Q2. There are a number of advantages and disadvantages for law making in the Westminster Parliament. It is the role of parliament to make laws for the country through the passing of bills between the House of Commons, House of Lords and finally the Royal Assent. Due to the complexity of English law this is not the only way in which law is created but is the main way. Advantages of this method include such areas as follows:-
- The opinion of the public is heard and represented. This is due to the House of Commons being a body of members that have been elected to the role by the general public. As a result of this election and situation in the House of Commons the general public as a whole now has a direct influence as to what law is or is not passed, how quickly it goes through, i.e. argumentative areas which need to be addressed fully prior to proceeding. This has been seen in a number of cases, one being the Dangerous Dog Act 1991. This Act was created due to public demand when a dog attacked a young child and subsequently killed them. This Act could have been passed quicker had it been agreed at an early stage as to what breeds are covered by this dangerous dog act.
- The actual precision that goes into the law making for this country as well as all the detail that needs to be covered can but only be an advantage. It’s the intense examination that a bill has to go through by the House of Commons and the by the House of Lords that ensures that errors in whatever format are highlighted swiftly and actioned as and where necessary. Law making through the English system has a lengthy process in order to ensure the final act is both precise and concise.
- Parliament can make any law.
The disadvantages to the Parliamentary Law Making are:
- Unlike the House of Commons the House of Lords are not elected by the same procedures as the House of Commons, therefore as a result of this the general public is unable to have a fully influenced parliamentary process.
- The creation of an Act of Parliament has to go through many lengthy and complex areas whilst going through both the House of Commons and the House of Lords. As a result of this there have been times when both the general public and the media have complained that the process is far too long to allow an act to be processed and endorsed. This was seen in both the dangerous dog act 1991 in which after the first child was killed by a dog, other breeds were seen in the media attacking other children and a few adults and the police’s hands were tied as to which breeds would be covered under this new act. Another act was the Anti – Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 which was put into force after the 9 11 attack in both Washington DC and New York USA. This act was to try and cut off funding for terrorism across the world. However, there was public outrage for the timing for this act to be finalised and what was happening in both in this country and across the world around the same time.
- If however, whilst a bill is going through the process of both houses and fails an area for whatever reason this bill will not become an act. There are far too many huddles for a bill to pass through before being implemented into the English legal system.
Q3. The judiciary for the English legal system is made up of the Supreme Court and all the lower courts, such as Court of Appeal, the High Court, County Court and finally the Magistrates’ Court. When a law needs to be amended for whatever reason, this is called a judicial review. It is the role of the judicial system to investigate the law to its facts and highlight any comparisons that may have arisen and amend it as necessary. As a result of this they have the power to step in to the making of any policies that they seem fit to do so and but they are not allowed to create a new law or act.
The country (being England, Wales and Northern Ireland (Scotland has its own legal system and court hierarchy)) is both governed and ruled by laws which were created by the making Acts and Legislature. Therefore, it is recognised that the role of judiciary system is to separate the functions of power so that there is no abuse or misunderstanding undertaken by any of the courts. This also includes the discretion of the government and its limitations; however, these also need to be executed within the limits of the law. It is however, these rules and this judiciary system that allows the country to function as a whole within the legal system in order to enforce a harmonized country within the system. One of the areas of which the judiciary system has to enforce is the area of precedent. This is one of basic forms of the common law for the country. The binding of a precedent is known by its Latin name of stare decisis (basically, this means to stand by or to adhere to). Within the hierarchical structure that is the English court system it is the final decision from one of the higher courts, i.e., Supreme Court, Court of Appeal or the High Court that has the binding precedent on all of the lower courts. It is however the hierarchy of where the precedent comes from that depends on this being binding or not, therefore, if a precedent comes from a High Court it may not be deemed as a binding precedent unlike if it had come from the Supreme Court. An advantage of this system is to allow both fairness and consistency with the English law for all the people that live in this country. A disadvantage would be that this system can be slow or unclear and may need further reform. Unfortunately, none of this would be possible until after the case has been heard by which time it might be too late for that case. Another disadvantage could be that some laws have a slight interpretation to them which could affect a number of cases.
I am of the understanding, having read the literature and the dvd from the Open University that the Judges that sit in the various courts across the nation do not make our law but up hold it so that it can be unanimously enforced throughout without there being any deviation at to what has been said and which law / acts have been breached. It can be said though that the art of law making and all its processes is governed by the judiciary system and the legislative body. It is these two professional bodies that need to work hand in hand in order to allow the laws to be approved as necessary for the welfare of the countries structure. This law is then passed further along the bodies to be reinforced by the executive body.
Total Word Count: Question 1a – e: 298
Question 2: 600
Question 3: 601
References: The Open University Law School - W100 Rules, Rights and Justice: An Introduction to Law. Unit 3 Making Law: (1) Parliament
Unit 4 Making Law (2) Common Law
Unit 5 Making law: (3) Europe.
The Open University Law School - W100 DVD Rules, Rights and Justice: An Introduction to Law.