Scrutiny : third progress report : seventh report of session 2004-05 : report, together with formal minutes and appendices / House of Lords, House of Commons, Joint Committee on Human Rights.

  • Great Britain. Parliament. Joint Committee on Human Rights.
Date:
2005
Catalogue details

Licence: Open Government Licence

Credit: Scrutiny : third progress report : seventh report of session 2004-05 : report, together with formal minutes and appendices / House of Lords, House of Commons, Joint Committee on Human Rights. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    42/52 (page 38)
    LATION he BRU) Mea statement of the duty on all governmental insti Wert ~to- me Lt and observe the independence of the judiciary. They recommend enshrining the principle into law at the constitutional level. Principles enjoying constitutional status, as judicial independence has been recognized to enjoy at common law, should not be subject to competing policy considerations. Your response to this question heightens our concern expressed in our report that the statement of the Minister’s duty in the Bill is a retrograde step in terms of the degree of legal protection given to judicial independence. We would therefore be grateful for further justification for your contention that the duty of the Lord Chancellor, and of other Ministers, to defend judicial independence may be qualified by factors such as those you have described, and how such qualifications could be held to be consistent with the apparently unqualified nature of the duty as expressed in clause 4(1) of the Bill, and its recognition by the common law as a principle enjoying a constitutional status. The Committee would appreciate your response by Monday 28 February if possible.