debates surrounding the judiciary

Question 1

arguments that the judiciary is too powerful:

Answer 1

• judges are unelected and can’t be removed easily
  -the HRA means judges get involved in politics which undermines both parliamentary sovereignty and democracy
  -judges make decisions that can have a huge impact e.g. to do with assisted dying
  -judicial review means judges can end up forcing gov. departments and public bodies to change their policies

Question 2

arguments that the judiciary isn’t too powerful:

Answer 2

-judges need to be independent of politicians to be impartial and fair to everyone
-judges only interpret laws passed by parliament
-judges are very experienced legal professionals who are properly trained on looking at difficult cases impartially, therefore they’re better suited than politicians
-the courts make sure that those in power stick to the rules themselves

Question 3

does a lack of diversity in the judiciary matter? YES

Answer 3

-judges don’t reflect modern british society - e.g. only 8% of all judges in 2021 were from a minority ethnic group, only 1/13 justices of the SC are female
-it could make it hard for judges to understand the cultural context of some cases fully
-there has been little improvement in judicial diversity in the last decade
-it reduces the public’s trust in the judiciary and leads to biased pro-establishment decisions
-more input from democratically elected representatives in the appointments process would help bolster diversity

Question 4

does a lack of diversity in the judiciary matter? NO

Answer 4

-unlike MPs, judges are not representatives of the people but are chose for their professional expertise and on merit alone
-judges are not there to empathise but to apply the law neutrally and professionally
-diversity is growing lower down the judicial hierarchy
-there is no evidence of an establishment bias, and judges have often criticised governments and upheld the rights of minorities e.g. asylum seekers