‘If an application for asylum is refused, the applicant can appeal to the First-tier Tribunal. The latest tribunal statistics show a sharp increase in the number of asylum appeals lodged in the tribunal.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 19th June 2024
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘On 11 June 2024, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights handed down its judgment in Nealon and Hallam v United Kingdom. The case is important for two reasons: firstly, because it provides a long-awaited clarification of the law relating to the presumption of innocence under Article 6 of the Convention; secondly, because it allows Strasbourg to perform a “return shot” after UK courts were very hostile to its earlier judgments on this issue.’
Constitutional Law Association, 13th June 2024
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘For the first time, by way of the Post Office (Horizon System) Offences Act (“the Act”), Parliament has legislated to quash criminal convictions. In this post I will argue that, no matter how understandable, indeed laudable, the intention behind this legislation, in its haste to offer a speedy and comprehensive correction to mass injustice, Parliament has crossed a constitutional line and ventured into territory that is properly the preserve of the courts.’
UK Constitutional Law Association , 3rd June 2024
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘Unwritten constitutional principles supply much of the foundation – or ‘hidden wiring’ – of the UK constitution. As Lord Reed has recently recognised, the constitution relies on numerous “understandings, generally tacit, about how power should be exercised”. Constitutional form and constitutional culture, working in combination, have produced a state in which even vital constitutional principles remain somewhat elusive; Lord Reed continues: “[b]ecause we have no written constitution, and court cases raising constitutional questions have until recently been few and far between, there has been relatively little by way of legal definition of constitutional principles.” Nonetheless, courts and political organs recognise the role of the rule of law, parliamentary sovereignty, and separation of powers as animating principles of the constitution.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 29th May 2024
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘It remains commonplace, both in political and public law discourse, to describe the Royal Prerogative as archaic or anachronistic. Executive power in the United Kingdom may begin with the Crown, but even the most venerated constitutional historians have long thought “the Crown” is a convenient cover for ignorance. Much like the sovereignty of Parliament, the more one explores its foundations, the more one suspects the bedrock will turn out to be quicksand. As the residue of the Crown’s discretionary authority, exercised by Ministers by convention without formal or legal restraint, it has been said prerogative remains difficult to translate into the modern era, precisely because it derives from the sixteenth century. A space devoid, on some accounts, of legality itself.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 23rd May 2024
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘The President of the Family Division, Sir Andrew McFarlane, has outlined the need for a “new approach” to post-adoption contact, noting that letterbox contact can “no longer be seen as the appropriate regime for most cases”.’
Local Government Lawyer, 23rd May 2024
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘In one of the most celebrated passages in legal history, Lord Atkin stated in Liversidge v Anderson [1942] AC 206 that whether in war or in peace, the laws speak in the same voice and that the judges, “stand between the subject and any attempted encroachments on his liberty by the executive, alert to see that any coercive action is justified in law.” During the COVID-19 pandemic, the country was on a war footing, although the enemy was a virus rather than a foreign state. The country was subject to the most severe restrictions on personal liberty in modern times, with people being confined to their homes, often for lengthy periods; families, partners, and friends separated; and schools, workplaces and places of worship closed. It provides a unique opportunity to examine how the system of judicial review responds to a prolonged crisis. This “stress test” of the judicial review system is revealing, not least by exposing the fact that it was the system rather than the judges, that had greatest impact in terms of revising and improving rules and decisions taken by governments.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 13th May 2024
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘The Work and Pensions Committee is conducting an inquiry on a highly important matter: how vulnerable welfare claimants are safeguarded by the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP), and whether changes ought to be made. In the course of this work, it has raised this important question: should the DWP be placed under a statutory duty for safeguarding vulnerable claimants?’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 16th April 2024
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘The myriad problems with the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill, as well as the policy that the Bill is supposed to facilitate, have been clearly documented. One common criticism is that the Bill would precipitate a “constitutional crisis” by provoking the courts into refusing to recognise its legal effect. Adam Tucker argues that the Bill’s most problematic sections could very well “count as a novel entry in our canon of possible limits of parliamentary sovereignty”. Jeff King argues that the House of Lords would be justified in radically amending or voting the Bill down, precisely because of the danger that it might incite a constitutional crisis. The Lords suggested sweeping amendments to the Bill, all of which were rejected by the Commons. The Bill will continue to go through a ping-pong process between each House before a final wording is settled.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 26th March 2024
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘In November 2023, the Supreme Court of the UK dealt a critical blow to the government’s proposal to send certain asylum seekers to the Republic of Rwanda. In AAA and Others v the Home Secretary, the Court ruled that removal to Rwanda would be unlawful because that country was not, at the time, a ‘safe country’.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 14th March 2024
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘Lady Rose – An Evolving Institution: The work of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. The Queen’s Distinguished Lecture in Law.’
Supreme Court, 21st February 2024
Source: www.supremecourt.uk
‘In a recent comment on the Government’s Rwanda Bill and on speculations about an unprecedented strike down by the Supreme Court, Professor Mark Elliott asked a question that has been on many UK public lawyers’ minds lately: “Are we headed for a constitutional crisis?” This question, to be sure, is not new. However, with a Government and Parliament increasingly willing to act with disregard for cardinal constitutional principles such as the rule of law and with certain judges’ growing outspokenness about their intention to resist further attacks on the country’s constitutional fundamentals, determining whether we are indeed in a constitutional crisis has gained great urgency. For if we are already in a crisis, then it may be necessary to take action to prevent the situation from spiralling out of control.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 20th February 2024
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘The upheaval of the UK constitution from 2016 onwards has been associated with a host of individuals, from David Cameron to Boris Johnson to Dominic Cummings, who have received the significant bulk of academic attention in recent years. And yet, another individual has had a substantial impact upon the UK constitution during this time: Nigel Farage. But his impact has not been as direct as other constitutional actors, and has often been scorned, sidelined, or generally undocumented. I can find only passing mentions of Farage on this blog, in addition to other major blogs on the UK constitution. Most of the articles mentioning him do so fleetingly, casting him in a negative light in relation to populism and his influence on Brexit (although some take a slightly more nuanced look). And yet, controversial though he is, Mr Farage deserves more attention. Although it may be easy to discount Farage as a fringe politician that has never held domestic political office, some of the issues and challenges his involvement in politics has brought forward go to the heart of the UK’s constitutional system.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, February 2024
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘It is difficult to provide a satisfying account of constitutional accountability in the UK without considering the internal processes of major political parties (especially the governing party and the largest opposition party). Yet, intra-party processes often do not receive the attention of constitutional scholars. Therefore, in this blog, I will discuss the constitutional importance and the legal treatment of intra-party processes. I will start with the constitutional significance of certain intra-party processes. Subsequently, I will discuss the consequences of the existing private law status of parties. I will then comment on the amenability of intra-party processes to judicial review in light of a recent judgment delivered by Fordham J in R (Tortoise Media) v Conservative Party [2023] EWHC 3088 (Admin) (“Tortoise Media”). The blog concludes with a caution against a blanket rejection of judicial review of intra-party processes.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 31st January 2024
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘The Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill will receive its second reading in the House of Lords on 29 January 2024, having cleared the House of Commons unamended. There are a great many problems with the Rwanda Bill, any of which might weigh with the Lords, but this blog post focuses on just one: the likelihood that, if enacted, the Bill may well trigger a constitutional crisis between the courts and Parliament. It would be a crisis that is likely to endure beyond the life of the policy embodied in the Bill. I argue here that one of the roles of the House of Lords is to act as a constitutional safeguard, a steam-valve, and, in exercise of this function under the rare circumstances that attend this Bill, it would be legitimate for the Lords to not only make and insist upon far-reaching changes to the Bill, but even to refuse to pass it altogether. This post is not concerned with the realpolitik of whether peers would in fact vote the Bill down – though I come to the point in the conclusion. It rather seeks to refute the constitutional argument that it would be illegitimate to block or make potent amendments to it.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 26th January 2024
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘Some commentators have claimed that the decision to expedite the process of formally exonerating the sub-postmasters potentially runs afoul of certain core constitutional principles, in particular the separation of powers. It has also been claimed that the “crown does not have a prerogative of justice but only a prerogative of mercy”. This blog considers and challenges those claims.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 16th January 2024
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘Last year’s Supreme Court decision in R (AAA) v Home Secretary – which found the British government’s Rwanda policy to be unlawful – has reignited broader debates about the position of a government which commands a majority in Parliament vis a vis the judiciary, the separation of powers, the extent to which legislating against judicial decisions is constitutionally proper or compatible with the rule of law, and the appropriateness of disapplying sections of the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA 1998). This post does not restate or reengage with such topics; substantive attention has already been given by Tom Hickman KC, Professor Mark Elliott, Adam Tucker, Professor Sarah Singer, and Richard Ekins KC et al. Neither does it take a position on the feasibility or desirability of any specific government policy, the continued operation of HRA 1998, or membership of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
Instead, this post will argue that the backlash to and disapproval of the British government’s response to R (AAA) – the introduction of the Safety of Rwanda Bill, which, amongst other measures, allows Parliament to diverge from the Supreme Court’s judgment – neatly evidences the intended effect of New Labour and Lord Derry Irvine’s HRA 1998 system and judicial reforms.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 15th January 2024
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘The government’s decision to pass a law overturning the convictions of post office operators has left many lawyers and judges uneasy.’
The Guardian, 11th January 2024
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘“Public inquiries are one of Britain’s only growth industries,” the Financial Times has suggested recently. Research from the Institute for Government demonstrates that there were 69 public inquiries launched between 1990 and 2017, compared with 19 in the previous 30 years. Several high-profile public inquiries are open at time of writing, including the Grenfell Inquiry, the Covid-19 Inquiry, and the Post Office Horizon Inquiry. The near-constant media coverage of the Covid-19 Inquiry, chaired by Baroness Heather Hallett, serves as a reminder of the role that public inquiries play in ensuring accountability and scrutiny. Each week of the Covid-19 Inquiry has painted a fuller picture of governmental decision making during the pandemic. The Covid-19 Inquiry has, however, demonstrated the shortcomings in governmental record-keeping and disclosure, particularly with respect to decisions which were taken via private communications platforms such as WhatsApp.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 20th December 2023
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
© Inner Temple Library 2024