Supreme court and relationship between the branches Flashcards
Uk Supreme court establishment
The UK supreme court was established under the Consititutional reform Act 2005, previously the highest court of appeal was made up of 12 Lords who sat in the Appellate Committee of the House of Lords.
What are the functions of the Supreme court
- It acts as the final court of appeal in England, Wales and Northen Ireland and hear appeals from civil cases in Scotland.
- To clarify the meaning of the law by hearing appeals in cases where their is uncertainty.
To what extent is the Supreme court neutral and independant?
3 Paragraphs
- Appointments proccess
- Composition of the court
- Seperation of powers/political but independant Increase in judicial activism/politicisation
To what extent is the Supreme court neutral and independant, Appointments proccess means they are independant and neutral.
- Involves little political interference, Judges cannot be picked on how they will rule and favour the government. The consitutional Reform Act 2005 led to the creation of the JAC, Judicial Appointments commission.
- Before 2005 the judges were appointed by the Chancellor and PM, so it was difficult to rule out any political influence. Judges that favoured the government could be more likely to be selected.
Judicial independance and neutrality
Judges should be able to act independantly from political control and influence from other branches, and they should be neutral, operating without judicial bias when adminsitrating justice.
To what extent is the Supreme court neutral and independant, Appointments proccess means they are NOT independant and neutral.
- The Lord Chancellor, although has a lesser role can now reject candidates proposed by the JAC, ask to reconsider, or choose to accept them.
Although the Lord Chancellor has to accept on of the three recomendations after the third nomination.
ALTHOUGH this is yet to happen and the Lord Chancellor must provide the JAC with a reasons why he rejected the recommendation.
-
To what extent is the Supreme court neutral and independant, Composition means they are NOT independant and neutral.
- They cannot be neutral due to the lack od diversity present in the supreme court. Predominatly white males who are upper middle class and univeristy educated.
- All 12 Justices are British White of ethnicity and there is only one women on the court.
- Lord Stephens is the only judge on the court that is not educated at the university of Oxford or Cambridge.
Judges cannot be neutral when their own life experiences are so different from the population, drawn from a very narrow pool of people.
To what extent is the Supreme court neutral and independant, Composition means they are independant and neutral.
- Diffiuclt to inerpret and asses whether convictions are made on the basis of ethical bias and prejudice.
- The justices on the court are highly experienced and educated at a very high level. Most senior justices have served as a high court justice and recieved excelent education standards. Therefore they are likely to be able to remain neutral and not allow prejudice to effect their judgement.
Applicants must have held high judicial office for at least to years
Applicants must satisfy the judicial-appointment eligibility condition on a 15-year basis, or have been a qualifying practitioner for at least 15 years.
To what extent is the Supreme court neutral and independant, Politication means they are NOT independant and neutral.
- The Human rights Act 1998 has drawn senior judges into the political fray by requiring them to rule on merit of an individual price of statue law as opposed to its application.
- UK judges writing articles and delivering speeches they have demonstrated their growing support for human rights and civil liberties.
ESSAY E.G
In relation to anti terror measures, Mr Justice Sullivan in 2006 said control orders imposed by the government were incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights
- Politicians hae broken with convention by publicaly criticing rulings by the court, involving it in a political game, David Davis Brexit Minister did this when reacting to the court decision in R (miller) v Secretary of state for exiting the EU 2017 saying that govt. could not trigger article 50 without govt. approval.
To what extent is the Supreme court neutral and independant, Politication means they are independant and neutral.
Increased conflict between judges and politicians is a good thing as it shows that the court is prepared to challange the government when it appears to be encroaching upon civil liberties.
It did this again in AM Zimbabwe v Secretary of state for the Home department 2020 where deportation of a individual was blocked amid concerns his life would be shorterend by HIV as suitable care was not available in Zimbabwe
Article 3 of the ECHR
Seperation of powers, the downgrading of the lord chancellor role, independance from the house of lords means that they are independant from the other two branches of government anc cannot become politicised.
Judicial review
The process in which justices review the actions of public bodies and public officals in order to determine wether they have acted in a manner that is lawful.
Human rights act 1998
Came into force in 2020 and brought any of the articles from the ECHR into UK law, thereby allowing citizens to pursue cases under the ECHR through UK courts as opposed to having to go directly to the ECtHR in strasbourg.
Evaluate the extent of the supreme courts power over the executive and legislative
- Judiciary is more independant from the other branches and can therefore hold the executive and legislative to account.
- Decleration of incompatability
- Increase in Judicial review
The Supreme court can exert power over the executive and legislative
- The Humans right act allows judges to issue a declearation of incompatability when laws do not comply with the European convention of human rights, they can therefore protect individual rights against government action.
- AM Zimbabwe v Secretary of state for the home department 2020
- A and others v Secretary of state for home department 2004 (although before 2005) It held that the indefinite detention of foreign prisoners in Belmarsh without trial was a violation of the ECHR.
- ARGUABLY hinders the ability for the government to carry out is roles and fight terroism and and curb immigration
The Supreme court can exert power over the executive and legislative through decleration of incompatability
- The Humans right act allows judges to issue a declearation of incompatability when laws do not comply with the European convention of human rights, they can therefore protect individual rights against government action.
- AM Zimbabwe v Secretary of state for the home department 2020
- A and others v Secretary of state for home department 2004 (although before 2005) It held that the indefinite detention of foreign prisoners in Belmarsh without trial was a violation of the ECHR.
- Governments do not wish to appear above the law and have always respected the decisions
AGAINST
- Although the Human Rights act gives the right to the Supreme court. parliament is under no legal obligation to fall into line with court rulings, at the end of the day parliament is sovreign.
- There is the onging threat of the removal of the human rights act, rishi sunak and growing frustration over immigration poliies being curbed.
- THE KING (ON THE APPLICATION OF AAA and others) v THE SECRETARY OF
THE HOME DEPARTMENT, concluded that it is lawful for the government to make arrangements regarding relocating asylum seekers to rwanda.
