House of Commons · Westminster Hall
14 October 2020 · 5 other contributors · 14,212 words
Opened by Joanna Cherry SNP Edinburgh South West
Responding minister: Alex Chalk
Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.
Joanna Cherry raised concerns about lord chancellor’s oath and the rule of law in Westminster Hall. A government minister responded.
Key points
Key requests to Government
What will the Lord Chancellor do to honour his oath to respect the rule of law in light of recent developments?
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said.
Opened the debate
The Lord Chancellor's first year in office has been marked by attacks on legal professionals, judiciary, and proposals to restrict judicial review. Concerns over the UK Internal Market Bill undermine rule of law principles, impacting Northern Ireland's Good Friday Agreement and Scotland's devolution settlement. Legal implications include challenges to international obligations and threats to independent Scottish legal system.
Focused on the need for clarity in the Lord Chancellor's Oath regarding accountability mechanisms within the judicial system. Highlighted the importance of transparency and public trust. I congratulate Joanna Cherry on securing this debate. I assert that clause 5 of the UK Internal Market Bill does not breach international law as it is a response to EU threats and includes parliamentary oversight. Moreover, I argue that even if there were a breach, it would not significantly impact the UK's standing in the international community.
Neill discussed the Lord Chancellor's oath, emphasizing that defining the rule of law is challenging. He praised the current Lord Chancellor for his commitment to the rule of law and judicial independence. Neill also addressed concerns about undermining the rule of law through examining judicial review and stated that such discussions do not inherently assault the rule of law.
David Lammy praised historical contributions to the rule of law but criticized the current Conservative government for undermining it. He pointed out that the UK's legal sector, worth £60 billion to the economy, is trusted globally due to its adherence to the rule of law. Lammy expressed shock at the cabinet decision to break the law and highlighted instances where government officials and ministers disregarded legal principles. He warned against a shift towards authoritarianism by attacking judicial independence and undermining respect for lawyers.
Addressed issues related to the administration of justice, suggesting reforms to ensure better compliance with legal standards and procedures. Emphasised the importance of respecting and defending the rule of law, highlighting his own experience as a magistrate. Noted the complexities involved in defining the rule of law and its relationship with the Lord Chancellor's role. Pledged to support the independence of the judiciary and praised the Lord Chancellor's integrity.
Discussed the importance of upholding the rule of law and questioned whether the current Lord Chancellor's Oath sufficiently reflects this. Raised concerns about breaches of judicial independence.
Government Response
Alex ChalkIt is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Twigg, and to respond to a debate back here in Westminster Hall. I congratulate the hon. and learned Member for Edinburgh South West (Joanna Cherry) on securing the debate and thank her for her wide-ranging but tightly-argued important representations. The role of the Lord Chancellor is different from that of the Law Officers who provide legal advice to the Government, as it does not include providing legal advice to the Government of the day. The Lord Chancellor's oath, set out in the Constitutional Reform Act 2005, respects the rule of law and defends judicial independence while ensuring resources for efficient court support. While there are differing views on the scope and content of the oath, its importance remains significant within a wider constitutional context. Equality before the law, access to independent and impartial justice, and government accountability under the law are core principles of the rule of law. The UK is committed to international human rights obligations and judicial independence is fundamental to our democracy. Judges benefit from immunity from lawsuits for their judicial actions and must dispense justice fearlessly. Reform efforts should be considered carefully without discarding important elements like judicial review. Resources have been allocated to support courts during the pandemic, with a focus on technology upgrades and funding increases. The UK Internal Market Bill (part 5) would only be used in cases of material breaches by the EU that undermine the Northern Ireland Protocol. On a personal note, I am pleased that the Lord Chancellor is committed to upholding the rule of law.