relationships between institutions 1

Question 1

what is the role of the supreme court?

Answer 1

1. FINAL COURT OF APPEAL
   so only hears important appeals on legal and constitutional issues
   - for example, R (miller) vs PM ruled that johnson’s prorogation of parliament was unlawful
2. JUDICIAL REVIEWS
   - for example, R (miller) vs PM; where they challenged the legality of proroguing parliament
3. PROTECTS HUMAN RIGHTS
   ensuring the laws respect rights like freedoms and fairness
   - for example, begum vs home secretary (2021), the supreme court ruled she couldnt return as national security came first

Question 2

what are arguments for and against how the supreme court is more powerful than the executive and parliament?

Answer 2

FOR:
1. JUDICIAL REVIEW allows courts to check gov power and decide whether they are unlawful
- for example, miller vs PM (2019) where the supreme court ruled johnson’s prorogation of parliament unlawful
- this directly

2. DOCTRINE OF ULTRA VIRES
   prevents gov overreach as they are striked down if seen to be acting beyond their powers
   - for example, after the brexit referendum, theresa may tried to trigger article 50 (to start the formal process of leaving the eu) using royal prerogative powers without consulting parliament
   - the supreme court ruled that only parliament could trigger article 50
3. PROTECT HUMAN RIGHTS
   (even against parliament) if it breaches the HRA 1998
   - for example, steinfield and keidan vs secretary of state (2018); where a heterosexual couple challenged the fact that only same sex couples could enter civil partnerships and the court later issued a declaration of incompatibility and parliament later changed the law in 2019

AGAINST:
1. JUDICIAL REVIEW
courts tend to avoid politically sensitive cases to respect the executive
- for example, during covid, courts did not challenge gov lockdown policies, despite serious impacts on rights

2. DOCTRINE OF ULTRA VIRES
   cannot overrule acts of parliament as the courts cannot invalidate an act of parliament, only gov actions
   - for example, the gov’s handling of the brexit withdrawal agreement involved broad powers given by parliament that the courts couldn’t overturn
3. PROTECTING HUMAN RIGHTS
   they can say a conflict with human rights but cant strike it down
   - for example, in the belmarsh detainees case (2019), the court declared indefinite detention without trial incompatible with human rights but parliament has been slow to reform legislation

Question 3

what are arguments for parliament being able to hold the executive to account; reducing its dominance and against it being to hold the executive to account; increasing its dominance?

Answer 3

FOR:
1. SELECT COMMITTEES scrutinise gov actions and hold them to account by questioning them
- for example, the public’s account committee challenged the gov over the cost and management of the test and trace system during covid

2. PMQ’s
   direclty challenge gov’s decisions publicly
   - for example, during covid mp’s used pmq’s to press johnson on the gov handling of the crisis
3. PARLIAMENT CAN DEFEAT THE GOV THROUGH VOTES
   - for example, may lost her parliamentary majority in the 2017 general election which lead to a hung parliament; forcing her to seek support from the DUP to govern

AGAINST:
1. SELECT COMMITTEES
they lack power to actually enforce gov action as reports are often ignored
- for example, the public accounts committee criticised the nhs test and trace repeatedly but the gov just continued with the same approach

2. PMQ’s
   they focus on point scoring and political theatre rather than accountability
   - for example, during johnson’s time in office, there was mostly quick jabs with few substantive answers on serious issues like covid or brexit challenges
3. PARLIAMENT CAN DEFEAT GOV THROUGH VOTES
   strong party discipline means defeats are rare
   - for example, after the 2019 general election, johnson’s large cons majority meant very few gov defeats in parliament; limiting parliamentary opposition

Question 4

what are arguments for and against the eu achieving its aims?

Answer 4

FOR:
1. THE FOUR FREEDOMS
the eu has successfully enabled the free movement of goods, services, capital and people across member states
- for example, german cars sold in france without tariffs and polish citizens being able to work in germany and spain

2. THE EUROZONE
   shows economic integration as now
   20/27 countries use the euro, making it easier to travel and trade
   - for example, the eurozone allows easier financial transactions between countries

AGAINST:

1. THE FOUR FREEDOMS
   often create political tension as some member states benefit more than others
   - for example, free movement of people led to backlash in the uk, contributing to brexit (2019) as many voters resented unrestricted migration from eastern europe
2. THE EUROZONE
   causes inequality not unity as the euro has created a “one size fits all” policy that doesnt suit all economies
   - for example, the greek debt crisis in the 2010s revealed how weaker economies struggled under eurozone rules

Question 5

what are arguments for and against the uk leaving the eu (on parliamentary soverignty and policy making)?

Answer 5

FOR :
1. PARLIAMENTARY SOVEREIGNTY:
restored as parliament is no longer bound by EU rules
- for example, the eu withdrawal act 2018, ended the supremacy of the eu law in the uk; so the uk parliament can now make or repeal any law without concern for eu restrictions

2. FLEXIBILITY
   greater flexibility in policy making as they can respond more quickly to national issues without needing the approval of eu
   - for example, the uk created its own covid vaccine approval process in 2020; authorising the pfizer vaccine before the eu

AGAINST:
1. PARLIAMENTARY SOVEREIGNTY
uk policy is still limited by practical necessities
- for example, domestic courts still use retained eu law in many areas, limiting true legal independence in the short term

2. FLEXIBILITY
   brexit has made policy making more complex in key sectors
   - for example, the northern ireland protocol disputes have led to political instability and complex governance arrangements