Every state has a constitution, since every state functions on the basis of certain rules and principles. It
has often been asserted that the United States has a written constitution, but that the constitution of Great
Britain is unwritten. This is true only in the sense that, in the United States, there is a formal document
called the Constitution, whereas there is no such document in Great Britain. In fact, however, many parts
of the British constitution exist in written form, whereas important aspects of the American constitution are
wholly unwritten. The British constitution includes the bill of Rights (1689), the Act of Settlement (1700 –
01), the Parliament Act of 1911, the successive Representation of the People Acts (which extended the
suffrage), the statutes dealing with the structure of the courts, the various local government acts, and many
others. These are not ordinary statutes, even though they are adopted in the ordinary legislative way, and
they are not codified within the structure of single orderly document. On the other hand, such institutions
in the United States as the presidential cabinet and the system of political parties, though not even
mentioned in the written constitution, are most certainly of constitutional significance. The presence or
absence of a formal written document makes a difference, of course, but only one of degree. A singledocument constitution has such advantages as greater precision, simplicity, and consistency. In a newly
developing state as Israel, on the other hand, the balance of advantage has been found to lie with an
uncodified constitution evolving through the growth of custom and the medium of statutes. Experience
suggests that some codified constitutions are much too detailed. An overlong constitution invites disputes
and litigation is rarely read or understood by the ordinary citizen and injects too much rigidity in cases in
which flexibility is often preferable. Since a very long constitution says to many things on too many
subjects, it must be amended often, and this makes it still longer. The United States Constitution of 7,000
words is a model of brevity, whereas many of that country’s state constitutions are much too long - the
longest being hat of the sate of Louisiana, whose constitution now has about 255,000 words. The very new,
modern constitutions of the recently admitted states of Alaska and Hawaii and the Commonwealth of
Puerto Rico have, significantly, very concise constitutions ranging from 9,000 to 15,000 words. The 1949
constitution of India, with 395 articles, is the wordiest of all national constitutions. In contract, some of the
world’s new constitutions, such as those of Japan and Indonesia, are very short indeed.
Some constitutions are buttressed by powerful institutions such as an independent judiciary, whereas
other, though committed to lofty principles, are not supported by governmental institutions endowed with
the authority to defend these principles in concrete situation. Accordingly, many juristic writers distinguish
between “normative” and “normal” constitutions. A normative constitution is the one that not only has the
status of supreme law but it also fully activated and effective; it is habitually obeyed in the actual life of the
state. A nominal constitution may express high aspirations, but it does not, in fact, reflect the political
realities of the state. Article 125 of the 1936 constitution of the Soviet Union and the article 87 of the 1954
constitution of the People’s Republic of China both purport to guarantee freedom of speech, but in those
countries even mild expressions of dissent are likely to be swiftly and sternly repressed. Where the written
constitution is only nominal, behind the verbal façade will be found the real constitution containing the
basic principles according to which power is exercised in actual fact. Thus in the Soviet Union, the rules of
the Communist Party describing its organs and functioning are more truly the constitution of that country
than are the grand phases of the 1936 Stalin constitution. Every state, in short has a constitution, but in
some, real constitution operates behind the façade of a nominal constitution.