[quote]The UK is in a small club when it comes to written constitutions - only two other states don't have one: New Zealand and Israel. [/quote] [quote]The reasons are linked to the UK's piecemeal approach to democracy, which has evolved over hundreds of years. Under the UK's "unwritten" system, parliament represents the people and is not bound by other laws or statutes. The Magna Carta, written in England in 1215, is the closest thing to a written constitution. This document has had a huge influence on the UK's parliamentary democracy, and the formation of written constitutions around the world. Some say not having a written constitution is advantageous, as it offers greater flexibility to how institutions such as government, the judiciary and legislature can be reformed. Critics point out that some of the world's most repressive regimes have had written constitutions.[/quote] Should countries have a constitution or should it have "unwritten rules" that can be changed if the time requires it?