header-logo header-logo

Rule of law has been ‘undermined’

12 September 2023
Issue: 8040 / Categories: Legal News , Rule of law , Human rights
printer mail-detail
JUSTICE report identifies slate of government attacks on the rule of law

The rule of law has ‘regressed significantly on multiple fronts’ in the UK, according to a devastating report by law and rights charity JUSTICE.

‘There are multiple reasons why we have reached the parlous state we are in,’ Fiona Rutherford, chief executive of JUSTICE, said.

‘Each one viewed in isolation does not amount to the wholesale negation of the rule of law—but taken together they create a picture suggesting that the rule of law is being incrementally undermined. We believe we have reached a tipping point and are determined to highlight a route back.’

JUSTICE’s 105-page report, ‘The state we’re in: addressing threats & challenges to the rule of law’, published this week, called on the government to stop using ‘inflammatory language’ such as referring to ‘unelected judiciary’.

The report found the process of lawmaking has become less transparent, less accountable, less inclusive and less democratic in the past decade, particularly in the past five years.

Public consultations, for example, were often poorly conducted, if at all. The report gives the examples of the Illegal Migration Act 2023, for which there was no public consultation or pre-legislative scrutiny, and the Bill of Rights Bill consultation, which was sidelined despite 90% of the 12,000 responses received opposing the reforms.

The report found a growing legislative disregard for human rights, for example, it noted the chilling effect of the Public Order Act 2023 on our rights to freedom of thought, expression and peaceful assembly. The government was increasingly using ‘Henry VIII’ powers to allow ministers to avoid or minimise legislative scrutiny by changing laws via statutory instrument. Meanwhile, individuals seeking to enforce or defend their rights were hampered by legal aid cuts and lengthy case backlogs.

JUSTICE called on the government to make ‘skeleton legislation’ an exception not a convenience, reduce its use of ‘Henry VIII’ powers, and make equality impact assessments a mandatory part of the legislative process.

It recommended wholesale repeal of several pieces of legislation passed since 2019, including Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Act 2021, the Public Order Act 2023 and the Illegal Migration Act 2023.
Issue: 8040 / Categories: Legal News , Rule of law , Human rights
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
back-to-top-scroll