Independence of our judiciary must be defended
The independence of the judiciary is a vital element of our constitution.
Our legal system is rightly admired throughout the world for its integrity and independence.
What the case considered was purely the process by which Article 50 should be triggered – NOT whether the Article 50 should be triggered or not.
The court held that the Royal Prerogative (meaning that the Prime Minister can take executive decisions after discussion with the Queen and, presumably, the Cabinet without the need to put the matter to Parliament) does not apply and therefore the Prime Minster must obtain the approval of Parliament before the Government can serve notice on the European Commission triggering Article 50.
The High Court agreed that the Royal Prerogative can be used to enter treaties but as membership of the European Union has resulted in numerous Acts of Parliament being passed as a result of membership and Acts of Parliament, which are passed by Parliament, can only be changed by Parliament, then Parliament must vote on the triggering of Article 50.
This decision was reached after careful and detailed analysis of the law by some of our most able judges and, in my view, must be correct. I would be very surprised if the Supreme Court reaches a different conclusion.
It is disappointing that neither Liz Truss, the Lord Chancellor, nor Theresa May, has strongly condemned the headlines and reporting we have seen in the Daily Mail and other newspapers.
Such accounts of the High Court decision, which appears to suggest that the Courts are trying to frustrate the decision reached in the referendum, demonstrate an appalling lack of understanding of the role of our judicial system.
There is a worrying trend with some newspapers who seem to be intent on pursing their own political agenda without due regard to the facts.
The British public deserve better than this.
The Lord Chancellor has to take “due regard to defend the independence (of the judiciary) and the need for the judiciary to have the support necessary to enable them to exercise their functions” (s 3 (6) Constitutional Reform Act 2005).
The Lord Chancellor should therefore carry out her statutory duties and roundly condemn the ill-informed and dangerous reporting shown by some of the press following on from the High Court decision. John Hughes is president of the
Birmigham Law Society