Abstract
1.Introduction 2.Distinction between law and convention 3.Enforcement by courts 4.Ground of binding force and political side of convention 5.Conclusion Constitutional law of England is composed of law of the constitution and convention of the constitution. Dicey, an orthodox constitutional lawyer of England, insisted convention is never law in the strict sense because convention is not enforced by court. And he pointed out the violation of convention is never illigal, though that is unconstitutional. On the other hand, some scholars(whose first on the list is I.Jennings)considering convention as law, have been critisizing Dicey;the argument is being continued between, as it were, the shcool of Dicey and the school of anti-Dicey until today inclusive. Why such argument is caused is that convention lacks a determining factor that gives convention an attribute as law;so I think convention is on the line of demarcation between law and extra legal fact, or law and political fact-a fact which is concerned in activities f government of state. The aim of this treatise is to study a handhold for making clear this problem, by arranging a little both opinions of the school of Dicey and anti-Dicey, in order to consider either convention is able to be recognized as law or it is rule belonging to political fact that is not law.
