header-logo header-logo

Judicial independence: A warning from America

23 February 2024 / Sir Geoffrey Bindman KC
Issue: 8060 / Categories: Opinion , Public , Constitutional law , International
printer mail-detail
160023
Do we want a written constitution? Sir Geoffrey Bindman KC sees a problem

The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom replaced the Judicial Committee of the House of Lords in 2009, as directed by the Constitutional Reform Act 2005. The Judicial Committee was an anomaly. It was the final court of appeal in the judicial system, yet—defying the axiomatic separation between legislators and judiciary—it was embedded in Parliament. The Supreme Court is now physically as well as constitutionally independent of the legislature. It is the ultimate arbiter of what is lawful but must obey legislation enacted by Parliament. In this it differs from the Supreme Court of the United States, which can nullify legislation and its effect by declaring it incompatible with the written US constitution.

We of course have never had any such overriding document. Recent investigations and proposals considered whether we should adopt one. They culminated in the government’s Bill of Rights Bill, recently abandoned following the departure from ministerial office of Dominic Raab

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Appointment of former Solicitor General bolsters corporate investigations and white collar practice

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Firm strengthens international strategy with hire of global relations consultant

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Partner and associate join employment practice

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll