‘The Independent Review of Administrative Law (IRAL), which is holding a short, seven-week consultation that will close on 26 October 2020, has a remit to consider whether parts of UK administrative law should be codified.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 20th October 2020
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘The scorn shown by Boris Johnson and Priti Patel marks a departure from centuries of Conservative tradition.’
The Guardian, 20th October 2020
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘A Home Office watchdog has said the department must use “neutral language” after its repeated use of the term “activist lawyer” prompted outrage.’
The Independent, 15th October 2020
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘The new president of the Law Society on why it’s crucial to defend the rule of law in these febrile times.’
The Guardian, 14th October 2020
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘The Law Society has set out six fundamental principles of judicial review that it says the Independent Review of Administrative Law (IRAL) “must protect”, arguing that judicial review is “a pillar of democracy and a vital check on power”.’
Local Government Lawyer, 7th October 2020
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘A former Supreme Court judge has accused Boris Johnson of trying to undermine the courts and legal system in a bid to solidify government power and push through his programme. Lord Sumption, who retired from the court in 2018, told at parliamentary select committee that the government was intent on “doing down the courts as potential sources of impediments for the government’s programme”.’
The Independent, 6th October 2020
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘Speech delivered by the Lord Chancellor at Temple Church for the Opening of the Legal Year Service.’
Ministry of Justice, 2nd October 2020
‘Huge controversy has already been generated over provisions in the United Kingdom Internal Market Bill granting Ministers the power to disapply the Withdrawal Agreement. Most of the debate (Elliott, Armstrong) has been focused on the potential breaches of international law. This could severely damage the reputation of the United Kingdom in the world. However, what has been relatively overlooked is that this Bill is also a flagrant attack on the Rule of Law at the UK domestic level. This remains the case even if amendments proposed by Sir Bob Neill MP (and apparently accepted by the Government) pass.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 23rd September 2020
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘During a pandemic, it seems like a good idea for politicians to “follow the science.” But what does this actually mean? The claim that the Government is “following the science” is in many respects laudable, but is it also a convenient way to avoid or limit accountability? Due to a lack of transparency, it is unclear whether and to what extent substantive decisions are being made by scientists, or if this is just a politically helpful turn of phrase. A recent Institute for Government report Decision Making in a Crisis: First Responses to the Coronavirus Pandemic potentially provides some insight into this question. The report says that when deciding whether to lockdown the country in March, the Government looked to science for “answers” for what to do, rather than as part of a range of inputs into a decision-making process. Is the Government delegating decisions for which, under statute, it is exclusively responsible? Possibly. It is necessary to consider how decision-making and accountability mechanisms for decision-makers must be modified to reflect this change in who exercises power in the United Kingdom and how. It is often argued that scientists should be “on tap but not on top.” This post asks if this “on tap not on top” relationship is possible during a pandemic, and to assess the challenges for legal and democratic accountability if it is not.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 21st September 2020
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘The government’s approach to the coronavirus is creating risks for the rule of law, politicians have warned in a report looking at the human rights implications of Covid-19.’
Law Society's Gazette, 21st September 2020
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘The Director of Public Prosecutions will discuss the importance of fair and independent prosecutions during a time of national emergency at an online event hosted by the Bingham Centre for the Rule of Law tomorrow (Friday, 18 September).’
Crown Prosecution Service, 17th September 2020
Source: www.cps.gov.uk
‘In an essay to accompany an event with the Bingham Centre for the Rule of Law, Max Hill QC outlines what independence means for the Crown Prosecution Service in an extraordinary 2020 and beyond, and how it intersects with the Service’s other values and responsibilities. Drawing on the experiences of the past six months, he considers what it means to remain independent while also being collaborative, responsive and adaptable in a changing world – and the importance of each of these qualities in maintaining public confidence in the criminal justice system.’
Crown Prosecution Service, 17th September 2020
Source: www.cps.gov.uk
‘The Black Lives Matter movement illuminates an incontrovertible chasm in the application of the rule of law in liberal democracy. The basic premise of the rule of law, which in Joseph Raz’s conception is that it should be capable of guiding behaviour, includes the necessary restriction on crime-preventing agencies from perverting the law. A society in which those tasked with upholding and applying the law – under the powers of stop-and-search and arrest – are instead themselves regular perpetrators of racist discrimination and violence, is one in which the rule of law is at best a randomised hope that is more or less likely to be realised depending on the race of the citizen in question.’
UK Human Rights Blog, June 2020
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘The director of public prosecutions, Max Hill, is being threatened with legal action over the failure to investigate Dominic Cummings for alleged breaches of the lockdown rules.’
The Guardian, 10th June 2020
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘How should individuals conduct themselves during a public health emergency, and more specifically how much reliance should we have on “instinct” and “rules”? Dominic Cummings, the Prime Minister’s chief adviser, has been accused of breaking the social distancing rules. The allegations revolve around travelling from London to Durham to isolate himself and his family, as well as taking additional trips whilst in that isolation. The specific law he is alleged to have breached is regulation 6 of the Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) Regulations 2020. Regulation 6(1) provides that “During the emergency period, no person may leave or be outside of the place where they are living without reasonable excuse.” In the course of defending his adviser, the Prime Minister argued that “he followed the instincts of every father” in seeking to protect his family. In response, Independent journalist Tom Peck stated that; “There is no guidance in place anymore, none at all. Just do what Dominic Cummings did and ‘follow your instincts’ and you’ll end up in the right place”.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 28th May 2020
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
© Inner Temple Library 2024