Explain the theory of the Rule of Law which you prefer. Analyse the extent to which the Rule of Law requires access to justice. Consider the extent to which judges should defend access to justice because of the Rule of Law
Explain the theory of the Rule of Law which you prefer. Analyse the extent to which the Rule of Law requires access to justice. Consider the extent to which judges should defend access to justice because of the Rule of Law, taking into account the issues raised by the quotation above. The rule of law is an important aspect of the UK constitution. Its function is control the abuse of powers by governments.[1] The term ‘rule of law’ is ambiguous in that it can mean different things to different people, thus making it rather difficult to give it an objective meaning.[2] The conception of the rule of law can be interpreted in a formal or substantive sense. The formal conception is concerned with how laws are passed, such as whether they are made by ‘properly authorised people’, exercising their law making powers within the limits set out by the law. However, this approach is not concerned with the actual content of the law. Meanwhile, the substantive conception acknowledges the formal attributes of the law but it is also concerned with its content. According to this approach, certain fundamental values, such as the protection of human rights, are important aspects of the rule of law.[3] Professor Dicey proposed an explanation of the rule of law. According to him, it consists of three elements. The first aspect is that individuals should only be punished in ordinary
Describe, citing and discussing relevant case-law, the manner in which the judiciary controls the exercise of the Royal Prerogative. Your answer should at the outset include a brief definition of the Royal Prerogative and provide examples of prerogatives.
Describe, citing and discussing relevant case-law, the manner in which the judiciary controls the exercise of the Royal Prerogative. Your answer should at the outset include a brief definition of the Royal Prerogative and provide examples of prerogatives. Royal prerogative in the words of A.V. Dicey is “the residue of discretionary or arbitrary authority which at any given time is legally left in the hands of the Crown”[1]. William Blackstone however, speaks of the royal prerogative as powers that “the King enjoys alone, in contradistinction to others, and not to those he enjoys in common with any of his subjects”[2]. Both Dicey’s[3] and Blackstone’s[4] definition have been contradistinctively followed. Examining the prerogative is “set about with difficulties with prerogatives disused, with prerogatives of doubtful existence, with prerogatives which exist by sufferance, merely because no one has thought it worthwhile to abolish them.”[5] Furthermore, “it is 350 years and a civil war too late for the Queen’s courts to broaden the prerogative”[6]. Currently, royal prerogative mainly concerns foreign affairs, defense and national security. Examples of royal prerogatives concerning foreign affairs are: the power to declare war, diplomatic relations, sending armed forces and the issuing of passports. Domestic royal prerogatives include: summoning/dissolving
What do you consider to be the proper functions of a second chamber in the constitution of this country? Does the House of Lords, as now constituted, effectively discharge these functions?
Nia Acquaye What do you consider to be the proper functions of a second chamber in the constitution of this country? Does the House of Lords, as now constituted, effectively discharge these functions? If not, what reforms would you introduce? The United Kingdom has a bicameral system, meaning there are two parliamentary chambers. In the United Kingdom the first chamber is known as the House of Commons and the second chamber the House of Lords. The second Chamber has several proper functions; it has a scrutiny function, a constitutional watchdog function, and a representative function. It is often debated as to whether the House of Lords effectively discharges these functions, and if any reforms would allow it to work as a better second chamber. Although I believe it fulfils some of its functions, there are several reforms which could be introduced to ensure that these functions are more effectively discharged. The Second chamber could be a mixed house with a majority election, and as this would give it democratic legitimacy due to its elected members, it could then have the power of veto reintroduced. An important function of the second chamber is to revise and scrutinise legislation. It will often revise legislation, looking at the wording of draft bills and their workability. This is the area that I believe the House of Lords excels in. It has such vast numbers, and
Critically evaluate the ability of tribunals to deliver effective administrative justice.
Critically evaluate the ability of tribunals to deliver effective administrative justice. Tribunals are set up as an alternative to the traditional court system and its operation alongside the court system has become an important and integral part of the legal system. [1] Most of the tribunals have been created in the late twentieth century with the development of the welfare state in order to give people a method of enforcing their entitlement to certain social rights. [2] With larger amount and range of disputes been brought forth in the recent years, many specialised tribunals were set up to deal with more specialised areas such as tax, state benefits and immigration. Generally, tribunals differ from courts in a number of ways such as its relative informality and its capacity to provide cheap and speedy means of dispute resolution. In fact, the original intention for establishing many tribunals was to channel disputes away from the courts. [3] However, although the tribunal system has received many praises for dealing with the short comings of the courts to provide an effective mean for the public to contest the state and other public sectors, there have been some controversies surrounding its close resemblance to the court system that some argued that it offer no additional value to the judicial system. To assess if such views are accurate we have to analyse a number
Constitutional Conventions. These conventions are binding, but are not recognised in the eyes of the court; the cabinet manual4 defines them as rules of constitutional practice that are regarded as binding in operation but not in law.
UID: 8119869 ESSAY A 0/25/2012 ________________ The cabinet manual[1] rightfully says that the United Kingdom does not operate on a codified constitution but on a number of various institutions, judicial precedents, statutes, royal prerogatives and convention, which are generally understood to be constitutional. A lot of the practices of constitutional behaviour which are observed by the government officials in the United Kingdom are contained neither in acts, statutes or journals. When one considers the term constitutional conventions, the name A.V Dicey comes to mind. He defined the term to be “conventions, understandings, habits or practices which, though they may regulate the conduct of the several members of the sovereign power…are not really laws at all since they are not enforced by the courts”[2]. Although this definition gives a general idea of what conventions are supposed to achieve, it is not accurate, constitutional conventions are not merely practices or habits, they are instruments of law that give meaning and “flesh to the dry bones of the law”, they keep the law it touch with the growth of ideas. This further explanation was given by Sir Ivor Jennings.[3] These conventions are binding, but are not recognised in the eyes of the court; the cabinet manual[4] defines them as “rules of constitutional practice that are regarded as binding in
Legal Reform of the Constitution - introduction of a 5 year term for Parliament.
"We are introducing legislation to fix parliamentary terms. The date of the next General Election will be 7 May 2015. This is a hugely significant constitutional innovation. It is simply not right that General Elections can be called according to a Prime Ministers whims. So, this prime Minister will be the first Prime Minister to give up that right" In the light of the above quote, critically evaluate the effectiveness of this measure in achieving legal reform of the UK constitution. A constitution is a framework of rules which determine how a country should be governed. The constitution of the United Kingdom is unwritten, unlike the USA's constitution, the rules of the state are not written in a single codified document. The British constitution was defined as a "whole system or government of a country, the collection of rules which establish and regulate or govern the government"1. An unwritten constitution derives from various different sources such as statute law, common law, treaties, the royal prerogative and convention. The introduction of a 5 year fixed term Parliament has taken a huge step in reforming the UK constitution. These proposals were introduced by Nick Clegg; " First, traditional powers of no confidence will be put into law, and a vote of no confidence will still require only a simple majority. Secondly, if after a vote of no confidence a Government cannot
To what extent are conventions a recognised source of the British Constitution?
Question 1: To what extent are conventions a recognised source of the British Constitution? Every organisation needs a constitution to define the powers, rights and duties and therefore it can be said that a constitution looks to both internal and external regulation of the body to which it relates. Under the United Kingdom's constitution, the manner in which constitutional change is effected will be depended not upon clearly written rules but, rather by accepted constitutional practice which Every organisation needs a constitution to define the has evolved over time. A Constitutional and legal fact is that Parliament has the ultimate Law making power within the state but it does not mean that there are no restraints on what parliament may do. Parliament is accountable to the electorates, and the economic and political necessities. To study the British Constitution there must be an understanding of historical, legal, philosophical matters which over the centuries have shaped the organisation of the state. It's almost unique in not having a written constitution and it's the product of many centuries of continuous and mostly gradual and peaceful evolution. It also has an unbroken history development dating from 1066. It is also necessary to understand issues such as, the conventions as a recognised source of the British Constitution. Constitutional conventions may not
Dicey's insistence upon the virtues of am unwritten constitution have come under the pressure as constitutional arrangement in the UK change to respond to changing political, international, economic and social circumstances. Discuss
Discussion on the UK unwritten constitution Dicey's insistence upon the virtues of am unwritten constitution have come under the pressure as constitutional arrangement in the UK change to respond to changing political, international, economic and social circumstances. Discuss Introduction When people talk of a constitution, they often refer to the single, codified document that exists in a physically tangible form. The most famous written constitution is the first three article of the Constitution of the USA 1789. (Carroll 2005 p1) However, within the UK, the constitutional principles, rules and practices have never been codified. As such, it is often described as an "unwritten" constitution. Turpin has defined British constitution as " A body of rules, conventions and practices which describe, regulate or qualify the organization and operation of government in the UK". (Turpin 2004 p4) Dicey claimed that according to the changing political, international, economic and social circumstances, the unwritten constitution of the UK has been no function to work and it is under the pressure as constitutional arrangement. (Jowell and Oliver 2004). This essay aims to consider the opinion of Dicey to discuss on both advantages and disadvantages in unwritten constitutions compared with written constitution, and examine whether unwritten constitution in UK has changed. The UK
A new Constitution of the United Kingdom - What options face the Commission on what to recommend about convention, and which course of action would be preferable?
Public Law A (hypothetical) Constitutional Commission is considering how (if at all) constitutional conventions might be incorporated into the draft of a new Constitution of the United Kingdom. What options face the Commission on what to recommend about convention, and which course of action would be preferable? To answer this essay question, one must first define the meaning of constitution conventions and its general characteristics, and then describe the current system of the United Kingdom constitution. In order to identify the options that will face the Commission, I will look at the incorporation of conventions into the Australian Constitution to identify the course of action that might be preferable. The term constitutional convention is defined by Dicey as "conventions, understandings, habits or practices which, though they may regulate the conduct of the several members of the sovereign power...are not in reality laws at all since they are not enforced by the courts." Dicey's definition means that constitutional conventions are derived from regular practices and norms that are customarily expected but they are not legally enforceable and would not be taken into action in courts. They are non-legal rules. One example of this is the power of the monarch. The Queen has the power to choose her Prime Minister and she has power to suspend government. Royal assent must
Holocaust Denial Laws
Taking a Position: Holocaust Denial Laws Holocaust denial laws, while differing in the exact wording country to country, generally prohibits citizens in countries where they are present from expressing the opinion that the holocaust did not occur. These laws are especially prevalent in Europe where thirteen nations currently ban the denial of the holocaust including; Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Lithuania, Poland and Switzerland (BBC). This essay will first exam why these laws have been passed and why they are considered to be just. It will then consider why despite this, why these laws are fundamentally wrong and are in fact counter-productive to the aims pursued in creating them. Holocaust denial laws were passed in the wake of the atrocities that occurred in Nazi Germany during World War II. They were justified as preventing those that had been implicit in the regime and sympathized with Nazism from arguing that the holocaust did not occur, there for absolving themselves over the guilt of the genocide. In recent years there have been several high profile cases involving holocaust denial, in particular centering on British historian David Irving who was sentenced to three years in prison for holocaust denial in Austria (BBC). This leads to the question of whether, if when laws brought in to combat Nazi sympathizers lead to the imprisonment of
![Prerogative powers are very important source of UK Constitution dealing with issues such as foreign affairs. There are not written down, and can only be followed in common law. All major prerogative is now regulated by conventions.[1] Despite being the Mo](https://mbt-essays-prod-public.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/888953/listing/888953_1.jpg)