or social laws, before governments are formally established on them as foundations.

Along the way, several writers examined how the design of government was important, even if the government were headed by a monarch. They also classified various historical examples of governmental designs, typically into democracies, aristocracies, or monarchies, and considered how just and effective each tended to be and why, and how the advantages of each might be obtained by combining elements of each into a more complex design that balanced competing tendencies. Some, such as [[Montesquieu]], also examined how the functions of government, such as legislative, executive, and judicial, might appropriately be separated into branches. The prevailing theme among these writers was that the design of constitutions was not completely arbitrary or a matter of taste. They generally held that there are underlying principles of design that constrain all constitutions for every polity or organization. Each built on the ideas of those before concerning what those principles might be.

The later writings of [[Orestes Brownson]]<ref>[http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/gutbook/lookup?num=2053 ''The American Republic: its Constitution, Tendencies, and Destiny''] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171010064705/http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/gutbook/lookup?num=2053 |date=October 10, 2017 }}, O.A. Brownson (1866)</ref> would try to explain what constitutional designers were trying to do. According to Brownson there are, in a sense, three "constitutions" involved: The first the ''constitution of nature'' that includes all of what was called "natural law". The second is the ''constitution of society'', an unwritten and commonly understood set of rules for the society formed by a social contract before it establishes a government, by which it establishes the third, a ''constitution of government''. The second would include such elements as the making of decisions by the public [[Convention (meeting)|conventions]] called by [[public notice]] and conducted by established [[Parliamentary procedure|rules of procedure]]. Each constitution must be consistent with, and derive its authority from, the ones before it, as well as from a historical act of society formation or constitutional ratification. Brownson argued that a [[state (polity)|state]] is a society with effective dominion over a well-defined territory, that consent to a well-designed constitution of government arises from presence on that territory, and that provisions of a written constitution of government can be "unconstitutional" if they are inconsistent with the constitutions of nature or society. Brownson argued that it is not ratification alone that makes a written constitution of government legitimate, but that it must also be competently designed and applied.

Other writers<ref>''Principles of Constitutional Design'', Donald S. Lutz (2006) {{ISBN|0-521-86168-3}}</ref> have argued that such considerations apply not only to all national constitutions of government, but also to the constitutions of private organizations, that it is not an accident that the constitutions that tend to satisfy their members contain certain elements, as a minimum, or that their provisions tend to become very similar as they are amended after experience with their use. Provisions that give rise to certain kinds of questions are seen to need additional provisions for how to resolve those questions, and provisions that offer no course of action may best be omitted and left to policy decisions. Provisions that conflict with what Brownson and others can discern are the underlying "constitutions" of nature and society tend to be difficult or impossible to execute, or to lead to unresolvable disputes.

Constitutional design has been treated as a kind of [[metagame]] in which play consists of finding the best design and provisions for a written constitution that will be the rules for the game of government, and that will be most likely to optimize a balance of the utilities of justice, liberty, and security. An example is the metagame [[Nomic]].<ref>[http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/writing/psa/ The Paradox of Self-Amendment] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060904214447/http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/writing/psa/ |date=September 4, 2006 }}, by Peter Suber (1990) {{ISBN|0-8204-1212-0}}</ref>

Political economy theory regards constitutions as coordination devices that help citizens to prevent rulers from abusing power. If the citizenry can coordinate a response to police government officials in the face of a constitutional fault, then the government have the incentives to honor the rights that the constitution guarantees.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Weingast|first=Barry R.|date=Summer 2005|title=The Constitutional Dilemma of Economic Liberty|journal=Journal of Economic Perspectives|volume=19 |issue=3|pages=89–108|doi=10.1257/089533005774357815|doi-access=free}}</ref> An alternative view considers that constitutions are not enforced by the citizens at-large, but rather by the administrative powers of the state. Because rulers cannot themselves implement their policies, they need to rely on a set of organizations (armies, courts, police agencies, tax collectors) to implement it. In this position, they can directly sanction the government by refusing to cooperate, disabling the authority of the rulers. Therefore, constitutions could be characterized by a self-enforcing equilibria between the rulers and powerful administrators.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=González de Lara|first1=Yadira|last2=Greif|first2=Avner|last3=Jha|first3=Saumitra|date=May 2008|title=The Administrative Foundations of Self-Enforcing Constitutions|journal=The American Economic Review|volume=98 |issue=2|pages=105–109|doi=10.1257/aer.98.2.105|citeseerx=10.1.1.386.3870}}</ref>

==Key features==

{{Multiple issues|{{Original research|section|date=September 2016}}{{More citations needed section|date=September 2016}}}}

[[File:Red copy of the Russian constitution.jpg|thumb|upright|[[President of Russia|Presidential]] copy of the [[Constitution of Russia|Russian Constitution]]]]

Most commonly, the term ''constitution'' refers to a set of rules and principles that define the nature and extent of government. Most constitutions seek to regulate the relationship between institutions of the state, in a basic sense the relationship between the executive, legislature and the judiciary, but also the relationship of institutions within those branches. For example, executive branches can be divided into a head of government, government departments/ministries, executive agencies and a [[civil service]]/administration. Most constitutions also attempt to define the relationship between individuals and the state, and to establish the broad rights of individual citizens. It is thus the most basic law of a territory from which all the other laws and rules are hierarchically derived; in some territories it is in fact called "[[Basic Law]]".

===Classification===

{| class="wikitable"

|-

! Type !! Form !! Example

|-

| Codified || In single act (document) || Most of the world (first: [[Constitution of the United States|United States]])

|-

| rowspan=2 | Uncodified || Fully written (in few documents) || [[Constitution of San Marino|San Marino]], [[Basic Laws of Israel|Israel]], [[Basic Law of Saudi Arabia|Saudi Arabia]]

|-

| Partially unwritten (see [[constitutional convention (political custom)|constitutional convention]]) || [[List of Canadian constitutional documents|Canada]], [[Constitution of New Zealand|New Zealand]], [[Constitution of the United Kingdom|United Kingdom]]

|}

A fundamental classification is codification or lack of codification. A codified constitution is one that is contained in a single document, which is the single source of constitutional law in a state. An uncodified constitution is one that is not contained in a single document, consisting of several different sources, which may be written or unwritten; see [[constitutional convention (political custom)|constitutional convention]].

====Codified constitution====

Most states in the world have codified constitutions.

Codified constitutions are often the product of some dramatic political change, such as a [[revolution]]. The process by which a country adopts a constitution is closely tied to the historical and political context driving this fundamental change. The legitimacy (and often the longevity) of codified constitutions has often been tied to the process by which they are initially adopted and some scholars have pointed out that high constitutional [[Wiki-constitutionalism|turnover]] within a given country may itself be detrimental to the separation of powers and the rule of law.

States that have codified constitutions normally give the constitution supremacy over ordinary [[statute]] law. That is, if there is any conflict between a legal statute and the codified constitution, all or part of the statute can be declared ''ultra vires'' by a court and struck down as [[Constitutionality|unconstitutional]]. In addition, exceptional procedures are often required to [[constitutional amendment|amend a constitution]]. These procedures may include: the convocation of a special [[constituent assembly]] or constitutional convention, requiring a [[supermajority]] of legislators' votes, approval in two terms of [[parliament]], the consent of regional legislatures, a [[referendum]] process, and/or other procedures that make amending a constitution more difficult than passing a simple law.

Constitutions may also provide that their [[Entrenched clause|most basic principles can never be abolished, even by amendment]]. In case a formally valid amendment of a constitution infringes these principles protected against any amendment, it may constitute a so-called ''unconstitutional constitutional law''.

Codified constitutions normally consist of a ceremonial [[preamble]], which sets forth the goals of the state and the motivation for the constitution, and several articles containing the substantive provisions. The preamble, which is omitted in some constitutions, may contain a [[Constitutional references to God|reference to God]] and/or to fundamental values of the state such as [[liberty]], [[democracy]] or [[human rights]]. In ethnic nation-states such as [[Estonia]], the mission of the state can be defined as preserving a specific nation, language and culture.

====Uncodified constitution====

{{Main|Uncodified constitution}}

[[File:Magna Carta (British Library Cotton MS Augustus II.106).jpg|thumb|[[Magna Carta]]]]

{{As of|2017}} only two sovereign states, [[New Zealand]] and the [[United Kingdom]], have wholly uncodified constitutions. The [[Basic Laws of Israel]] have since 1950 been intended to be the basis for a constitution, but as of 2017 it had not been drafted. The various Laws are considered to have precedence over other laws, and give the procedure by which they can be amended, typically by a simple majority of members of the Knesset (parliament).<ref name=lawsintro>{{cite web|title=Basic Laws – Introduction|url=https://www.knesset.gov.il/description/eng/eng_mimshal_yesod.htm|website=The Knesset|date=2016|access-date=7 May 2017}} Article gives information on the procedures for amending each of the Basic Laws of Israel.</ref>

Uncodified constitutions are the product of an "evolution" of laws and conventions over centuries (such as in the [[Westminster System]] that developed in Britain). By contrast to codified constitutions, uncodified constitutions include both written sources – e.g. constitutional statutes enacted by the Parliament – and unwritten sources – [[Constitutional convention (political custom)|constitutional conventions]], observation of [[precedent]]s, [[royal prerogative]]s, [[convention (norm)|customs]] and traditions, such as holding general elections on Thursdays; together these constitute [[British constitutional law]].

====Mixed constitutions====

Some constitutions are largely, but not wholly, codified. For example, the [[Constitution of Australia|''Constitution of Australia'']] sets out much of the structure of the federal system of government and its relationship with the states. It is however supplemented with statutes of constitutional significance, namely the [[Statute of Westminster 1931|''Statute of Westminster'']] and the [[Australia Act 1986|''Australia Act 1986'']], and unwritten [[Convention (political norm)|conventions]] and the common law.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Williams |first=George |title=Blackshield and Williams Australian Constitutional Law and Theory: Commentary and Materials |last2=Brennan |first2=Sean |last3=Lynch |first3=Andrew |date=2018 |publisher=Federation Press |others= |isbn=978-1-76002-151-1 |edition=7th |___location=Sydney |page=4 |language=en}}</ref>

The [[Constitution of Canada]] resulted from the passage of several [[British North America Acts]] from 1867 to the [[Canada Act 1982]], the act that formally severed British Parliament's ability to amend the Canadian constitution. The Canadian constitution includes specific legislative acts as mentioned in section 52(2) of the [[Constitution Act, 1982]]. However, some documents not explicitly listed in section 52(2) are also considered constitutional documents in Canada, entrenched via reference; such as the [[Proclamation of 1763]]. Although Canada's constitution includes [[List of Canadian constitutional documents|a number of different statutes, amendments, and references]], some constitutional rules that exist in Canada are derived from unwritten sources and constitutional conventions.

The terms ''written constitution'' and ''codified constitution'' are often used interchangeably, as are ''unwritten constitution'' and ''uncodified constitution'', although this usage is technically inaccurate. A codified constitution is a single document; states that do not have such a document have uncodified, but not entirely unwritten, constitutions, since much of an uncodified constitution is usually written in laws such as the [[Basic Laws of Israel]] and the [[Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949|Parliament Acts]] of the United Kingdom. Uncodified constitutions largely lack protection against amendment by the government of the time. For example, the U.K. [[Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011]] legislated by simple majority for strictly [[Fixed-term election|fixed-term parliaments]]; until then the ruling party could call a general election at any convenient time up to the maximum term of five years. This change would require a constitutional amendment in most nations.

=== Amendments ===

{{Main|Constitutional amendment}}

[[File:Constitution of the United States, page 1.jpg|thumb|[[United States Constitution]]]]

A constitutional amendment is a modification of the constitution of a [[polity]], [[organization]] or other type of [[Legal entity|entity]]. Amendments are often interwoven into the relevant sections of an existing constitution, directly altering the text. Conversely, they can be appended to the constitution as supplemental additions ([[wikt:codicil|codicils]]), thus changing the frame of government without altering the existing text of the document.

Most constitutions require that amendments cannot be enacted unless they have passed a special procedure that is more stringent than that required of ordinary legislation.

==== Methods of amending ====

{| class="wikitable"

|+Procedures for amending national constitutions

!Approval by

![[Supermajority]] needed

!Countries

|-

| rowspan="9" |Legislature (unicameral, joint session or lower house only)

|>50% + >50% after an election

|Iceland, Sweden

|-

|>50% + 60% after an election

|Estonia, Greece

|-

|60% + >50% after an election

|Greece

|-

|60%

|France, Senegal, Slovakia

|-

|{{frac|2|3}}

|Afghanistan, Angola, Armenia, Austria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Djibouti, Ecuador, Honduras, Laos, Libya, Malawi, North Korea, North Macedonia, Norway, Palestine, Portugal, Qatar, Samoa, São Tomé and Príncipe, Serbia, Singapore, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Vietnam, Yemen

|-

|>50% + |{{frac|2|3}} after an election

|Ukraine

|-

|2/3 + |{{frac|2|3}} after an election

|Belgium

|-

|3/4

|Bulgaria, Solomon Islands (in some cases)

|-

|4/5

|Estonia, Portugal (in the five years following the last amendment)

|-

| rowspan="9" |Legislature + referendum

|>50% + >50%

|Djibouti, Ecuador, Venezuela

|-

|>50% before and after an election + >50%

|Denmark

|-

|3/5 + >50%

|Russia, Turkey

|-

|2/3 + >50%

|Albania, Andorra, Armenia (some amendments), Egypt, Slovenia, Tunisia, Uganda, Yemen (some amendments), Zambia

|-

|2/3 + >60%

|Seychelles

|-

|3/4 + >50%

|Romania

|-

|3/4 + >50% of eligible voters

|Taiwan

|-

|{{frac|2|3}} + {{frac|2|3}}

|Namibia, Sierra Leone

|-

|75% + 75%

|Fiji

|-

| rowspan="2" |Legislature + sub-national legislatures

|{{frac|2|3}} + >50%

|Mexico

|-

|{{frac|2|3}} + {{frac|2|3}}

|Ethiopia

|-

| rowspan="4" |Lower house + upper house

||{{frac|2|3}} + >50%

|Poland, Bosnia and Herzegovina

|-

||{{frac|2|3}} + {{frac|2|3}}

|Bahrain, Germany, India, Italy, Jordan, Namibia, Netherlands, Pakistan, Somalia, Zimbabwe

|-

|60% + 60%

|Brazil, Czech Republic

|-

|75% + 75%

|Kazakhstan

|-

|Lower house + upper house + joint session

|>50% + >50% + {{frac|2|3}}

|Gabon

|-

|Either house of legislature + joint session

|{{frac|2|3}} + {{frac|2|3}}

|Haiti

|-

| rowspan="8" |Lower house + upper house + referendum

|>50% + >50% + >50%

|Algeria, France, Ireland, Italy

|-

|>50% + >50% + >50% (electors in majority of states/cantons)+ >50% (electors)

|Australia, Switzerland

|-

| 60% + 60% + >50% (optional)

|Spain (in most cases)<ref>"The Spanish Constitution and its reform" ''[https://blog.congreso.es/la-constitucion-y-su-reforma-ordinaria blog.congreso.es]''. Retrieved 28 August 2023.</ref>

|-

|{{frac|2|3}} + {{frac|2|3}} + >50%

|Japan, Romania, Zimbabwe (some cases)

|-

|{{frac|2|3}} + {{frac|2|3}} before and after an election + >50%

|Spain (in some cases)

|-

|{{frac|2|3}} + >50% + |{{frac|2|3}}

|Antigua and Barbuda

|-

|{{frac|2|3}} + >50% + >50%

|Poland (some cases)<ref>{{Cite web |title=The Constitution of the Republic of Poland |url=https://www.sejm.gov.pl/prawo/konst/angielski/kon1.htm |access-date=2022-05-25 |website=www.sejm.gov.pl}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Konstytucja Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej |url=https://www.sejm.gov.pl/prawo/konst/polski/kon1.htm |access-date=2022-05-25 |website=www.sejm.gov.pl}}</ref>

|-

|75% + 75% + >50%

|Madagascar

|-

| rowspan="5" |Lower house + upper house + sub-national legislatures

|12/12

|Canada (in some cases)

|-

|>50% + >50% + {{frac|2|3}}

|Canada (in most cases)

|-

||{{frac|2|3}} + {{frac|2|3}} + >50%

|India (in some cases)

|-

||{{frac|2|3}} + {{frac|2|3}} + 75%

|United States

|-

|{{frac|2|3}} + {{frac|2|3}} + 50%

|Ethiopia<ref>"Constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia". ''Article 105,'' ''[https://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b5a84.html 21 August 1995]''. Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia. Retrieved 28 August 2023.</ref>

|-

|Referendum

|>50%

|Estonia, Gabon, Kazakhstan, Malawi, Palau, Philippines, Senegal, Serbia (in some cases), Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan

|-

| rowspan="2" |Sub-national legislatures

||{{frac|2|3}}

|Russia

|-

|75%

|United States

|-

| rowspan="2" |Constitutional convention

|

|Argentina

|-

|{{frac|2|3}}

|Bulgaria (some amendments)

|}

''Some countries are listed under more than one method because alternative procedures may be used.''

==== Entrenched clauses ====

{{Main|Entrenched clause}}

An entrenched clause or entrenchment clause of a [[basic law]] or constitution is a provision that makes certain amendments either more difficult or impossible to pass, making such amendments inadmissible. Overriding an entrenched clause may require a [[supermajority]], a [[referendum]], or the consent of the minority party. For example, the U.S. Constitution has an entrenched clause that [[Article Five of the United States Constitution#Constitutional clauses shielded from amendment|prohibits abolishing equal suffrage of the States within the Senate without their consent]]. The term eternity clause is used in a similar manner in the constitutions of the [[Constitution of the Czech Republic|Czech Republic]],<ref name="CECEE">{{cite book|author=Kyriaki Topidi and Alexander H.E. Morawa|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=IhLKZKm7zGgC&pg=PA105|title=Constitutional Evolution in Central and Eastern Europe (Studies in Modern Law and Policy)|year=2010|isbn=978-1409403272|page=105| publisher=Ashgate Publishing }}</ref> [[Constitution of Germany|Germany]], [[Constitution of Turkey|Turkey]], [[Constitution of Greece|Greece]],<ref>[http://www.hellenicparliament.gr/UserFiles/f3c70a23-7696-49db-9148-f24dce6a27c8/001-156%20aggliko.pdf The official English language translation of the Greek Constitution as of May 27, 2008] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171114142907/http://www.hellenicparliament.gr/UserFiles/f3c70a23-7696-49db-9148-f24dce6a27c8/001-156%20aggliko.pdf |date=November 14, 2017 }}, Article 110 §1, p. 124, source: Hellenic Parliament, "The provisions of the Constitution shall be subject to revision with the exception of those which determine the form of government as a Parliamentary Republic and those of articles 2 paragraph 1, 4 paragraphs 1, 4 and 7 , 5 paragraphs 1 and 3, 13 paragraph 1, and 26."</ref> [[Constitution of Italy|Italy]],<ref name="weakcon">{{cite book|author=Joel Colón-Ríos|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=TqqQAzH2zxEC&pg=PA67|title=Weak Constitutionalism: Democratic Legitimacy and the Question of Constituent Power (Routledge Research in Constitutional Law|year=2012|isbn=978-0415671903|page=67| publisher=Routledge }}</ref> [[Constitution of Morocco|Morocco]],<ref name="EWC">{{cite book|author=Gerhard Robbers|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=M3A-xgf1yM4C&pg=PA626|title=Encyclopedia of World Constitutions|year=2006|isbn=978-0816060788|page=626| publisher=Facts On File, Incorporated }}</ref> [[Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran|the Islamic Republic of Iran]], [[Constitution of Brazil|Brazil]] and [[Constitution of Norway|Norway]].<ref name="weakcon" /> [[Constitution of India|India's constitution]] does not contain specific provisions on entrenched clauses but the [[basic structure doctrine]] makes it impossible for certain basic features of the Constitution to be altered or destroyed by the [[Parliament of India]] through an [[amendment of the Constitution of India|amendment]].<ref>{{cite news|url=http://hindu.com/2004/09/26/stories/2004092600491600.htm|title=The basic features|date=2004-09-26|access-date=2012-07-09|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120725005100/http://hindu.com/2004/09/26/stories/2004092600491600.htm|archive-date=2012-07-25|newspaper=[[The Hindu]]|url-status=dead}}</ref> The [[Colombian Constitution of 1991|Constitution of Colombia]] also lacks explicit entrenched clauses, but has a similar substantive limit on amending its fundamental principles through judicial interpretations.<ref name="weakcon" />

=== Constitutional rights and duties ===

{{Main|Constitutional right}}

Constitutions include various rights and duties. These include the following:

* Duty to pay [[tax]]es<ref>{{Cite web|title=Read about "Duty to pay taxes" on Constitute|url=https://www.constituteproject.org/search?lang=en&key=taxes&status=in_force&status=is_draft|website=www.constituteproject.org|language=en-US|access-date=2020-05-05}}</ref>

* [[Conscription|Duty to serve in the military]]<ref>{{Cite web|title=Read about "Duty to serve in the military" on Constitute|url=https://www.constituteproject.org/search?lang=en&key=milserv&status=in_force&status=is_draft|website=www.constituteproject.org|language=en-US|access-date=2020-05-05}}</ref>

* Duty to work<ref>{{Cite web|title=Read about "Duty to work" on Constitute|url=https://www.constituteproject.org/search?lang=en&key=work&status=in_force&status=is_draft|website=www.constituteproject.org|language=en-US|access-date=2020-05-05}}</ref>

* [[Suffrage|Right to vote]]<ref>{{Cite web|title=Read about "Claim of universal suffrage" on Constitute|url=https://www.constituteproject.org/search?lang=en&key=voteun&status=in_force&status=is_draft|website=www.constituteproject.org|language=en-US|access-date=2020-05-05}}</ref>

* [[Freedom of assembly]]<ref>{{Cite web|title=Read about "Freedom of assembly" on Constitute|url=https://www.constituteproject.org/search?lang=en&key=assem&status=in_force&status=is_draft|website=www.constituteproject.org|language=en-US|access-date=2020-05-05}}</ref>

* [[Freedom of association]]<ref>{{Cite web|title=Read about "Freedom of association" on Constitute|url=https://www.constituteproject.org/search?lang=en&key=assoc&status=in_force&status=is_draft|website=www.constituteproject.org|language=en-US|access-date=2020-05-05}}</ref>

* [[Freedom of speech|Freedom of expression]]<ref>{{Cite web|title=Read about "Freedom of expression" on Constitute|url=https://www.constituteproject.org/search?lang=en&key=express&status=in_force&status=is_draft|website=www.constituteproject.org|language=en-US|access-date=2020-05-05}}</ref>

* [[Freedom of movement]]<ref>{{Cite web|title=Read about "Freedom of movement" on Constitute|url=https://www.constituteproject.org/search?lang=en&key=freemove&status=in_force&status=is_draft|website=www.constituteproject.org|language=en-US|access-date=2020-05-05}}</ref>

* [[Freedom of thought]]<ref name="auto1">{{Cite web|title=Read about "Freedom of opinion/thought/conscience" on Constitute|url=https://www.constituteproject.org/search?lang=en&key=opinion&status=in_force&status=is_draft|website=www.constituteproject.org|language=en-US|access-date=2020-05-05}}</ref>

* [[Freedom of the press]]<ref name="auto1"/>

* [[Freedom of religion]]<ref>{{Cite web|title=Read about "Freedom of religion" on Constitute|url=https://www.constituteproject.org/search?lang=en&key=freerel&status=in_force&status=is_draft|website=www.constituteproject.org|language=en-US|access-date=2020-05-05}}</ref>

* Right to dignity<ref>{{Cite web|title=Read about "Human dignity" on Constitute|url=https://www.constituteproject.org/search?lang=en&key=dignity&status=in_force&status=is_draft|website=www.constituteproject.org|language=en-US|access-date=2020-05-05}}</ref>

* Right to civil marriage<ref>{{Cite web|title=Read about "Provision for civil marriage" on Constitute|url=https://www.constituteproject.org/search?lang=en&key=civmar&status=in_force&status=is_draft|website=www.constituteproject.org|language=en-US|access-date=2020-05-05}}</ref>

* [[Right to petition]]<ref>{{Cite web|title=Read about "Right of petition" on Constitute|url=https://www.constituteproject.org/search?lang=en&key=petition&status=in_force&status=is_draft|website=www.constituteproject.org|language=en-US|access-date=2020-05-05}}</ref>

* Right to [[academic freedom]]<ref>{{Cite web|title=Read about "Right to academic freedom" on Constitute|url=https://www.constituteproject.org/search?lang=en&key=acfree&status=in_force&status=is_draft|website=www.constituteproject.org|language=en-US|access-date=2020-05-05}}</ref>

* Right to [[Conscientious objector|conscientious objection]]<ref>{{Cite web|title=Read about "Right to conscientious objection" on Constitute|url=https://www.constituteproject.org/search?lang=en&key=nomil&status=in_force&status=is_draft|website=www.constituteproject.org|language=en-US|access-date=2020-05-05}}</ref>

* Right to a [[Right to a fair trial|fair trial]]<ref>{{Cite web|title=Read about "Right to fair trial" on Constitute|url=https://www.constituteproject.org/search?lang=en&key=fairtri&status=in_force&status=is_draft|access-date=2020-10-21|website=www.constituteproject.org|language=en-US}}</ref>

* Right to [[personal development]]<ref>{{Cite web|title=Read about "Right to development of personality" on Constitute|url=https://www.constituteproject.org/search?lang=en&key=devlpers&status=in_force&status=is_draft|website=www.constituteproject.org|language=en-US|access-date=2020-05-05}}</ref>

* Right to start a family<ref>{{Cite web|title=Read about "Right to found a family" on Constitute|url=https://www.constituteproject.org/search?lang=en&key=fndfam&status=in_force&status=is_draft|website=www.constituteproject.org|language=en-US|access-date=2020-05-05}}</ref>

* [[Freedom of information laws by country|Right to information]]<ref>{{Cite web|title=Read about "Right to information" on Constitute|url=https://www.constituteproject.org/search?lang=en&key=infoacc&status=in_force&status=is_draft|website=www.constituteproject.org|language=en-US|access-date=2020-05-05}}</ref>

* Right to marriage<ref>{{Cite web|title=Read about "Right to marry" on Constitute|url=https://www.constituteproject.org/search?lang=en&key=marriage&status=in_force&status=is_draft|website=www.constituteproject.org|language=en-US|access-date=2020-05-05}}</ref>

* [[Right of revolution]]<ref>{{Cite web|title=Read about "Right to overthrow government" on Constitute|url=https://www.constituteproject.org/search?lang=en&key=overthrw&status=in_force&status=is_draft|website=www.constituteproject.org|language=en-US|access-date=2020-05-05}}</ref>

* [[Right to privacy]]<ref>{{Cite web|title=Read about "Right to privacy" on Constitute|url=https://www.constituteproject.org/search?lang=en&key=privacy&status=in_force&status=is_draft|website=www.constituteproject.org|language=en-US|access-date=2020-05-05}}</ref>

* Right to protect one's reputation<ref>{{Cite web|title=Read about "Right to protect one's reputation" on Constitute|url=https://www.constituteproject.org/search?lang=en&key=libel&status=in_force&status=is_draft|website=www.constituteproject.org|language=en-US|access-date=2020-05-05}}</ref>

* Right to [[Renunciation of citizenship|renounce citizenship]]<ref>{{Cite web|title=Read about "Right to renounce citizenship" on Constitute|url=https://www.constituteproject.org/search?lang=en&key=citren&status=in_force&status=is_draft|website=www.constituteproject.org|language=en-US|access-date=2020-05-05}}</ref>

* [[Children's rights|Rights of children]]<ref>{{Cite web|title=Read about "Rights of children" on Constitute|url=https://www.constituteproject.org/search?lang=en&key=childpro&status=in_force&status=is_draft|website=www.constituteproject.org|language=en-US|access-date=2020-05-05}}</ref>

* Rights of debtors<ref>{{Cite web|title=Read about "Rights of debtors" on Constitute|url=https://www.constituteproject.org/search?lang=en&key=debtors&status=in_force&status=is_draft|website=www.constituteproject.org|language=en-US|access-date=2020-05-05}}</ref>

=== Separation of powers ===

{{Main|Separation of powers}}

Constitutions usually explicitly divide power between various branches of government. The standard model, described by the [[Charles de Secondat, baron de Montesquieu|Baron de Montesquieu]], involves three branches of government: [[executive branch|executive]], [[legislature|legislative]] and [[judiciary|judicial]]. Some constitutions include additional branches, such as an [[audit|auditory branch]]. Constitutions vary extensively as to the degree of separation of powers between these branches.

====Accountability====

In [[Presidential system|presidential]] and [[semi-presidential]] systems of government, department secretaries/ministers are accountable to the [[President (government title)|president]], who has patronage powers to appoint and dismiss ministers. The president is accountable to the people in an election.

In [[parliamentary]] systems, Cabinet Ministers are accountable to [[Parliament]], but it is the [[prime minister]] who appoints and dismisses them. In the case of the United Kingdom and other countries with a monarchy, it is the monarch who appoints and dismisses ministers, on the advice of the prime minister. In turn the prime minister will resign if the government loses the confidence of the parliament (or a part of it). Confidence can be lost if the government loses a [[vote of no confidence]] or, depending on the country,<ref>A synchronic comparative perspective were before the founding fathers of Italian Constitution, when they were faced with the question of bicameralism and related issues of confidence and the legislative procedure, {{cite journal|last1=Buonomo|first1=Giampiero|date=2013|title=Il bicameralismo tra due modelli mancati|url=https://www.questia.com/projects#!/project/89409110|journal=L'Ago e Il Filo Edizione Online|access-date=April 10, 2016|archive-date=March 24, 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160324160801/https://www.questia.com/projects#!/project/89409110|url-status=dead}}</ref> loses a particularly important vote in parliament, such as vote on the budget. When a government loses confidence, it stays in office until a new government is formed; something which normally but not necessarily required the holding of a general election.

==== Other independent institutions ====

Other independent institutions which some constitutions have set out include a [[central bank]],<ref>{{Cite web|title=Read about "Central bank" on Constitute|url=https://www.constituteproject.org/search?lang=en&key=bank&status=in_force&status=is_draft|website=www.constituteproject.org|language=en-US|access-date=2020-05-05}}</ref> an [[List of anti-corruption agencies|anti-corruption commission]],<ref>{{Cite web|title=Read about "Counter corruption commission" on Constitute|url=https://www.constituteproject.org/search?lang=en&key=cc&status=in_force&status=is_draft|website=www.constituteproject.org|language=en-US|access-date=2020-05-05}}</ref> an [[Election commission|electoral commission]],<ref>{{Cite web|title=Read about "Electoral commission" on Constitute|url=https://www.constituteproject.org/search?lang=en&key=ecom&status=in_force&status=is_draft|website=www.constituteproject.org|language=en-US|access-date=2020-05-05}}</ref> a judicial oversight body,<ref>{{Cite web|title=Read about "Establishment of judicial council" on Constitute|url=https://www.constituteproject.org/search?lang=en&key=jc&status=in_force&status=is_draft|website=www.constituteproject.org|language=en-US|access-date=2020-05-05}}</ref> a [[human rights commission]],<ref>{{Cite web|title=Read about "Human rights commission" on Constitute|url=https://www.constituteproject.org/search?lang=en&key=hr&status=in_force&status=is_draft|website=www.constituteproject.org|language=en-US|access-date=2020-05-05}}</ref> a media commission,<ref>{{Cite web|title=Read about "Media commission" on Constitute|url=https://www.constituteproject.org/search?lang=en&key=medcom&status=in_force&status=is_draft|website=www.constituteproject.org|language=en-US|access-date=2020-05-05}}</ref> an [[ombudsman]],<ref>{{Cite web|title=Read about "Ombudsman" on Constitute|url=https://www.constituteproject.org/search?lang=en&key=ombuds&status=in_force&status=is_draft|website=www.constituteproject.org|language=en-US|access-date=2020-05-05}}</ref> and a [[truth and reconciliation commission]].<ref>{{Cite web|title=Read about "Truth and reconciliation commission" on Constitute|url=https://www.constituteproject.org/search?lang=en&key=truthcom&status=in_force&status=is_draft|website=www.constituteproject.org|language=en-US|access-date=2020-05-05}}</ref>

=== Power structure ===

Constitutions also establish where sovereignty is located in the state. There are three basic types of distribution of sovereignty according to the degree of centralisation of power: unitary, federal, and confederal. The distinction is not absolute.

In a unitary state, sovereignty resides in the state itself, and the constitution determines this. The territory of the state may be divided into regions, but they are not sovereign and are subordinate to the state. In the UK, the constitutional doctrine of [[Parliamentary sovereignty]] dictates that sovereignty is ultimately contained at the centre. Some powers have been [[devolution|devolved]] to [[Northern Ireland]], [[Scotland]], and [[Wales]] (but not [[England]]). Some unitary states ([[Spain]] is an example) devolve more and more power to sub-national governments until the state functions in practice much like a federal state.

A federal state has a central structure with at most a small amount of territory mainly containing the institutions of the federal government, and several regions (called ''states'', ''provinces'', etc.) which compose the territory of the whole state. Sovereignty is divided between the centre and the constituent regions. The constitutions of Canada and the United States establish federal states, with power divided between the federal government and the provinces or states. Each of the regions may in turn have its own constitution (of unitary nature).

A confederal state comprises again several regions, but the central structure has only limited coordinating power, and sovereignty is located in the regions. Confederal constitutions are rare, and there is often dispute to whether so-called "confederal" states are actually federal.

To some extent a group of states which do not constitute a federation as such may by [[treaty|treaties]] and accords give up parts of their sovereignty to a [[Supranational union|supranational]] entity. For example, the countries constituting the [[European Union]] have agreed to abide by some Union-wide measures which restrict their absolute sovereignty in some ways, e.g., the use of the [[metric system of measurement]] instead of national units previously used.

=== State of emergency ===

{{Main|State of emergency}}

Many constitutions allow the declaration under exceptional circumstances of some form of state of emergency during which some rights and guarantees are suspended. This provision can be and has been abused to allow a government to suppress dissent without regard for human rights&nbsp;– see the article on [[state of emergency]].

===Facade constitutions===

{{See also|Constitutionalism}}

Italian political theorist [[Giovanni Sartori]] noted the existence of national constitutions which are a facade for authoritarian sources of power. While such documents may express respect for [[human rights]] or establish an independent judiciary, they may be ignored when the government feels threatened, or never put into practice. An extreme example was the [[Constitution of the Soviet Union]] that on paper supported [[freedom of assembly]] and [[freedom of speech]]; however, citizens who transgressed unwritten limits were summarily [[Political prisoner|imprisoned]]. The example demonstrates that the protections and benefits of a constitution are ultimately provided not through its written terms but through deference by government and society to its principles. A constitution may change from being real to a facade and back again as democratic and autocratic governments succeed each other.

==Constitutional courts==

{{Further|Constitutional court|Constitutionality}}

The constitution is often protected by a certain legal body in each country with various names, such as ''supreme'', ''constitutional'' or ''high'' court. This court judges the compatibility of legislation with the provisions and principles of the constitution, which is termed "constitutionality". Especially important is the court's responsibility to protect constitutionally established rights and freedoms. In constitutions without the concept of supreme law, such as the United Kingdom constitution, the concept of "constitutionality" has little meaning, and constitutional courts do not exist.

Constitutions are often, but by no means always, protected by a legal body whose job it is to interpret those constitutions and, where applicable, declare void executive and legislative acts which infringe the constitution. In some countries, such as [[Germany]], this function is carried out by a dedicated constitutional court which performs this (and only this) function. In other countries, such as [[Republic of Ireland|Ireland]], the ordinary courts may perform this function in addition to their other responsibilities. While elsewhere, like in the [[United Kingdom]], the concept of declaring an act to be unconstitutional does not exist.

A "constitutional violation" is an action or legislative act that is judged by a constitutional court to be contrary to the constitution, that is, "unconstitutional". An example of constitutional violation by the executive could be a [[politician]] who abuses the powers of his constitutionally-established office. An example of constitutional violation by the legislature is an attempt to pass a law that would contradict the constitution, without first going through the proper [[constitutional amendment]] process.

A constitutional violation is an action or legislative act that is judged by a [[constitutional court]] to be contrary to the constitution, that is, unconstitutional. An example of constitutional violation by the executive could be a public office holder who acts outside the powers granted to that office by a constitution. An example of constitutional violation by the legislature is an attempt to pass a law that would contradict the constitution, without first going through the proper [[constitutional amendment]] process.

A constitutional court is normally the [[court of last resort]], the highest judicial body in the government. The process of [[judicial review]] is then integrated into the system of [[court of appeals|courts of appeal]]. This is the case, for example, with the [[Supreme Court of the United States]]. Cases must normally be heard in lower courts before being brought before the Supreme Court, except cases for which the Supreme Court has [[original jurisdiction]]. Some other countries dedicate a special court solely to the protection of the constitution, as with the [[Federal Constitutional Court of Germany|German Constitutional Court]]. Most constitutional courts are powerful instruments of judicial review, with the power to declare laws "unconstitutional", that is, incompatible with the constitution. The effect of this ruling varies between governments, but it is common for the courts' action to rule a law unenforceable, as is the case in the United States. However, many courts have the problem of relying on the legislative and executive branches' co-operation to properly enforce their decisions. For example, in the United States, the Supreme Court's ruling overturning the "separate but equal" doctrine in the 1950s depended on individual states co-operation to enforce. Some failed to do so, prompting the federal government to intervene. Other countries, such as France, have a [[Constitutional Council of France|Constitutional Council]] which may only judge the constitutionality of laws before the ratification process.

Some countries, mainly those with uncodified constitutions, have no such courts at all. &ndash; forFor example, as the [[United Kingdom]] has traditionally functionsoperated under the principle of [[parliamentary sovereignty]]: theunder legislature haswhich the powerlaws topassed enact any law it wishes. However, through its membership in theby [[EuropeanUnited Union]], the UK is now subject to the jurisdiction of [[European CommunityKingdom lawParliament]] andcould thenot [[Europeanbe Court of Justice]]; similarly,questioned by acceding to the [[Council of Europe]]'s [[European Convention on Human Rights]], it is subject to the [[European Court of Human Rights]]. In effect, these bodies are constitutional courts that can invalidate or interpret UK legislation, first established as a principle by the [[Factortame case]].

==By country==

{{Main|List of national constitutions}}

* [[Constitution of the Roman Republic]]

* [[Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe|Unratified European Union constitution]]

** [[Treaty of Lisbon]] (adopts same changes, but without constitutional name)

* [[United Nations Charter]]

==See also==

{{div col}}

{{wiktionarypar|constitution}}

* [[Basic law]], equivalent in some countries, often for a temporary constitution

* [[Apostolic constitution]] (a class of [[Roman Catholic Church]] documents)

* [[Apostolic constitution]] (a class of [[Catholic Church]] documents)

* [[Company (law)#Corporate constitution|Corporate constitution]]

* [[Consent of the governed]]

* [[European constitution|European Union (proposed) constitution]]

* [[Constitutional amendment]]

* [[List of national constitutions]]

* [[UNConstitutional Chartercourt]]

* [[Constitutional crisis]]

* [[Constitutional documents]]

* [[Constitutional economics]]

* [[Judicial interpretation|Constitutional interpretation]]

** [[Originalism]]

** [[Strict constructionism]]

** [[Textualism]]

* [[Constitutionalism]]

* [[International constitutional law]]

* [[Law]]

* [[Legal tradition]]

* [[International law ]]

* [[Justice]]

* [[Judicial activism]]

* [[Judicial restraint]]

* [[Judicial review]]

* [[Philosophy of law]]

* [[Religious law]]

* [[Rule of law]]

* [[Rule according to higher law]]

{{div col end}}

==Further reading==

'''Judicial philosophies of constitutional interpretation'''

* Zachary Elkins and Tom Ginsburg. 2021. "[[doi:10.1146/annurev-polisci-100720-102911|What Can We Learn from Written Constitutions?]]" ''Annual Review of Political Science''.

''(note: generally specific to [[United States|U.S.]] [[constitutional law]])''

*[[Judicial activism]]

*[[Judicial restraint]]

*[[Originalism]]

*[[Strict constructionism]]

*[[Textualism]]

==References==

{{Reflist}}

<references/>

*[http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/ld200203/ldselect/ldconst/168/16809.htm#note92 Report on the British constitution and proposed European constitution by Professor John McEldowney, University of Warwick] Submitted as written evidence to House of Lords Select Committee on Constitution, published to the public on [[15 October]] [[2003]].

==External links==

<!-- NO MORE LINKS! Constitutions should be on Wikisource and we already link to them -->

*Audio Commentary [http://www.adventuresinlegalland.com/images/stories/audio/spooner_no_treason_full.mp3 No Treason: The Constitution by L. Spooner] mp3

{{Sister project links}}

*[http://www.oefre.unibe.ch/law/icl ''International Constitutional Law'':] English translations of various national constitutions

* [http://constituteproject.org Constitute], an indexed and searchable database of all constitutions in force

*[http://www.constitution.org/ The Constitution Society] Research and public education on the principles of [[Constitutionalism|constitutional republican government]]

*[https://amendmentsproject.org/ Amendments Project]

*[http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/cgi-local/DHI/dhi.cgi?id=dv1-61 ''Dictionary of the History of Ideas'':] Constitutionalism

* [https://web.archive.org/web/20060623044421/http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/cgi-local/DHI/dhi.cgi?id=dv1-61 Dictionary of the History of Ideas] Constitutionalism

*[http://www.staff.amu.edu.pl/~wroblew/html/en_pr_konst.html ''Constitutional Law''] "Constitutions, bibliography, links"

* [https://web.archive.org/web/20060502181213/http://www.staff.amu.edu.pl/%7Ewroblew/html/en_pr_konst.html ''Constitutional Law''], "Constitutions, bibliography, links"

*[http://www.nccs.net/ U.S. National Center for Constitutional Studies]

* [http://www.servat.unibe.ch/icl/ ''International Constitutional Law'':] English translations of various national constitutions

* [http://www.usip.org/pubs/specialreports/sr107.html Democratic Constitution Making] [[U.S. Institute of Peace]] Report, July 2003

* [https://web.archive.org/web/20091204190502/http://unrol.org/article.aspx?article_id=31 United Nations Rule of Law: Constitution-making], on the relationship between constitution-making, the [[rule of law]] and the United Nations.

*[http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-experience/charters/constitution.html Images of the Constitution] and downloadable high-resolution images from the National Archives.

* {{Wikisource-inline|Portal:Constitution}} <!-- this is in addition to Portal:___, to which Sister project links point to -->

* [https://www.britannica.com/topic/constitution-politics-and-law constitution | Theories, Features, Practices, & Facts | Britannica]

* [https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/constitutionalism/ Constitutionalism | Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]

* [https://www.encyclopedia.com/social-sciences/applied-and-social-sciences-magazines/constitutions-and-constitutionalism Constitutions and Constitutionalism | Encyclopedia.com]

{{Government}}

===Some national constitutions===

{{Law}}

(All in English unless otherwise noted)

{{Authority control}}

*[http://www.constitution.org/cons/natlcons.htm List of National Constitutions]

*[http://confinder.richmond.edu Constitution Finder]

<div style="-moz-column-count:3; column-count:3;">

* {{es}} {{en}} [http://pdba.georgetown.edu/Constitutions/Argentina/argentina.html Argentina]

* [http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/general/constitution/ Australia]

* [http://www.fed-parl.be/constitution_uk.html Belgium]

*: [http://www.senate.be/doc/const_nl.html {{smaller|in Dutch}}]{{·}} [http://www.senate.be/doc/const_fr.html {{smaller|in French}}]{{·}} [http://www.senate.be/deutsch/const_de.html {{smaller|in German}}]

* [http://www.planalto.gov.br/CCIVIL_03/Constituicao/Constitui%C3%A7ao.htm Brazil, in Portuguese]

* [http://www.parliament.bg/?page=const&lng=en Bulgaria] [http://www.parliament.bg/?page=const&lng=bg {{smaller|in Bulgarian}}]

* [http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/const/index.html Canada] [http://laws.justice.gc.ca/fr/const/index.html {{smaller|in French}}]

* [http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China People's Republic of China]

* {{es}} [http://www.presidencia.gov.co/prensa_new/constitucion/index.pdf Colombia (PDF)]

* [http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Cuba Cuba]

* [http://www.folketinget.dk/pdf/constitution.pdf Denmark]

* [http://www.legaltext.ee/en/andmebaas/tekst.asp?loc=text&dok=X0000&pg=&tyyp=&query=&ptyyp=&keel=en Estonia] [http://www.legaltext.ee/en/andmebaas/tekst.asp?loc=text&dok=X0000&pg=&tyyp=&query=&ptyyp=&keel=et {{smaller|in Estonian}}]

* [http://www.finlex.fi/en/laki/kaannokset/1999/en19990731.pdf Finland]

* {{fr}} [[:fr:Constitutions françaises|France]]

* [http://www.bundesregierung.de/nn_22672/Webs/Breg/EN/Federal-Government/FunctionAndConstitutionalBasis/BasicLaw/ContentofBasicLaw/content-of-basic-law.html Germany]

* [http://www.parliament.ge/files/68_1944_216422_konst.pdf Georgia]

* [http://www.parliament.gr/english/politeuma/syntagma.pdf Greece]

* [http://www.friends-partners.org/oldfriends/constitution/const-hungary.html Hungary]

* [http://www.government.is/constitution/ Iceland]

* [http://indiacode.nic.in/coiweb/welcome.html India]

* [http://mellat.majlis.ir/CONSTITUTION/ENGLISH.HTM Iran]

* [http://www.taoiseach.gov.ie/index.asp?docID=262 Republic of Ireland] [http://www.taoiseach.gov.ie/attached_files/Pdf%20files/Constitution%20of%20IrelandNov2004.pdf {{smaller|PDF}}]

* [http://www.concourt.am/wwconst/constit/italy/italy--e.htm Italy] [http://www.quirinale.it/costituzione/costituzione.htm {{smaller|in Italian}}]

* [http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Japan Japan]

* [http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_Republic_of_Korea South Korea]

*: [http://ko.wikisource.org/wiki/%EB%8C%80%ED%95%9C%EB%AF%BC%EA%B5%AD_%ED%97%8C%EB%B2%95 {{smaller|in Korean}}]{{·}} [http://www.ccourt.go.kr/ccout_quick/chinese.asp {{smaller|in Chinese}}]

* [http://www.mediaclub.cg.yu/Ustav/ Montenegro]

* [http://www.pap.gov.pk/constitu/mconstitu.htm Pakistan]

* [http://www.gov.ph/aboutphil/constitution.asp Philippines]

* [http://www.sejm.gov.pl/prawo/konst/angielski/kon1.htm Poland]

* [http://www.constitution.ru/en/10003000-01.htm Russia]

* [http://www.parlamento.pt/ingles/cons_leg/crp_ing/index.html Portugal] [http://www.parlamento.pt/ingles/cons_leg/Constitution_definitive.pdf {{smaller|PDF}}]

*: [http://www.parlamento.pt/const_leg/crp_port/index.html {{smaller|in Portuguese}}] [http://www.parlamento.pt/const_leg/crp_port/constpt2005.pdf {{smaller|PDF}}]

*: [http://www.parlamento.pt/frances/const_leg/crp_franc/index.html {{smaller|in French}}]{{·}} [http://www.parlamento.pt/espanhol/const_leg/crp_esp/index.html {{smaller|in Spanish}}]

* [http://www.humanrights.lv/doc/latlik/satver~1.htm Latvia] [http://www.saeima.lv/Likumdosana/satversme_izdr.htm {{smaller|in Latvian}}]

* [http://www3.lrs.lt/cgi-bin/preps2?Condition1=211295&Condition2= Lithuania]

* [http://odin.dep.no/odin/engelsk/norway/system/032005-990424/index-dok000-b-n-a.html Norway] [http://www.lovdata.no/all/hl-18140517-000.html {{smaller|in Norwegian}}]

* [http://www.riksdagen.se/templates/R_Page____6357.aspx Sweden]

* [http://www.admin.ch/ch/itl/rs/1/c101ENG.pdf Switzerland]

*: [http://www.admin.ch/ch/d/sr/c101.html {{smaller|in German}}]{{·}} [http://www.admin.ch/ch/f/rs/c101.html {{smaller|in French}}]{{·}} [http://www.admin.ch/ch/i/rs/c101.html {{smaller|in Italian}}]

*: [http://www.admin.ch/ch/itl/rs/1/index.htm {{smaller|Index to other languages}}]

* {{es}} [http://constitucion.presidencia.gob.mx/docs/constitucion.pdf Mexico]

* [http://www.gio.gov.tw/info/news/constitution.htm Republic of China (Taiwan)]

*: [http://www.gio.gov.tw/info/news/additional.htm {{smaller|Additional articles}}]

* [http://statutes.agc.gov.sg Singapore]

* [http://www.info.gov.za/documents/constitution/index.htm South Africa]

* [http://www.tbmm.gov.tr/english/constitution.htm Turkey]

* [http://www.findlaw.com/casecode/constitution/ United States]

*: {{smaller|[[United States Constitution|Annotated version]]}}{{·}} [http://finduslaw.com/us_constitution_5th_and_14th_amendments {{smaller|Amendments}}]

* [http://www.vheadline.com/printer_news.asp?id=6831 Venezuela]

</div>

<!--Categories-->

[[Category:Constitutions| ]]

[[Category:ConstitutionalSources of law]]

[[Category:Official documents]]

<!--Other languages-->

[[als:Verfassung]]

[[ar:دستور]]

[[ast:Constitución]]

[[bn:সংবিধান]]

[[zh-min-nan:Hiàn-hoat]]

[[be:Канстытуцыя]]

[[bg:Конституция]]

[[ca:Constitució]]

[[cs:Ústava]]

[[da:Forfatning]]

[[de:Verfassung]]

[[et:Põhiseadus]]

[[el:Σύνταγμα]]

[[es:Constitución]]

[[eo:Konstitucio]]

[[fa:قانون اساسی]]

[[fr:Constitution]]

[[gl:Constitución]]

[[ko:헌법]]

[[hr:Ustav]]

[[io:Konstituco]]

[[id:Konstitusi]]

[[is:Stjórnarskrá]]

[[it:Costituzione]]

[[he:חוקה]]

[[ka:კონსტიტუცია]]

[[sw:Katiba]]

[[lv:Konstitūcija]]

[[lt:Konstitucija]]

[[li:Grondwet]]

[[hu:Alkotmány]]

[[mk:Устав]]

[[ms:Perlembagaan]]

[[nl:Grondwet]]

[[ja:憲法]]

[[no:Konstitusjon]]

[[nn:Grunnlov]]

[[nrm:Constitution]]

[[oc:Constitucion]]

[[ps:اساسي قانون]]

[[pl:Konstytucja (akt prawny)]]

[[pt:Constituição]]

[[ro:Constituţie]]

[[ru:Конституция]]

[[simple:Constitution]]

[[sk:Ústava]]

[[sl:Ustava]]

[[sr:Устав]]

[[sh:Ustav]]

[[fi:Perustuslaki]]

[[sv:Grundlag]]

[[tl:Saligang batas]]

[[th:รัฐธรรมนูญ]]

[[vi:Hiến pháp]]

[[tr:Anayasa]]

[[uk:Конституція]]

[[wa:Mwaisse lwè]]

[[zh:宪法]]