One of the most dynamic relationships historically has been that of the state with religion. Having been blamed for many wars and rebellions it comes as no surprise that those states continuing to model close relationships with an individual religion come under high scrutiny, especially now religious freedom plays such an important part in today's society. Furthermore, sociological theories have developed beyond metaphysical explanations of state authority and no longer depend on spiritual or religious explanations. The UK, with two established churches, is one such state with its relationship with the Church of England especially being subjected to criticism from a number of different groups. Whether this constant criticism is justified is another story and one of the aims of this thesis is to try to unpick some of the debates that flow around the subject in order to put them into a practical context. Often, when such discussions are undertaken there are lots of arguments made as to why the Church of England should, or should not, be disestablished. Discussions on whether they retain an important place in society are made but ultimately very little said about how disestablishment may occur if this was chosen as the way forward. This thesis will aim to tackle some of these questions and will delve into the constitutional complexities in order to discover how such a procedure can be initiated, and the effect this would have on both the state and the Church of England. Future relations will also be discussed and an important consideration will be the views and effect this might have on other religions who have come to benefit from the pleural approach of the established church. Ultimately, the result will be the uncovering of the complexities of disestablishment and who, if anyone, will benefit from the process.

The last two decades have witnessed a period of constitutional change without precedent in the United Kingdom’s contemporary history, and prominent constitutionalists have suggested that these transformations signified primarily a legalisation of the British constitutional settlement. The present research hence offers a review of the most salient and impactful instances of constitutional change since 1997 with the aim of assessing in what ways the UK could be transitioning from a more political to a more legal constitutional framework. It highlights a greater reliance on legal devices to regulate constitutional processes and more frequent resort to judicial mechanisms of constitutional control. Indeed, the virtual entrenchment of various classes of norms (ECHR rights, common law constitutional rights and principles, Thoburn-‘constitutional statutes’) suggests the formation in British public law of a ‘bloc de constitutionnalité’ that could serve as basis for increasingly genuine forms of constitutional review. Concurrently, British courts are performing more of the functions of constitutional courts and appear willing to assume the role of constitutional guardian ascribed to the judiciary in a legal-constitutional model. Overall, the political constitution and its core principle of parliamentary sovereignty seem to be under challenge, particularly in judicial and jurisprudential debates grounded in the influential theory of common law constitutionalism. We therefore argue that the British constitution can no longer be described as exclusively ‘political’ and that there is at least some evidence of a trend towards legal constitutionalism in the UK.

L’objet de cette étude est d’identifier une constitution « britannique » distincte de la constitution anglaise. Si le langage commun tend trop souvent à confondre une partie pour le tout, l’Angleterre pour le Royaume-Uni, cet écueil n’épargne pas les juristes. La notion de constitution britannique vise précisément à rendre compte de la manière dont le droit constitutionnel a pu appréhender et saisir la tension fondamentale qui l’anime entre deux exigences en apparence contraires, l’unité et la diversité. Depuis les lois de dévolution adoptées à la fin du XXe siècle, l’Ecosse, le Pays de Galles et l’Irlande du Nord disposent d’institutions de gouvernement autonomes, soumises théoriquement à la souveraineté du Parlement de Westminster. Le corps de lois, règles et principes qui régissent cet arrangement institutionnel permettent d’identifier un cadre constitutionnel spécifiquement britannique. Mais celui-ci n’est pas pour autant né à la fin du XXe siècle. Il nous semble en effet que cette constitution britannique trouve ses sources et son origine dans les relations qui ont pu s’établir entre le Royaume-Uni et certaines de ses colonies dotées d’un statut particulier et d’un gouvernement autonome, les Dominions. C’est dans ce cadre historique et intellectuel qu’a pu apparaître une manière spécifiquement britannique d’organiser cette tension entre l’unité et la diversité. Celle-ci puise d’ailleurs dans les ressources propres du constitutionnalisme britannique, qui résulte d’un entrelacement ingénieux de règles et principes juridiques et de pratiques institutionnalisées, les conventions de la constitution. Cette rencontre entre le droit et les conventions dessine un droit constitutionnel original et peut-être fédéral. / This study aims at identifying a « British » constitution distinct from the English constitution. If popular language tends to confuse one part with the whole, England with the United Kingdom, so do jurists. The concept of a British constitution aims at capturing the way in which constitutional law may have grasped the fundamental tension between two seemingly antagonist ideas, unity and diversity. Since the devolution Acts have been enacted in the end of the XXth century, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland enjoy responsible government, under the asserted sovereignty of the Parliament of Westminster. The body of statutes, rules and principles that govern this institutional arrangement thus form a specifically British constitutional framework. But this framework was not necessarily born in the end of the XXth century. We intend to show that this British constitution can be traced back to the constitutional relations established between the United Kingdom and some of her colonies, the Dominions. It is within this historical and intellectual framework that may have appeared a specifically British way of dealing with this tension between unity and diversity. It seems to have resorted to the resources of British constitutionalism, which is produced by the ingenious imbrication of legal rules and principles and of institutionalized practices, i.e. the conventions of the Constitution. This confluence of law and conventions sketches a constitutional law that is both original and possibly federal.

Les droits de l’homme au Royaume-Uni sont un objet de vif débat, à la frontière entre le domaine juridique et le domaine politique. L’une des toutes premières mesures du gouvernement de Tony Blair a été de faire voter une loi en 1998 incorporant la Convention européenne des droits de l’homme au droit national, transformant ainsi sa protection à l’échelle nationale. Pourtant, les faiblesses de la loi sont rapidement apparues et elle a été remise en cause. En outre, le gouvernement a dû faire des choix politiques pour mettre en œuvre la protection des droits de l’homme. L’évolution de celle-ci a pu être paradoxale : d’un côté le droit à l’égalité a été renforcé et élargi, quand, de l’autre, le développement d’une politique sécuritaire a entraîné de nombreuses limites aux libertés individuelles. Enfin, les cours britanniques ont pu participer à la création de nouveaux droits comme le droit à la vie privée, qui est apparu dans le droit britannique. Tous les changements législatifs ont entraîné un changement dans la distribution des pouvoirs au Royaume-Uni, tant à l’échelle nationale, où le pouvoir exécutif a été renforcé, qu’à l’échelle européenne, où les pouvoirs des cours internationales a été perçu comme une ingérence dans la souveraineté du Parlement britannique. La politique des droits de l’homme des gouvernements de Tony Blair et Gordon Brown a donc été pétrie de contradictions, entre un engagement réel pour la défense de certains droits et les limites apportés à certains autres pour défendre la sécurité, et entre une volonté d’intégration dans l’UE et une réaction à un euroscepticisme croissant. / In the United Kingdom, human rights have been strongly debated, both in the legal and political fields. One of the very first measures taken by the government of Tony Blair in 1998 has been to pass the Human Rights Act, a law incorporating the European convention on human rights into national law, therefore transforming the protection of human rights at the national level. However, the flaws of the Human Rights Act have appeared and it was contested soon after its passage. Furthermore, the government had to make political choices to implement in practice the protection of human rights. Their evolution can be considered paradoxical: the right to equality was strengthened and included more varied elements while the development of a strong security policy caused some civil liberties to be severely constrained. The British courts have also been able to participate in the creation of new rights, like the right to privacy which did not have an independent existence in English law until the courts recognised it, under European influence. The legal changes in the protection of human rights have caused a change in the way power is distributed in the United Kingdom, both at a national level, where the executive branch was strengthened, and in the relationship with Europe, where the power of international courts has been seen as infringing on British sovereignty. The human rights policies of the Blair and Brown governments, therefore, has been fraught with contradictions, living somewhere between the stronger protection of some rights and the tighter restraints created to defend security, and between the desire to participate more fully in European integration while still having to deal with growing Euroscepticism.

The main goal of this diploma thesis is to analyse the impacts of Brexit on British constitution. Brexit represents the process of The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland exiting the European Union. This very complex process has and will have significant impacts on the British constitutional system. Great Britain is very unique, because it does not dispose of codified constitution, therefore the examination of the impacts of Brexit on British constitution is a very interesting subject. The main objective of this diploma thesis is to bring an analysis of evident impacts of Brexit on the British constitution and to present the readers possible impacts, that might occur in the future.