Judiciary-Executive Flashcards
How was the relationship of the judiciary and executive until the 1970s
Very different:
+ Judiciary was seen as a conservative body (same socio-political background as members of successive Conservative Govt).
+ Showed support for the power of the state in relation to its citizens - judges not expected to challenge govt authority (seen as servants of the state rather than an equal partner).
How has the relationship changed after the 1970s?
Because of:
+ Growth of judicial review
+ Rise of liberal ideology since the 60s and the growth of the ‘rights culture’.
+ Appointment of liberal-minded senior judges from the 1990s.
+ The Human Rights Act 1998 - gave judges a codified statement of HR - protecting citizens against state power.
+ Constitutional Reform Act 2005
Summary: claims of the government (executive)
(1) Elected and held accountable, unlike judges (even chosen by parliament through the JAC).
(2) Clear mandate to run the country and protect its citizens - further granted authority if they can control their majority in parliament.
(3) Able to respond to public opinion.
(4) Holds overreaching responsibility to protect citizens, even if it means setting aside individual rights for the interests of national security.
(5) Parliamentary sovereignty - able to reverse judge decisions and judges must enforce the will of parliament.
Summary: claims of the judiciary
(1) Judges do not allow political considerations to interfere with the protection of rights.
(2) As qualified lawyers, judges brings a rational bearing to questions of law and justice.
(3) Expected to be immune to outside influence - no bias towards a certain group or ideology.
(4) As they are not elected - judges can take a long-term view whilst politician have to consider their short term re-elections prospects (career politicans).
