If it is in part judges taking a more expansive interpretation of their rights and responsibilities, that itself is downstream of politicians legislating in such a way as gives them more freedom to do so.
Would-be reformers have thus far refused to countenance returning to the traditional constitutional position, long predating the ECHR and HRA, that Parliament can be trusted to protect human rights through ordinary statutes.
The succession of Blairite governments that have run Britain over the past three decades put in place a judicial apparat that now serves as a rampart against change.
The Wolfson review is a sensible first step on a big subject like potentially quitting the ECHR – but it isn’t going to wrest the spotlight or the initiative back to the party anytime soon.
The Sentencing Council and the Government would have you believe that they resolved the problem themselves. That is not true. It was our legal action, supported by Robert Jenrick, that made both them think again.
The second in a two-part series exploring where Labour’s landmark legislation looks set to improve the planning landscape – and where it has fallen short.
The first in a two-part series exploring where Labour’s landmark legislation looks set to improve the planning landscape – and where it has fallen short.
Many of its proposed reforms are welcome, if inadequate to the scale of the challenge. But it’s remarkable how many of them were proposed before the election, or mimic previous Conservative policy.
Have ministers been properly warned of the huge risk of litigation if the Government tries to use secondary legislation to affirm that his detention was legally proper?
Economic dynamism is particularly hard to deliver in a mature democracy richly endowed with interest groups, many of which are organised to try to stop things happening.
Liberty deserves its victory in this case, even if its account of the judgment is inaccurate: in no way did the regulations involve Government deciding what causes can lawfully be protested.
The decision to legislate is not just constitutionally acceptable, it is in fact a shining example of the best traditions of parliament acting powerfully to grant justice to the wronged.
I doubt that the KlimaSeniorinnen judgment will help states better address climate change – but it certainly helps seal the case for states to withdraw from the ECHR.
To insist that judges must have the final say would displace Parliament’s proper role as the ultimate decision-maker in our constitution.
This Government does not seem to weigh the rights of Chagossians very highly, but it is hoped the Courts will determine these people deserve consultation.