Commons Sense

House of Commons · Ministers' Questions

Government and Parliament: Relationship with Courts

Tuesday 8 December 2020 · 5 questions

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

Read the full transcript on Parliament.uk

At a glance

Answered 0 Partly answered 5 Not answered 0

Key points

  • Government is reviewing the relationship between the Government, Parliament, and courts as part of its manifesto commitments.
  • The review includes examining the Human Rights Act 1998 and the relationship between domestic courts and the European Convention on Human Rights.
  • Welcoming the commitment to supporting the independence of the judiciary, the Government emphasizes the importance of judicial diplomacy and the understanding of distinctive legal contexts.

Topics (select to filter)

Questions & Answers

Q1 Michael Fabricant Con
Justice & Courts Parliamentary Procedure
Context

The context of reviewing the constitutional relationship between different judicial bodies.

Question

What plans he has to review the relationship between Government, Parliament and (a) the Supreme Court and (b) other courts; and if he will make a statement. My right hon. and learned Friend will share with me—indeed, I suspect the whole House will share with me—the respect we have for our Supreme Court and its judgments. Nevertheless, it is called in from time to time to look at issues that are highly political and highly contentious. Does he not agree with me that we urgently need to establish some sort of framework so that we can decide precisely what the Supreme Court should be looking at and what issues are perhaps beyond or different from its remit?

Answer from Robert Buckland (Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice)

As set out in our manifesto, we are looking at the broader aspects of our constitution, including the relationship between the Government, Parliament and the courts. Our independent courts and legal system are respected around the world, and I would like to protect our world-class judiciary from being drawn into political matters. I am interested in reviewing the Constitutional Reform Act 2005, and I will update the House on arrangements in due course. The hon. Friend understands the concern that he outlines. Of course, the Supreme Court does not of its own volition investigate matters; it hears cases and answers questions before it on arguable points of law of general public importance. However, as I have already said, I think it is important that we look again at the balance.

Partly answered

Not addressed: Specific framework for defining Supreme Court's jurisdiction was not addressed.

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Q2 Michael Fabricant Con
Scotland Standards & Ethics
Context

Concerns about the review of the Human Rights Act potentially interfering with Scottish legal autonomy.

Question

The terms of reference for the Government's review of the Human Rights Act 1998, which were announced yesterday, include the relationship between domestic courts and the European convention on human rights. But of course human rights themselves, as opposed to the Act, are not a reserved matter, and Scotland's courts play an important role in supervising human rights protections under the Scotland Act 1998. So can the Lord Chancellor give me a cast-iron guarantee that the British Government are not planning to interfere with the competence of the Scottish Parliament in respect of human rights and the jurisdiction of Scotland's separate legal system in enforcing human rights protections?

Answer from Robert Buckland

I am happy to assure the hon. and learned Lady that the terms of reference have been carefully couched to make it clear that we have distinctive contexts and natures in each of the jurisdictions, and that they will be considered where that is necessary. I am also content that where there are particular questions on devolved matters or of a devolved nature, the independent review will be approaching or inviting engagement from all appropriate parties. Of course, it is only the first stage in making recommendations.

Partly answered

Not addressed: Specific guarantee was not provided; response suggests that terms are carefully crafted but does not explicitly state no interference.

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Q3 Joanna Cherry SNP
Standards & Ethics
Context

Welcoming the tone and commitment to judicial independence in the review.

Question

Can I welcome the tone of my right hon. and learned Friend's statement and his very clear commitment to supporting the independence of the judiciary? That is an absolute and fundamental principle of our constitution, and should never be undermined by anyone. Can I also welcome the terms of reference of the review, which are balanced and measured in relation to the Human Rights Act and, in particular, the quality of the panel that has been appointed?

Answer from Robert Buckland

My hon. Friend is absolutely right to highlight the impeccable credentials of the chair, Sir Peter Gross, not only as a distinguished former Lord Justice of Appeal, but of course as the judge responsible for international relations: he understands very well the issue of judicial diplomacy, which is very much at the heart of this review.

Partly answered

Not addressed: Did not provide reassurance that panel will have a completely free hand without pressure.

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Q4 Bob Neill Con
Democracy & Elections Standards & Ethics
Context

Concerns about transparency and accountability in the human rights review.

Question

The independent review of the Human Rights Act will have an enormous impact on the basic rights and freedoms that British citizens enjoy. The Government caused outrage by failing to publish submissions to the independent review of administrative law. Transparency and accountability are fundamental parts of our democracy. Will the Secretary of State guarantee that both the submissions to the human rights review and the review itself will be published in full?

Answer from Robert Buckland

I think perhaps the right hon. Gentleman is to be forgiven for his descent into hyperbole when it comes to the ambit of this review. It is all about the mechanism, and comments about fundamental rights being affected are way wide of the mark. First, with regard to the process in the review, it is a matter for the review as to what precise submissions it publishes, but I can assure him that the outcome of the review and the Government's position will of course be published in full.

Partly answered

Not addressed: Did not guarantee publication of all submissions; only guaranteed publishing the outcome.

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Q5 David Lammy Lab Tottenham
Justice & Courts Parliamentary Procedure Standards & Ethics
Context

Discussion on reviewing constitutional aspects including court relationships and independence of judiciary.

Question

What plans he has to review the relationship between Government, Parliament and (a) the Supreme Court and (b) other courts; and if he will make a statement. My right hon. and learned Friend will share with me—indeed, I suspect the whole House will share with me—the respect we have for our Supreme Court and its judgments. Nevertheless, it is called in from time to time to look at issues that are highly political and highly contentious. Does he not agree with me that we urgently need to establish some sort of framework so that we can decide precisely what the Supreme Court should be looking at and what issues are perhaps beyond or different from its remit?

Answer from Robert Buckland

As set out in our manifesto, we are looking at the broader aspects of our constitution, including the relationship between the Government, Parliament and the courts. Our independent courts and legal system are respected around the world, and I would like to protect our world-class judiciary from being drawn into political matters. I am interested in reviewing the Constitutional Reform Act 2005, and I will update the House on arrangements in due course.

Partly answered

Not addressed: Specific framework was not established; response focuses on general aspects of constitutional review.

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)