Judges should not meddle in political matters

SIR – Why has the High Court agreed to a judicial review of Boris Johnson’s decision to back Priti Patel over bullying claims (report, April 28)?

The ministerial code is not a matter of law and the code itself makes clear the sole arbiter of whether it has been breached is the prime minister. The PM is free to choose whether or not to follow any advice given. Interference by the judiciary in the PM’S decision is a further egregious invasion of matters political, where judges do not belong.

The acceptance of jurisdiction by the Supreme Court in the Article 50 appeal in 2017, and especially in the Case of Prorogation in 2019, saw the advent of nakedly political interference by the judiciary.

On both occasions, this was manifested by improper judicial interference in the exercise by the government of prerogative powers. The weasel words employed by the Supreme Court to justify these legal solecisms could not disguise the underlying desire to interfere with the result of the 2016 Brexit referendum.

These judgments shattered the precedent, dating back to the 1689 Bill of Rights, that the courts never interfere in the government’s exercise of prerogative powers. While top judges may dislike the government, they should not allow this to provoke them to breach long-established precedent – the foundation of our common law. In so doing, they cross the clear dividing line between the law and politics, a central constitutional pillar in Britain for centuries.

If the judges continue to act politically, they should no longer expect to be self-appointing, as they are largely today, the Judicial Appointments Commission being packed with lawyers. If the courts continue to play politics then the people must be given some influence over senior judicial appointments. Gregory Shenkman London W8