“This is a major initiative being undertaken by LSE Law Department and the LSE’s Institute of Public Affairs (IPA) together with Democratic Audit UK and LSE Public Policy Group.”
UK Constitutional Law Group, 28th September 2013
Source: www.ukconstitutionallaw.org
“It is clear that public opinion affects law reform. MPs are democratically elected and thus to become elected MPs are naturally influenced by the will of the public. As legislation is put forward and created by those influenced by public opinion, there is no doubt that this has a significant influence on the development of legislation.”
Halsbury’s Law Exchange, 30th July 2013
Source: www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk
“If you think there are clear rules governing the UK’s use of armed force, you would be wrong.”
The Guardian, 24th July 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“In the last fortnight, two major pieces of constitutional reform returned to the political agenda. The House of Commons considered Conservative MP James Wharton’s private Member’s Bill that would provide for a referendum on whether the UK should remain a member of the EU. The Bill, according to Prime Minister David Cameron, will have ‘the full support of the Conservative Party’. Several days later, senior members of the Conservative Party made statements indicating that the Party would make ‘wholesale changes’ to the country’s system of human rights protection if it obtains a majority in Parliament at the next election. Proposed changes include repeal of the Human Rights Act and withdrawal from the European Convention on Human Rights. In this post, I consider whether the former might have implications for the latter—whether the rise of the referendum could and/or should affect the future of rights reform in the UK.”
UK Constitutional Law Group, 17th July 2013
Source: www.ukconstitutionallaw.org
“In anticipation of the birth of the Royal baby, Parliament passed the Succession to the Crown Act in April 2013. It provides that in future the eldest child will be next in line of succession, whether it is a girl or a boy. The law will not come into force in time for the Royal birth, but the new baby when born will be next in line. This Blog post explains the background, and the difficulties involved in changing the rules of succession.”
UK Constitutional Law Group, 15th July 2013
Source: www.ukconstitutionallaw.org
“On 12 June 2003 a minor constitutional revolution began with the resignation of Lord Irvine as Lord Chancellor and the announcement of a package of reforms including the abolition of his office and the creation of a Supreme Court, later to become the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 (CRA). To commemorate the tenth anniversary of these events, the Judicial Independence Project held a private seminar on 12 June 2013 at which some of those directly involved in the changes spoke about the experience and the effects it has had on constitutional change. A note of the seminar is available here. In part the seminar brought out the drama and the comedy of the day itself. An old friendship ended in acrimony: Irvine had been the Prime Minister’s pupil master and had introduced him to his wife. At the same time the senior judiciary, at an away day with civil servants, were taken by surprise by the announcement and had to have the details explained to them whilst they huddled, increasingly angry, around a single phone in a country pub.”
UK Constitutional Law Group, 26th June 2013
Source: www.ukconstitutionallaw.org
“The judges have nothing to gain and everything to lose by negotiating with Chris Grayling in private.”
The Guardian, 25th June 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“The justice secretary, Chris Grayling, has been warned by the lord chief justice, Lord Judge, not to undermine the independence of the judiciary through plans to privatise parts of the court service or make it self-financing.”
The Guardian, 24th June 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“On the 20 of May the House of Commons Political and Constitutional Reform Committee (the PCR) published its report on legislative scrutiny standards titled ‘Ensuring standards in the quality of legislation’. The Report contains two eye catching and ambitious proposals for parliamentary reform: the creation of a joint committee on legislative standards and the adoption of a code of legislative standards. This blog is about the second of these proposals. The proposal is a significant one, and if implemented it would dramatically improve the information available to parliamentarians in their scrutiny of government bills. The PCR’s code is in effect a series of questions and demands for information relating to the content and to the timetable of a bill, that the government would answer within the explanatory notes to a bill. In this blog post, I draw attention to the code proposed by the PRC and I offer a critique of their approach, and in particular of the decision not to include substantive legislative standards.”
UK Constitutional Law Group, 14th June 2013
Source: www.ukconstitutionallaw.org
“Should parliament give itself more powers? That’s the intriguing question posed by a paper to be published next week by the Constitution Society, an educational charity established five years ago.”
The Guardian, 2nd May 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“A bill which ends succession to the Crown based on gender has become law.”
BBC News, 25th April 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“Last week, the House of Commons Political and Constitutional Reform Committee published their report, Do We Need A Constitutional Convention For the UK? (HC 2012-13 371). It is an interesting document, mainly because its very existence shows that the idea of a constitutional convention is becoming more mainstream within Westminster. But the report raises many questions, not all of which are fully answered. The central thrust of the report is that considering the raft of changes made to the constitution since 1997, particularly devolution, ‘it is time to conduct a comprehensive review so that the Union can work well in the future’ (para 111), and that this review should take the form of a ‘constitutional convention to look at the formal constitutional structure of the UK’.”
UK Constitutional Law Group, 3rd April 2013
Source: www.ukconstitutionallaw.org
“The Commission delivered its Report – A UK Bill of Rights? – The Choice Before Us – to the Government in December 2012. It is an odd document, dominated by the lack of agreement in the Commission as to the role that any human rights’ instrument in Britain should play. That was unsurprising since at the inception of the Commission the Coalition partners appeared to want it to play two different roles – defending or attacking the HRA. From the very outset the Commission and the idea of a Bill of Rights (BoR) was relied upon by Cameron and other senior Conservatives to allay anger in the Conservative party, and among some voters, directed at decisions made under the Human Rights Act. David Cameron announced the Commission’s inception in March 2011 at Prime Ministers’ Questions as a reaction to criticism of the decision of the Supreme Court that sex offenders should be able to challenge their inclusion on the Sex Offenders’ register. He indicated that a BoR would address the concerns expressed (17.3.11; see the Telegraph in relation to R and Thompson v SSHD). The idea that a BoR could right the wrongs of the HRA – would provide a panacea for the HRA’s ills – had apparently been embedded in the Conservative party psyche for some years: David Cameron in a speech to the Centre for Policy Studies in 2006 Balancing freedom and security – A modern British Bill of Rights said that the HRA should be repealed: ‘….The Human Rights Act has a damaging impact on our ability to protect our society against terrorism…. . I am today committing my Party to work towards the production of a Modern Bill of Rights’. In contrast, the 2010 Liberal Democrat election manifesto promised to ‘Ensure that everyone has the same protections under the law by protecting the Human Rights Act.'”
UK Constitution Law Group, 21st March 2013
Source: www.ukconstitutionllaw.org
“The current system for human rights protection in the UK is once again under siege. In the last week, statements were made indicating that the Conservative Party’s manifesto for the next election would include major reforms to current arrangements. Chris Grayling, Justice Secretary and Lord Chancellor, declared that a future Conservative Government would repeal the UK Human Rights Act 1998 ‘and start[] again’, suggesting that it would be replaced by alternative legislation. Theresa May, Home Secretary, announced that the manifesto would include a promise to withdraw the UK from the European Convention on Human Rights.”
UK Constitutional Law Group, 7th March 2013
Source: www.ukconstitutionallaw.org
“The debate over the place of human rights in UK constitutional law continues to run and run. The Home Secretary, Theresa May MP, has recently criticised the manner in which UK judges are interpreting the right to family life protected by Article 8 of the ECHR. A private members bill tabled by Tory MP Charlie Elphicke, the Human Rights Act 1998 (Repeal and Substitution) Bill, which would de-incorporate Convention rights and replace them with diluted ‘British’ replacements, received its Second Reading on the 1st March 2013. Furthermore, at the time of writing, the Mail on Sunday is quoting Theresa May again to the effect that the next Tory election manifesto will include a commitment to withdrawing from the jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights, de-incorporating Convention rights, or some such equivalent measure.”
UK Constitutional Law Group, 4th March 2013
Source: www.ukconstitutionallaw.org
“Constitutional reforms that have taken effect over the past seven years ‘may be eroding something rather important’, the lord chief justice of England and Wales told peers on Wednesday.”
The Guardian, 30th January 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“Now that the idea of a new UK Bill of Rights appears to be buried, choices re-emerge. The predicted outcome of the London-based Commission’s work was finally confirmed in December. Where now for human rights?”
UK Human Rights Blog, 29th January 2013
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
“There is nothing surprising in the conclusion formed by the majority of the Commission on the Bill of Rights in their report, issued yesterday. A majority favours replacing the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) with a Bill of Rights for the UK, as the means of securing the most effective compliance by this country with its obligations under the Human Rights Convention.”
Halsbury’s Law Exchange, 19th December 2012
Source: www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk
“All Commonwealth realms have agreed to press ahead with a bill ending discrimination against women in the succession to the British throne.”
BBC News, 4th December 2012
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024