Difference between Flexible constitution and Rigid constitution
Posted on : 21-11-2018 Posted by : Admin

Introduction: Flexible Constitution

Famous political writer, Bryce has suggested that the classification of the constitution should be based on the method of amendment to the constitution and its relation to the ordinary or statutory law. Under this scheme there are two types of constitution.-flexible and rigid.

In a flexible constitution there is no distinction between ordinary law and constitutional law. Both the laws are enacted in the same manner and their source is also same. In this type, the constitution may be written or mainly based on agreements.

The amendment of the flexible constitution requires no special procedure. The constitution of Britain is a classic example of a flexible constitution. The Parliament in Britain is sovereign. Here,

1. There is no law which parliament cannot make.
2. There is no law which parliament cannot unmake.  
3. There is no clear distinction between laws which are fundamental or constitutional and laws, which are not.
4. In Britain constitutional changes can be made by following the same way as an ordinary law is enacted.
5. The courts have no authority of review. They cannot nullify any enactment of parliament.

Merits of a flexible constitution

• A flexible constitution can be amended with the same ease and facility with which ordinary laws are altered. It makes possible the adjustment of the constitution to the changing needs of the society.
• A flexible constitution can easily adopt the needs of people with the change of time because of its elasticity. When the demands of people are fulfilled by the constitution there is hardly any chance of revolution.

• A flexible constitution is very useful for developing a country, because it is a great expression of its development. It does not hinder progress due to its adaptability. At the same time it protects the basic principles of the constitution.
• A flexible constitution is based on the sound assumption of some sociopolitical change and premise that there cannot be a perfect constitution for all times, to tackle the socio-political changes.
• Flexible constitution is shaped by the conventions of national life. It represents the historical continuity of the nation’s life and incorporates changes within itself.  
• A flexible constitution can claim to feel the pulse of public opinion. It represents the minds of people.

Demerits of a flexible constitution

Due to its flexible nature the constitution keeps on changing. The constitution may be changed just to satisfy the people who are in majority ignoring the welfare of minority.

It fails to provide a stable system in administration, which results in the poor performance of the government.

When the procedure of amendment is simple and easy, it is liable to be seriously affected by ever changing popular passion. And popular passions are guided by emotions, not by reasons. These decisions, which are based on emotions, may disturb the harmony and balance of a nation. It may divide the society and there may be a possible threat to the integration of the nation itself.

Flexible constitution is not suitable for a federal system, because the rights of constituent units are not guaranteed due to flexible nature of the constitution.

Introduction: Rigid Constitution

Rigid constitutions are those, which require a special procedure for the amendment. The constitutions of USA, Australia and Switzerland are the best examples of a rigid constitution. The rigid constitution is above the ordinary law and can be changed by a procedure, which is different from the procedure of ordinary law, thus making it difficult to change. The objective is to emphasize that the constitutional law embodies the will of the sovereign, and it should be treated as sacred document.

American constitution is the best example of a rigid constitution. The American congress cannot make any law contrary to the constitution. The American Supreme Court acts as the guardian of the constitution and it has right to declare any law of the congress null and void. The constitution of India is neither as flexible as the British constitution not as rigid as the American constitution. But it is midway, which means more rigid than British constitution and less rigid than American constitution. A rigid constitution is always written.

Merits of Rigid Constitution

1. A rigid constitution possesses the qualities of stability and performance. ‘A rigid constitution is essentially a written constitution which is the creation of experienced and learned people. Thus it is the symbol of national efficiency. People regard it as a sacred document and they are ready to work according to its provisions.
2. A rigid constitution safeguards legislative violation, Constitution should not be a plaything in the hands of legislatures.
3. A rigid constitution safeguards fundamental rights effectively. Fundamental rights are part of constitution. No legislature can tamper them, because they are superior to ordinary law.
4. A rigid constitution protects the rights of minority. Minorities cannot be expected to agree to their rights being endangered by a majority action. If the majority ventures it, the judges perform their function of guardianship.
5. A rigid constitution is free from dangers of temporary popular passion. Because of complex amendment procedure the constitution may not be swept away by the emotions of the people which in most of the cases are not based on wisdom and reasoning.
6. A federal set up of government essentially needs a rigid constitution for the safety of the rights of the units as well as for the strength and integration of the federation.
7. Under rigid constitution units of a federation feel secure and at the same time there is a check on their activities also in order to stop them from violating each other’s jurisdictions.

Demerits of Rigid constitution

1. Sometimes changes in the constitution become inevitable but a rigid constitution cannot be amended easily.
2. The framers of constitution have hardly foreseen the future. A rigid constitution is not suitable for a progressive nation where changes take place frequently.
3. Under the rigid constitution, the main concern of the judiciary is to see whether the law obeys the provisions of the constitution or not.

The following are the differences between the flexible constitution and the rigid constitution

Whatever merits and demerits a rigid constitution has the fact is that modern tendency is to have a written and a rigid constitution. There is a future for rigid constitution having some elements of flexibility in it. As the constitution of India is having elements of flexibility as well as rigidity, this may provide an ideal path for forth coming generations.

• ← Previous
• Next →

Hope you have liked this post.

Please share it with your friends through below links.

All the very best from Team Studyandscore

“Study well, Score more…”