The separation of powers in the English Legal System. The Supreme Court would respect a material change in circumstances, it would give people the opportunity to restore a single apex to the UKs judicial system where all the constitutional issues can b

Sovereignty is the legitimate and exclusive right to exercise power within a given area because Sovereignty is where supreme power lies according to the law. The new Supreme Court will not be able to challenge the Sovereignty of parliament because Parliament detains the Sovereign power to make law in the English legal system; Parliament holds the supreme authority in the UK. AV Dicey wrote that Parliament “has under the British Constitution, the right to make or unmake any law whatever; and further, that no person or body is recognized by the law of England as having a right to override or set aside the legislation of Parliament”. This statement can be seen as true because Parliament have the ultimate political authority, most key decisions must be approved by Parliament. All powers exercised by ministers, devolved governments, local governments and other public bodies are granted by parliament and can be removed by Parliament. All new primary legislation is passed by parliament and secondary legislation made by ministers can be overruled by Parliament.

 The department of the constitutional affairs was given a task of taking responsibilities of constitutional matters. The new department have provided parts of the answer for the Lord Chancellor who combines many roles as head of the judiciary, senior member of the speaker in the house of commons who was a key player in the judicial, executive and legislation branch for the government, with the European jurisprudence in place and the principle of the separation of powers they decided it would be desirable for the protection of the liberty that the three aspects of government should be kept demarcated. The Constitutional affairs will be responsible for creating the Supreme Court , which will have its own staff and budget, its jurisdiction will not only be the one which used to be exercised in the house of lords it will also have jurisdiction to decide devolution issues concerning Scotland and Wales. The Supreme Court will not decide on matters concerning the bill when becoming an act of parliament. The role of the House as the final appeal was to hear particular proposals, the bill had to go though a number of stages in both the House of Lords and Commons, as the new Supreme Court will not operate as a full constitutional court, it will not have a hand in the drafting of the bill, meaning that any bill introduced will not go to the new Supreme Court as stated my Lord Falconer, so therefore they will not have the power to strike down any legislation enacted by parliament, but instead will increase the separation of the judiciary.  

The new Supreme Court in civil cases will assume the current jurisdiction of the House of Lords, where the house is considering a statute of the UK parliament which applies equally across both jurisdiction or even a statute which is in the same terms in both jurisdictions its decisions will be taken as binding in both. Where the common law of both countries is the same on a particular issue, its decision on that issue will be taken as binding across both jurisdictions.

The Lord Chancellor has had an important role in preserving judicial independence as he will become Secretary of state for constitutional affairs he will safe guard the vital responsibility within the government and publicly, he will be responsible for defending judicial independence from any attack. The Supreme Court would respect a material change in circumstances, it would give people the opportunity to restore a single apex to the UK’s judicial system where all the constitutional issues can be considered, it would ensure that there is no longer a danger of conflicting judgments arising e.g. human rights cases.

As key objective is achieved full and transparent separation between the judiciary and the legislature, follows that justices of the Supreme Court, other holders of full time judicial office or retired justices of the Supreme Court who continue to sit, will no longer be entitled to sit or vote in the House of Lords or to participate in the work of parliament for as long as they hold their judicial appointment. The composition of the commission consisting of members of the appointments commissions from across the United Kingdom with members of parliament. The president will also be an ex- officio member that will ensure a proper balance of lay and judicial input to its deliberations, the commission will consider candidates eligible for appointment by reference to criteria that have been approved by parliament, subject to the overriding principal of merit. The secretary of state will be under a statutory duty to ensure that the Court has among its members, sufficient knowledge and expertise of the law in each United Kingdom jurisdiction.

To conclude if the creation of the new Supreme Court, remains one of the great achievement of the Labour Party as it allows the two institutions to be effectively independent one from another; if the creation of the Supreme Court has put an end to what could be considered as being unfair and unjust, especially when a single person, in occurrence, the Lords Chancellor could cumulate three powers; all that remains is that the new Supreme Court leave up to the expectation of both sides as well as to those of the general people. This can only be achieved if each power acknowledges its powers and limits.    

                                           

                                                REFERENCE

• G.Slapper & D.Kelly (2006) 8th edition, English legal system Cavendish publishing LTD UK

• DCA, ‘Constitutional Reform: A Supreme Court for the United Kingdom’ (2003) CP 11/03,  .

• Windlesham, Lord (2006) ‘The Constitutional Reform Act 2005: The Politics of Constitutional Reform: part2’ P.L., SPR, 35-57,  .

• Mance, Lord (2006) ‘Constitutional Reforms, the Supreme Court and the Law Lords’ C.J.Q 25(APR), 155-165. ,  .

• Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948)

http://www.ppu.org.uk/learn/texts/doc_universal_dec.html

• Windlesham, Lord (2005)’The Constitutional Reform Act 2005: Ministers, Judges and Constitutional Change: part1’ P.L., WIN. 806-823.,  .

• M. Davis, H. Croall & J. Tyrer (2005) 3rd edition, Criminal Justice, an introduction to criminal justice system in England and Wales, Pearson publishing.

---