The basic principle that a democratic country abides by is freedom. However, granting it in absolute terms may lead to unjust misuse of this fundamental right. Hence, a set of rules for the same is necessary. The Constitution of a country is this very set of rules and principles meant to avoid arbitration of rights. The Constitution of a democratic country follows four basic guidelines: firstly, it upholds the ideals of its representative country; defining the type of society we live in. Secondly, it defines the nature of the country's political system which runs the nation; for example, Nepal was a monarchy until 2006 when the people's movement finally bore fruit and a new Constitution established Nepal as a democracy. Thirdly, the Constitution works as a safeguard against tyrannical use of power by dominant groups against minorities. Hence, in India, which is a melting pot of several cultures and religions, the Constitution ensures that the majority i.e., the Hindus do not use their status to overwhelm the minorities predominantly comprising Muslims and Christians. Lastly, the Constitution protects us from ourselves in ascertaining that our whims cannot change its basic structure i.e., provisions that guarantee citizens' rights cannot be easily overthrown. Thus, a democratic nation needs a Constitution to uphold its rights of freedom and equality.
On the other hand, a Constitution is not technically necessary for a democracy to exist. Great Britain for one never had one to this day. All the safeguards mentioned above were over time gradually established there through separate laws and jurisdiction.
The underlying presumption of the question, that democratic countries need constitutions, is not actually correct. Quite a number of democratic countries, most notably the United Kingdom, operate without a specific document which is a National Constitution. However, having a constitution is extremely useful in a democracy because it sets the limits of governmental power and explains how the "political game is played" in clear and unambiguous language. This allows democracies to effectively enforce the Rule of Law and create equality of rights for all citizens. (In countries like the United Kingdom that do not have constitutions, a combination of traditions and localized laws serve a parallel function.)
The awnser is no because ther are no laws in communist countries. Well for government officials that is!
No other country will ever, nor should ever, adopt the US Constitution.
a consul has to have an understanding of the constitution and has to know what the ambassador is doing with foreign countries
Many countries that have dictators and communist governments. The US might be the ONLY nation that has INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS written into it's constitution.
many countries like Britain newzealand, soudi arabia etc
yes
Britain
Africa is a continent, not a country. There are over 50 countries in Africa, some of which have their own constitutions. So it would not make sense or be practical to have a single constitution for the whole continent.
No, many other countries have a constitution similar to the U.S. Constitution. There are to many for me to name.
there isn't an answer to this.
But not in Cambodia.
Not specifically.
British
argentina
No, the USA is the only country under our own constitution. however, other countries like England and France have their own versions of a constitution.
Yes, and many countries on Earth do not have a constitution.
Habsbans