role and influence of judiciary increased Flashcards
upholding rule of law
-the judiciary must ensure the rule of law applies to parliamentarians and ministers
-judges can rule ministers actions ultra vires forcing the government to stop illegal actions e.g. the prorogation case in which Johnson’s power was checked, who tried to illegally close parliament to avoid scrutiny
rule of law evaluation
Judges in the UK are less powerful than those in the US as given how easy it is to change the Constitution, the government can simply change the law if it is found in breach of it. Since 1997, have been 14 major changes in anti-terrorism legislation in the UK, usually in reaction to judicial rulings that place limits on the executive’s power. The Blair government alone introduced 7 major anti-terrorism laws. It overturned one ruling (Belmarsh prison ruling) by a new law, the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005.
interpreting the constitution
-in parts the constitution is unclear and judges must interpret it to make it understandable
-article 50 case strengthened the power of parliament over the executive
-prorogation case limited the PMs ability to close parliament
-and the boundaries of devolution have been defined, devolved bodies cannot stray into constitutional matters such as brexit
-cases in human rights are increasingly important too e.g. Nicklinson case ruling there was no right to assisted suicide in UK law
constitution evaluation
Because the Constitution is unentrenched, it is flexible and easy to change if the government doesn’t agree with the judiciary’s interpretation. The Johnson government even threatened to review the powers of the UK Supreme Court following a series of rulings that went against it (Article 50 and Prorogation cases).
power of judicial review to protect civil liberties and ‘executive tyranny’
-judges can resolve the legality of ministers actions (Article 50/Miller)
-conflicts between individuals and the state can be resolved (Begum)
-cases involving competing rights can be resolved (Ashers Bakery)
-compared to the US, UK judges have limited power as they cannot strike down legislation, however they can issue declarations of incompatibility
judicial review evaluation
The UK Supreme Court has no initiation power. It is a ‘reactive’ rather than active institution and thus, cannot actively defend civil liberties unless a judicial review is brought by a pressure group / individual.
judicial inquiries
-public inquiries can be called upon into public issues such as systemic racism (Macpherson inquiry)
-their experience and training gives them the intellectual ability to form the truth
-independence from the government
-any testimony in front of them carries the penalty of perjury
-judicial inquiries can be significant in influencing the legislative agenda of parliament
-but recommendations can be ignored e.g. Levenson inquiry
inquiries evaluation
Critics of the judiciary suggest it is part of the establishment, with senior judges ‘whitewashing’ controversial issues via judicial inquiries. To illustrate, Leveson failed to lead to changes in the law. Hutton backed the Blair government’s version of events.
