Public Law -The reform of the House of Lords has been on the political agenda for many years.
Evelyn Lee LW 1011 Public Law I Group 36 Non-Assessed Essay Question 12 The reform of the House of Lords has been on the political agenda for many years. The main reason that calls for reform is the need for the House of Lords to tailor its composition to suit its various functions. The proposal set out in the editorial from The Observer 1998 took to the view that it was necessary to 'blend democracy with distinction'. 'Democracy' as the word suggests, places the emphasis on the need for legitimacy which can only be conveyed by election. By blending democracy with distinction, it is aimed to move the House of Lords to a position in which it is seen to have more legitimacy without losing the degree of political independence inherent in its undemocratic character. Previously, the House of Lords is an unrepresentative chamber in which the Lords take their seats either because they are hereditary peers or because they have been created life peers under the Life Peerages Act 1958. This makes the House of Lords a wholly non-elected chamber and the two systems of membership to the House are subjected to many criticisms due to their undemocratic nature which is said to be a major obstruction to the effectiveness of the House. The system of appointment is often criticised as an inappropriate method of recruiting people into a legislative chamber. This is due to the fact that a
To what extent (if at all) is it true to say that the United Kingdom constitution is based on a separation of powers?
Constitutional and Administrative Law Coursework Assignment To what extent (if at all) is it true to say that the United Kingdom constitution is based on a separation of powers? In addressing this question, it would be useful to explain just what the doctrine of the separation of powers consists of. The concept of the separation of powers goes back to the time of ancient Greece however it only came to be considered as a real 'grand constitutional principle' when the French theorist Montesquieu wrote 'L'Esprit des Lois' (The Spirit of the Laws). In this work, there was an argument for a strict separation of powers, that is the legislature, the executive and the judiciary. So in other words, the power to make the law, the power to govern the state and the power to apply and interpret the law should be separate for the protection of the liberties and freedoms of the individual. Montesquieu justifies his view and this is effectively shown by several passages of his work. 'When legislative power is united with executive power in a single person or in a single body of magistracy, there is no liberty'. The reasons given by Montesquieu for this was that the holder of that power, whether it is an individual or a group can create tyrannical laws and then exercise them in a tyrannical manner. He also said, 'Nor is there liberty if the power of judging is not separate from legislative
![It cannot be too strongly emphasized that the British constitutionis firmly based on the separation of powers. (Lord Diplock in Duport Steels v Sirs[1980]). Discuss.](https://mbt-essays-prod-public.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/904406/listing/904406_1.jpg)
It cannot be too strongly emphasized that the British constitutionis firmly based on the separation of powers. (Lord Diplock in Duport Steels v Sirs[1980]). Discuss.
Mark: 70 'It cannot be too strongly emphasized that the British constitution...is firmly based on the separation of powers.' (Lord Diplock in Duport Steels v Sirs[1980]). Discuss. There are several ways of approaching the concept of the separation of powers. One way is to look at it "purely," envisioning three distinct branches of government - legislative, executive, and judicial - that are allocated to different persons or bodies, and are mutually exclusive in the functions they perform.1 Montesquieu believed that stringently separating the three branches is the best way to avert abuse of power.2 If we believe that the current state of government in the UK is constitutional, then we will not by any means find a pure separation of powers. Another way to view it is termed the "partial separation theory," where the main point is the "avoidance of concentration of power"3; powers are roughly separate, but each branch can "check and balance" another by either having some of the functions of that branch, or by being able to review its actions. This is closer to the truth, although most functions that cross the boundaries are clearly due to efficiency rather than attempts to avoid abuse of power. The separation of powers doctrine, in both of these forms, has had a substantial influence on the UK constitution, especially on judicial independence. But it is not unified, clear, or
Constitution of the United Kingdom - What options face the Commission on what to recommend about conventions, and which course of action would be preferable?
Essay A 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 conventions, and which course of action would be preferable? At present in the United Kingdom there is no single codified constitution. A Constitution sets out the fundamental law in a state, and is basically a set of 'rules' by which to abide. In 2001 the House of Lords set up a 'Select Committee on the Constitution' who defined a constitution as being, 'The set of laws, rules and practices that create the basic institutions of the state, and its component and related parts, and stipulate the powers of those institutions and the relationship between the different institutions and between those institutions and the individual.'1 The introduction of such a written, codified constitution would usually follow a 'fundamental political event' such as a revolution. However, political events in the United Kingdom have never called for the enactment of a fully written and codified constitution. Our present constitution, although uncodified, is still in a sense, written, however it can be found in a number of different sources, which are constantly developing and evolving. Six main forms of out constitution may be included into a
Striking a balance - What GC & C v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis tells us about the protection of human rights in the United Kingdom.
Striking a balance What GC & C v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis tells us about the protection of human rights in the United Kingdom. LW103 Spring 2011 Hasan Q. Zulfiqar Word Count: 1,074 The incorporation of certain Articles of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) into domestic law, by way of the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA), has led to a significant change in the way the courts have tackled the protection of human rights in the United Kingdom.1 Specific rights of individuals enshrined in the HRA, and powers conferred upon the courts to interpret legislation in compliance with Convention rights (CR) has meant that an increasing number of judicial review cases concerning breaches of CR by public authorities have come before the courts.2 One such case which highlights the growing importance of human rights protection in the UK is GC & C v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis3 (GC), which was an action brought by two individuals, Gc and C, who argued that the contentious policy of the Association of the Chief Constables of Police (ACPO) of indefinite retention of biometric samples, DNA and fingerprints, breached their right of privacy in accordance with Article 8 of the ECHR. This particular case has relevant points of public interest which serve to enlighten us on the way the UK courts have interpreted the HRA, yet cannot give us a full indication
The Rule of Law and the Terrorism Acts
A) Chapter 2: The rule of law I) Introduction There is a hierarchy in that the politicians and officials have authority invested in them by the law through democracy, which means there is a hierarchy as the law is higher than the politicians and these politicians are above the people. It could be said that the people confer their rights on to the politicians when voting for them due to the nature of an electoral democracy1. The rule of law says that the judiciary and legislature should be equal. It has been said "The critical feature to the Rule of Law is that individual liberties depend on it. Its success depends on the role of trial by jury and the impartiality of judges."2 Therefore the judiciary also play a significant role in the law and as a result the relationship between the two should be equal. The concept of the rule of law first materialized with Dicey in 1885 and according to Lord Bingham of Cornhill his views "...had attracted considerable controversy over the years which had elapsed since then."3 Dicey stated that there were three main principles to the rule of law. The second point is the significant one as far as this discourse is concerned and it states: "; 2) every man is subject to the ordinary law of the land administered by ordinary and usual tribums" This is relevant when one looks at control orders, in that people are subjected to orders under
Council of Ministers
The Council of Ministers The Council of the European Union informally known as the Council Of Ministers is one of the two legislative institutions of the European Union. Along with the Parliament they form the highest legislative body within the Union. 3Article 203 of the EC states that the Council should consist of representatives of each member state at ministerial level, authorised to commit the government of that member state. Each council member is elected by their state under their own national voting system. The Council of Ministers sit in Brussels and Strasbourg to discuss their issues. The Council first appeared in the European Coal and Steel Community as the special council of Ministers set up to counter-balance the high authority. This original Council had limited powers. The council only had to give its consent to decisions, so as a whole only scrutinised the executive. In 1957 the Treaty of Rome created two new Communities, and with them two new councils. However due to objections over their high authority, the Council received more executive power. In 1967 the Merger Treaty created a single council of the European communities. This merged the special Council of Ministers the Communities and their Councils. In 1993 the Council of European Union with Maastricht Treaty reflected the wider change in name. This strengthened the council with more
'The House of Lords should be abolished. The UK only needs one chamber of parliament' Discuss
'The House of Lords should be abolished. The UK only needs one chamber of parliament.' Discuss Since the formation of the House of Lords during the reign of Edward III the role of this chamber has transformed greatly. From being the most powerful House at its formation to being abolished during the Civil War period and subsequently reinstated; the role and indeed the existence of the House of Lords has been subject to much debate. The main current functions of this House are: The expert scrutiny of parliamentary bills, to 'check' the power of the House of Commons, to uphold the democratic constitutional rights of UK citizens, to scrutinise legislation for Human Rights compatibility, to scrutinise public policy and to scrutinise EU legislation. The powers of the House of Lords include the power to delay legislation that has been approved by the House of Commons and limited veto powers. However, these legislative powers are heavily restricted by the Parliament Acts of 1911 and 1949. The main argument in favour of the motion in question is: That the House of Lords is undemocratic and is contrary to the UK's core democratic values. Currently, The House of Lords is composed of 587 life peers, 92 hereditary peers and 26 bishops1. All of the life peers are appointed by the Queen, upon the advice of the Prime Minister. None of the members of the House of Lords are elected by the
A Constitutional Commission is considering how Constitutional conventions might be incorporated into the new draft of a new constitution of the United Kingdom. What options face the commission on what to recommend about conventions, and which course of ac
A (hypothetical) Constitutional Commission is considering how (if at all) Constitutional conventions might be incorporated into the new draft of a new constitution of the United Kingdom. What options face the commission on what to recommend about conventions, and which course of action would be preferable? The question of introducing a written constitution is a question fraught with difficulties as it is. The questions of whom should draft it? And what should go into it? Are all questions that would arise. It is certain that conventions too would also feature as a major question mark. As they stand at the moment, conventions are very difficult subject. There is not even unanimous concurrence as to what they actually are amongst academics. Their constitutional importance, however, is undisputed and the main argument must be whether or not they are codified into any written constitution that the UK may adopt. A loose term proffered by Dicey suggests that conventions are "understandings, habits, or practices ...[with regard to]...the conduct of several members of the sovereign power, of the Ministry, or of other officials." On the face of it then, constitutional conventions seem a vital part in governing the government. Rules to regulate the regulators. On closer inspection however, we see that they are (i) not written down, (ii) not enforceable by law, (iii) as a result of
The Constitutional Reform Act 2005
The Constitutional Reform Act 2005 (CRA) was agreed by both houses on March 21, 2005 and received royal assent on the 24th March 2005. It fundamentally makes provision for adjusting the functions of the Lord Chancellor and the office as well as providing a Supreme Court to substitute the existing role of the Law Lords in the House of Lords. Furthermore, it resolves new judicial appointments. By introducing these reforms, the question arises as to whether the CRA has developed the doctrine of the separation of Powers in the UK's constitution that it hoped to achieve. It was stated by a Law Lord, Lord Steyn that the role of the chancellor was 'no longer on either constitutional or pragmatic terms...a spokesman for the government in furtherance of its party political agenda.'1 The Lord Chancellor had progressively developed overlapping powers including being a member of the Cabinet, Head of the Judiciary and a Speaker in the House of Lords allowing a concentration of power to the same one person which is undemocratic. This resulted in the government, deciding on a radical reform called the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 (CRA) without any consultation. They had the desire to increase separation of Powers between judges and government and to comply with article six of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) on judicial independence. The decision in the ECHR in McGonnel v United
![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)