Judiciary Flashcards
(11 cards)
rule of law
no one is above the law , not even the executive
kilmuir guidelines
political views must be unknown
judicial independence
ability of judges to resist pressure from other 2 branches of government
- security of tenure : Parliament cannot sack or suspend judges
• miller 2 case : judged faced backlash after verdict (referred to as ‘enemies of the ppl) - kept jobs
~ protects judges from removal and gov influence
~ can make decisions without fear of dismissal as appointed for open ended term - independent appointment system: judicial appointment commission (former and senior judges) that recommends judges through nomination to whom get formally decided by PM or LC
• JAC appointed Lady Rose as Justice of the Uk Supreme Court through independent selection procedure
~ JAC select based on fairness and qualifications
~ prevents political interference during selection process - contempt of court: media, ministers and public prevented from publically speaking out during legal proceedings
• Grillo sisters case - gained huge media coverage and trial focused on Nigela Lawson’s alleged drug use rather than fraud charges — David Cameron publically commented on the matter describing her as ‘brilliant’
~ ministers must remain private to ensure D has right to fair trial without external influence
• judges have consolidated fund (salary not set by parliament)
Judicial neutrality
judges should operate without personal bias in administration of justice
- no political activity or campaigns for party or pressure group
• Pinochet case: Lord Scarman couldn’t serve on panel since he was a member of Amnesty International and his legal philosophy would influence the case
~ judges aren’t allowed to be involved with either side of case
~ won’t be impartial = unfair trial - anonymity: judges operate away from public eye and rarely speak out on legal/political issues
• Lord Justice Laws criticised for public comments regarding judges being able to intervene in legislation when necessary = served as reminder of boundaries that judges should maintain
~ judges mustn’t get involved in politics as it’s likely they will show personal bias and won’t apply law partially
~ kilmuir guidelines - undergo high level training to ensure neutrality
• judicial college, specialist training, mentoring, court management training
~ comprehensive training program ensures and confirms that judges will remain impartial
~ trained to make judgements by providing verdict and reasoning, based on law and not personal belief
judges have become too powerful since 1997
agree:
- increase in judicial review
• Miller 2 case 2019
~ judiciary interfere with decisions of elected ministers = intervened with democracy since judges are unelected
~ almost dictate gov’s actions without fear of dismissal (open ended term)
- interpret HRA1998 and issue acts with declaration of incompatibility
• Belmarsh case - issued DoI and parliament advised to modify and they do so
~ courts can scrutinise legislature and pressurises them to amend or repeal any act deemed unlawful
disagree:
- parl have passed legislation that aims to reduce judicial review
• Judicial Review and and Courts Act 2022: decreased and reformed JR process - especially in tribunals
~ less opportunities for judiciary to excessively interfere with gov decisions
~ power shift from J to Parl as they have authority to create laws that limit judicial power
- gov can create statute that legitimises and justifies their past actions that have been ruled unlawful
• gov introduced back to work schemes asking job seekers to participate in unpaid work placement in order to claim unemployment benefits = courts ruled as unlawful as had no legal clarity when imposing schemes = parl padded Job Seekers Act 2013 which made actions legal
~ while senior judges can rule that executive has acted ultra vires and beyond statutory authorit, ministers can use executive control of parliament to pass retrospective legislation that legitimises earlier actions
Act of Settlement 1707
both houses must sign a vote (+ monarch) to remove a judge by impeachment
e.g. Jonah Barrington 1830s)
analysis of indwpendence and neutrality
JI = free from external pressure = focused on applying law and not influence = impartiality = JN
Judges and public inquiries (exercising influence over gov)
- judged can hold public inquiries that investigate governments wrongdoings and create a starting point for future laws
• Leveson inquiry: held ministers accountable and exposed the close relationship between government and press
~ inquiries publically challenge actions of government and identify any poor conduct carried out
~ repercussions take place after
Judges far too politicisied
agree:
- judicial review brings judges into ‘political fray’
• miller 2 case 2019
~ verdicts have political impact and political will attempt to pressure judges to alter their verdicts
- HRA empowers judges to directly question acts of parliament through JR
• Belmarsh case
~ increase of JR = citizens more inclined to use court = more laws created by Parliament that can be deemed unlawful = more judicial involvement
Disagree:
- not many JR cases rule against public body as a consequence
• out of all JR cases, only 36% resulted in a ruling against parl or public institution
• Heathrow 3rd runway = plan not scrapped = only advised to take sensible procedures
~ statistically, it’s uncommon for judiciary to make judgements that result in significant impacts in politics
- CRA05 established multiple ways to further separate the judiciary from the legislature and executive
• supreme court and replace law lords - statute further emphasised idea that J is an independent body and segregated it from policy scene
how are civil liberties protected
• judicial review under HRA (ECHR - declared humans had certain protected rights (right to life, fair trial)
- incorporated into UK law = don’t need to go to court abroad and go to british courts (cheaper and more accessible) = increase in JR
• judicial review under other leg. such as EA10
judicial review
actions of parliament are reviews to ensure they’re acting lawfully and enforces rule of law
