Evaluate the view that the Supreme Court has strengthened Parliamentary Sovereignty

Question 1

Point one?

Answer 1

Supreme Court is to uphold the rule of law, and they are successful in doing so. They do this by interpreting the law and checking it’s compatibility against the Human Rights Act and the ECHR.

Question 2

Evidence for point one?

Answer 2

In the Belmarsh case, it was ruled that the clause of Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 was incompatible with Articles 5 and 14 of the ECHR

• R. (Reilly) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (2016) : had infringed the protection against slavery provided in Article 4 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).

Question 3

Counter 1?

Answer 3

Declarations of incompatibility challenge parliamentary sovereignty.

Question 4

Counter 1 evidence

Answer 4

• Civil partnership act 2016 influenced by the keigan and stein field case
  – ECHR ruled against Rwanda deportation as it went against Human Rights.

Question 5

However.. (Point 1)

Answer 5

However, Declaration of incompatibility works within the principles of Parliamentary Sovereignty. The Court cannot strike down an Act of Parliament or force Parliament to take action. The decision of the Belmarsh case was not invalidated and the Government chose to change the law

Question 6

Point 2?

Answer 6

Judicial reviews, often uphold the rights of Parliament and are an important way of limiting the powers of government.