What is the role of the judiciary?

How independent are judges in the UK?

Judges are mainly separate from the executive and legislative, apart from the Lord Chancellor who has a role in all three sections of government. Parliamentary regulations stop parliament debating matters that are in the course of being determined in the courts. Also rules say that individual judges are not be criticised in parliament unless they are the subject in discussion. The government does not train judges in the UK therefore the judiciary are not as accountable towards them as they would be if they were trained by the government. The judiciary are able to interpret the law as it stands, effectively giving judges the ability to act as lawmakers. The Queen on the advice of the Prime Minister appoints the highest judges, anyone below is appointed by the Lord Chancellor. Judges have a statutory retiring age of 75. They enjoy protection from public actions for anything said or done while acting in a judicial capacity. The parliament giving judges the power can just as easily take it away; there is no written constitution to say that the judiciary is independent but political problems would follow any effort to interfere with judicial independence.

The government have had to accept the rule of law principle that they should not interfere with the conducts of the court. A violation of judicial independence example is in 1989, Lords Lane and Donaldson criticised proposals in the courts and legal services Bill, because in their view, it gave the government greater control over the legal profession, thus threatening its independence.

How effectively do courts protect civil liberty?

The trademark for liberal democracy is the effectiveness with which a range of basic citizen rights or civil liberties is guaranteed. There is well-established public support for the rule of law. There are the main principles for example that all persons are equal before the law, and that no one is punishable except for a break of the law. The political and public culture of liberty and protection of speech can be seen in the support for the rule for law. The role of the European court of Human Rights assists British citizens to obtain their rights by upholding and enlarging civil liberties within Britain. The Human Rights Act in Oct 97 with the incorporation of the convention into British law means that British citizens who consider there rights to have been infringed will be able to take their cases to British courts rather than to the European Court of Human Rights. The British courts protect civil liberty with the independence of the judiciary neutrality is present, and is an essential security for civil freedoms. The judicial review of the executive and reviewing of legislation secures accountability and protection for the citizens of Britain.  Most judges are from the lines of barristers. The majority of them went to high-class universities such as Oxford or Cambridge and are probably members of private hobby clubs. They are wealthy and most of them are male and white, representation is poor. The combination of social characters certainly affects the view of judges and can influence the way they work. Some say that this affects the judge’s neutrality and makes them impartial. Even so civil freedom I believe should still be maintained no matter the judge’s background. A recent case of the courts protecting civil liberty is within the European court of Human Rights and artifial selection where for medical grounds people can have genetically engineered children, i.e. hereditary diseases.