The Politics of Judicial Independence in Britain's Changing Constitution
Lead Research Organisation:
University College London
Department Name: Political Science
Abstract
Introduction
The courts have a lot more power than they used to, which has heightened tension between politicians and the judges. That in turn has triggered a growing debate about judicial independence, and judicial accountability.
The judges are institutionally more independent, with a separate Supreme Court, and the Lord Chief Justice as head of the judiciary in place of the Lord Chancellor. But they still feel uneasy. At their insistence, the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 places a statutory duty on Ministers to uphold judicial independence.
The Act does not define judicial independence. If it is to be upheld, it must be clearly understood by all the actors who are required to protect it. So two questions addressed by this project are:
- What is the meaning of judicial independence, and its proper limits?
- How is it best protected, and by whom?
The new arrangements also raise questions about accountability. The Lord Chancellor was politically accountable for the whole judicial system. Who is now accountable, and to whom?
Research questions
- How do different political and legal actors understand judicial independence and judicial accountability?
- What are the day to day contexts in which judicial independence and accountability arise as issues?
- Who are the guardians of judicial independence, and accountability? How much coordination is there between them?
- What do the new arrangements tell us about the changing relationship between the judges, government and Parliament?
Academic importance
There is little writing about judicial independence in the UK, and no accepted body of theory. We intend to develop a body of theory which explains the rationale for judicial independence and accountability in the UK, their proper limits, and practical requirements.
Most books on judicial independence are comparative, edited collections. Ours will be an in depth study of how judicial independence and accountability operate within a specific system. It will examine not just high profile clashes, but the day to day decisions on the budget and management of the court service, judicial pay and pensions, complaints and discipline, appraisal and training. In the process it will identify all the 'hidden guardians' within the executive, parliament and the judiciary whose everyday decisions define how judicial independence and acccountability are interpreted in the UK.
Political importance
The project is very timely. A decade of constitutional reform has transformed the constitutional landscape, with much greater separation of powers. The Lord Chief Justice has 80 staff to support him in his new role. Parliament has invited the judges to explain how the new system works.
All the actors - politicians, judges, parliamentarians and officials - are questioning different aspects of the new system, and developing a new set of rules. It is the perfect moment to capture the formal and informal conventions which are being developed; to explore emerging differences of view and the reasons behind them; and to suggest how some of those differences might be resolved.
Outputs
The main outputs will be
- a book
- an interim and final report for policy makers
- three academic articles
- articles in practitioner journals.
Impact
There will be a series of high level practitioner seminars running throughout the project; public lectures; a website and blog; interviews for radio and TV; articles for the press, and for legal and political magazines.
Project team and timetable
The research team have long experience of working with government, Parliament and the judiciary. Prof Robert Hazell (Constitution Unit, UCL) will lead the project, working with Prof Kate Malleson (Queen Mary) and Dr Graham Gee (Birmingham). It will be a three year project, running from Sept 2010 to August 2013.
The courts have a lot more power than they used to, which has heightened tension between politicians and the judges. That in turn has triggered a growing debate about judicial independence, and judicial accountability.
The judges are institutionally more independent, with a separate Supreme Court, and the Lord Chief Justice as head of the judiciary in place of the Lord Chancellor. But they still feel uneasy. At their insistence, the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 places a statutory duty on Ministers to uphold judicial independence.
The Act does not define judicial independence. If it is to be upheld, it must be clearly understood by all the actors who are required to protect it. So two questions addressed by this project are:
- What is the meaning of judicial independence, and its proper limits?
- How is it best protected, and by whom?
The new arrangements also raise questions about accountability. The Lord Chancellor was politically accountable for the whole judicial system. Who is now accountable, and to whom?
Research questions
- How do different political and legal actors understand judicial independence and judicial accountability?
- What are the day to day contexts in which judicial independence and accountability arise as issues?
- Who are the guardians of judicial independence, and accountability? How much coordination is there between them?
- What do the new arrangements tell us about the changing relationship between the judges, government and Parliament?
Academic importance
There is little writing about judicial independence in the UK, and no accepted body of theory. We intend to develop a body of theory which explains the rationale for judicial independence and accountability in the UK, their proper limits, and practical requirements.
Most books on judicial independence are comparative, edited collections. Ours will be an in depth study of how judicial independence and accountability operate within a specific system. It will examine not just high profile clashes, but the day to day decisions on the budget and management of the court service, judicial pay and pensions, complaints and discipline, appraisal and training. In the process it will identify all the 'hidden guardians' within the executive, parliament and the judiciary whose everyday decisions define how judicial independence and acccountability are interpreted in the UK.
Political importance
The project is very timely. A decade of constitutional reform has transformed the constitutional landscape, with much greater separation of powers. The Lord Chief Justice has 80 staff to support him in his new role. Parliament has invited the judges to explain how the new system works.
All the actors - politicians, judges, parliamentarians and officials - are questioning different aspects of the new system, and developing a new set of rules. It is the perfect moment to capture the formal and informal conventions which are being developed; to explore emerging differences of view and the reasons behind them; and to suggest how some of those differences might be resolved.
Outputs
The main outputs will be
- a book
- an interim and final report for policy makers
- three academic articles
- articles in practitioner journals.
Impact
There will be a series of high level practitioner seminars running throughout the project; public lectures; a website and blog; interviews for radio and TV; articles for the press, and for legal and political magazines.
Project team and timetable
The research team have long experience of working with government, Parliament and the judiciary. Prof Robert Hazell (Constitution Unit, UCL) will lead the project, working with Prof Kate Malleson (Queen Mary) and Dr Graham Gee (Birmingham). It will be a three year project, running from Sept 2010 to August 2013.
Planned Impact
1 Who will benefit from the research?
Beneficiaries from outside academe include all three branches of government, the legal profession, the media, NGOs and the general public.
The judiciary
Judges and their officials and advisers. Supreme Court Justices, Court of Appeal judges, High Court judges and Circuit judges.
Lord Chief Justice as head of the Judiciary, the Council of Judges as its main representative body, the Judicial Studies Board as the main training body. Chief Executive of the Judicial Offices.
Parliament
Select Committees: Commons Justice Committee, Home Affairs Committee, Lords Constitution Committee, Joint Committee on Human Rights.
Officials: Michael Pownall (Clerk of the Parliaments, House of Lords), Robert Rogers (Director General, Chamber and Committee Services, House of Commons).
Frontbench spokesmen: Dominic Grieve MP (Conservative shadow Justice Secretary), David Howarth MP (Lib Dem ditto).
Individual MPs and peers: Lord Lester QC, Helena Kennedy QC, Lord Goodhart QC, Andrew Dismore MP
Government
Politicians and senior officials in Ministry of Justice, Law Officers' Department, Parliamentary Counsel, Treasury Solicitor, Cabinet Office, Home Office, Treasury.
Public sector bodies
Judicial Appointments Commission. HM Courts Service.
Devolved governments
Scotland Judiciary: Lord President, judges of Court of Session, High Court of Justiciary. Scottish Courts Service. Judicial Appointments Board for Scotland.
Justice Committee in Scottish Parliament.
Justice Minister. Lord Advocate. Constitution, Law and Courts Directorate of Scottish government.
Northern Ireland Lord Chief Justice of Northern Ireland. NI Courts Service. NI Judicial Appointments Commission.
NI Assembly Executive and Review Committee. Northern Ireland Office.
Legal profession
Bar Council. Law Society.
Specialist NGOs
JUSTICE. Hansard Society. Liberty.
Legal and political correspondents in broadsheet press, BBC and ITN.
Radio and TV
BBC Radio 4 Law in Action, Unreliable Evidence, Week in Westminster.
BBC TV News, C4 News, ITV News.
International beneficiaries
Council of Europe. Venice Commission for Democracy through Law (Council of Europe's advisory body on constitutional matters). Consultative Council of European Judges.
Commonwealth Magistrates' and Judges' Association. World Bank (Judicial Reform for Improving Governance initiative).
Canadian National Judicial Institute, Association of Provincial Court Judges, Institute of Parliamentary and Political Law.
Civil society and general public
Finally, the research will engage anyone involved with the courts, or interested in the changing relationship between judiciary, parliament and government. They will be engaged via the media, using the Constitution Unit's well established contacts with the written press, broadcasters and the serious blogosphere.
2 how will they benefit?
All these organisations will benefit from a better understanding of:
- The different interpretations of judicial independence and accountability
- The different rationales for judicial independence and accountability
- Their respective roles in upholding judicial independence and accountability
- The requirements in practice to ensure these values are upheld.
3 what will be done to ensure that they benefit?
Throughout the project there will be a wide range of
- Public lectures and practitioner seminars
- Private briefings
- Constitution Unit reports and press releases
- Presentations to key target audiences
- Articles in specialist magazines
- Articles in the general press
- TV and radio interviews.
These are detailed in the Impact Plan.
Beneficiaries from outside academe include all three branches of government, the legal profession, the media, NGOs and the general public.
The judiciary
Judges and their officials and advisers. Supreme Court Justices, Court of Appeal judges, High Court judges and Circuit judges.
Lord Chief Justice as head of the Judiciary, the Council of Judges as its main representative body, the Judicial Studies Board as the main training body. Chief Executive of the Judicial Offices.
Parliament
Select Committees: Commons Justice Committee, Home Affairs Committee, Lords Constitution Committee, Joint Committee on Human Rights.
Officials: Michael Pownall (Clerk of the Parliaments, House of Lords), Robert Rogers (Director General, Chamber and Committee Services, House of Commons).
Frontbench spokesmen: Dominic Grieve MP (Conservative shadow Justice Secretary), David Howarth MP (Lib Dem ditto).
Individual MPs and peers: Lord Lester QC, Helena Kennedy QC, Lord Goodhart QC, Andrew Dismore MP
Government
Politicians and senior officials in Ministry of Justice, Law Officers' Department, Parliamentary Counsel, Treasury Solicitor, Cabinet Office, Home Office, Treasury.
Public sector bodies
Judicial Appointments Commission. HM Courts Service.
Devolved governments
Scotland Judiciary: Lord President, judges of Court of Session, High Court of Justiciary. Scottish Courts Service. Judicial Appointments Board for Scotland.
Justice Committee in Scottish Parliament.
Justice Minister. Lord Advocate. Constitution, Law and Courts Directorate of Scottish government.
Northern Ireland Lord Chief Justice of Northern Ireland. NI Courts Service. NI Judicial Appointments Commission.
NI Assembly Executive and Review Committee. Northern Ireland Office.
Legal profession
Bar Council. Law Society.
Specialist NGOs
JUSTICE. Hansard Society. Liberty.
Legal and political correspondents in broadsheet press, BBC and ITN.
Radio and TV
BBC Radio 4 Law in Action, Unreliable Evidence, Week in Westminster.
BBC TV News, C4 News, ITV News.
International beneficiaries
Council of Europe. Venice Commission for Democracy through Law (Council of Europe's advisory body on constitutional matters). Consultative Council of European Judges.
Commonwealth Magistrates' and Judges' Association. World Bank (Judicial Reform for Improving Governance initiative).
Canadian National Judicial Institute, Association of Provincial Court Judges, Institute of Parliamentary and Political Law.
Civil society and general public
Finally, the research will engage anyone involved with the courts, or interested in the changing relationship between judiciary, parliament and government. They will be engaged via the media, using the Constitution Unit's well established contacts with the written press, broadcasters and the serious blogosphere.
2 how will they benefit?
All these organisations will benefit from a better understanding of:
- The different interpretations of judicial independence and accountability
- The different rationales for judicial independence and accountability
- Their respective roles in upholding judicial independence and accountability
- The requirements in practice to ensure these values are upheld.
3 what will be done to ensure that they benefit?
Throughout the project there will be a wide range of
- Public lectures and practitioner seminars
- Private briefings
- Constitution Unit reports and press releases
- Presentations to key target audiences
- Articles in specialist magazines
- Articles in the general press
- TV and radio interviews.
These are detailed in the Impact Plan.
Organisations
Publications
Gee G
(2017)
Rethinking the Lord Chancellor's role in judicial appointments
in Legal Ethics
Gee GDS
(2017)
Debating Judicial Appointments in an Age of Diversity
Gee, G
(2011)
(Review) The Limits of Judicial Independence
in Public Law
Gee, G
(2013)
Guarding the Guardians: The Chief Executive of the UK Supreme Court
in Public Law
Gee, G
(2014)
What are Lord Chancellors for?
in Public Law
Hazell R J D
(2015)
Judicial independence and accountability in the UK have both emerged stronger as a result of the Constitutional Reform Act 2015
in Public Law
Hazell R J D
(2016)
Meaningful Dialogue: Judicial Engagement with Parliamentary Committees at Westminster
in Public Law
Hazell RJD
(2018)
Judicial Input into Parliamentary Legislation
in Public Law
| Description | •Judicial independence is a political achievement. That needs greater recognition, by the judiciary, but also by its multiple guardians in the Executive and in Parliament. •Judges now enjoy greater power over judicial appointments, discipline, deployment, the courts service. They should be more accountable for the greater power they wield. They must give a fuller account of their stewardship to government, Parliament, the legal profession, the media, the wider public. •Judicial independence is not a fixed concept. The core of judicial independence is decisional independence: the need for individual judges to be able to decide cases according to the law, free from any improper pressure. But around that core, everything else is negotiable, and continuously being negotiated •Greater separation of the judiciary has increased the need for regular and close consultation with the other branches of government. Otherwise there is a risk of increasing lack of interest and disengagement by the political branches •The pay freeze and reductions in judicial pensions were not a threat to judicial independence. But to ensure that the government pays competitive salaries, the convention that judges cannot return to practice should be abandoned. •Parliament is a central guardian of judicial independence, with the new Select Committees more constant and systematic guardians than were the law lords. The judiciary deserve credit for their willingness to engage with parliamentary committees: it is a valuable two way dialogue. •The judicial appointments commission is now an efficient recruitment agency but the judiciary has too much influence in the selection process while the Lord Chancellor's role over individual selections has been reduced to a rubber stamp. Attempts to improve judicial diversity are undermined by this marginalisation. The Lord Chancellor should be given real choice in relation to senior appointments, with a short list of three names. If that raises concerns about political bias, the appointees should be invited to pre-appointment scrutiny hearings by a joint parliamentary committee, to test their independence. •Many judges are still in mourning for the old-style office of Lord Chancellor. But overall the judiciary and judicial independence have emerged stronger from the 2005 changes, with the inclusion of Tribunals into the judiciary and the courts system, a more independent and visible Supreme Court, and greater autonomy of the Lord Chief Justice as the new head of a more professionalised judiciary. •Judicial accountability is also stronger, in particular through the frequent appearances by the LCJ and other judges before parliamentary committees. But the LCJ needs to submit an annual report, and parliamentary committees need to learn to be less deferential. |
| Exploitation Route | We were invited to give a presentation to the Judicial Executive Board, the Judiciary's 'Cabinet' (the Lord Chief Justice and his Heads of Division etc). We were also invited to a similar private discussion with the Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of Justice and her senior staff. In Parliament we gave a talk to the All Party Parliamentary Group on the Constitution. They all now have a much better understanding that judicial independence has multiple guardians, in the Executive and in Parliament as much as in the Judiciary: to take two examples, the MoJ Permanent Secretary and the Clerk of the House of Commons had not previously recognised their guardianship role, but they do now. |
| Sectors | Government, Democracy and Justice |
| URL | http://www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit/research/judiciary-human-rights/judicial-independence |
| Description | Our research highlighted the threat to judicial independence posed by the greater constitutional separation between judges and politicians brought in by the Constitutional Reform Act 2005. The research findings challenged conventional wisdom about the relationship between the branches of government and the best way to protect judicial independence. The Lord Chief Justice Lord Thomas, has publicly referenced the research findings on a number of occasions in support of a more proactive approach, saying in a lecture that 'judicial independence is best served by more, not less, day-to-day engagement with government and Parliament.' Likewise, on 7 November 2016, Lord Hodge, Supreme Court Justice, argued for greater engagement between politicians and judges referring in support to the project and its 'warning that the disengagement of politicians from the justice system could be the greatest threat to judicial independence in future'. The Chair of the House of Commons Justice Committee, Sir Alan Beith MP, explained that the research had been 'very helpful to the Justice Committee at a time when we were actively developing the engagement of the judiciary with Parliament in ways which did not threaten that independence.' Nick Walker, the Clerk to the Justice Committee also noted that 'the research has provided welcome legitimation of the approach of Parliament and its committees to their relations with the judiciary, especially in supporting the idea that the judiciary should be less nervous about engaging with us. This is also supported by the important empirical evidence assembled and analysed demonstrating the increasing frequency and variety of judicial appearances before select committees, combined with the fact that the constitution has not collapsed as a result.' Nor was the impact limited to England and Wales. in the speech by the Lord Chief Justice of Northern Ireland, Sir Declan Morgan, at the opening of the legal year in September 2015, he drew on the research findings to argue for changes the arrangements for managing the courts: 'A recent study in the UK concluded that enhanced judicial independence and greater accountability are often two sides of the same coin, and highlighted the benefits of more active and transparent involvement of the Judiciary in the management of court business. I would, therefore, encourage the Department of Justice to give serious consideration to the possibility of legislating for a non-ministerial department in the next Assembly mandate.' |
| First Year Of Impact | 2011 |
| Sector | Government, Democracy and Justice |
| Impact Types | Policy & public services |
| Description | Recognition by judges, politicians and civil servants that with the greater separation of powers following the Constitutional Reform Act 2005, the three branches of government need to engage more with each other, not less, in order to uphold judicial independence and strengthen judicial accountability |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Policy Influence Type | Citation in other policy documents |
| Impact | Through practitioner seminars, conferences, meetings with the senior judiciary, ministry of justice officials and members of the judicial appointments commission, oral and written evidence to parliamentary select committees, written submissions to consultation papers, blog posts, journal articles and a monograph published by Cambridge University press, the research has led senior judges and politicians to rethink the way they approach judicial independence. In particular, the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Thomas, has publicly referenced the research findings on a number of occasions in support of a more proactive approach by the judiciary to protecting judicial independence. During the three year project we ran 12 high level Practitioner Seminars at which senior figures such as the President of the Supreme Court, Lord Chief Justice, chair of the Justice Committee, former Lord Chancellors and Cabinet Secretaries all attended and spoke. These seminars became an important forum to develop a stronger dialogue between the three branches of government about their shared responsibility for upholding judicial independence. They were such a success that we secured an extension of AHRC funding for a further six months to develop them. In June 2014 we were invited to give a presentation to the Judicial Executive Board, the Judiciary's 'Cabinet' (the Lord Chief Justice and his Heads of Division). In 2014 we were also invited to a similar private discussion with the Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of Justice and her senior staff. In Parliament we gave a talk to the All Party Parliamentary Group on the Constitution [date]. These meetings gave key stakeholders a much better understanding that judicial independence has multiple guardians, in the Executive and in Parliament as much as in the Judiciary. In a lecture on 22nd June 2015 at the Institute for government, the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Thomas stated that he: 'welcomed the study as a very important contribution to an on-going discussion, and more importantly, an on-going series of constitutional developments.' In September 2015 in a speech to the commonwealth magistrates' and judges' association he specifically referred to the findings of the research in arguing that 'the judiciary needs to engage with the other two branches of State within the confines of the Constitution', noting that the research had demonstrated that the result of recent constitutional changes was that 'judicial independence is best served by more, not less, day-to-day engagement with government and Parliament. It has also necessitated a much more proactive stance by the judiciary in promoting an understanding of the importance of justice and in taking more proactive steps in many areas it might traditionally have left to others.' |
| Description | Follow Up Funding |
| Amount | £28,079 (GBP) |
| Funding ID | AH/L007363/1 |
| Organisation | Arts & Humanities Research Council (AHRC) |
| Sector | Public |
| Country | United Kingdom |
| Start | 01/2014 |
| End | 06/2015 |
| Description | 'Submission to MoJ consultation ' Appointments and Diversity: A Judiciary for the 21st Century |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | Submission to MoJ consultation http://www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit/research/judicial-independence/moj-submission.pdf |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2010,2012 |
| URL | http://www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit/research/judicial-independence/moj-submission.pdf |
| Description | A revolution with little impact : yet |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Media (as a channel to the public) |
| Results and Impact | Article for the Local Government Chronicle Local government chronicle |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2012 |
| URL | http://www.lgcplus.com/a-revolution-with-little-impact-yet/5037437.article |
| Description | Changes to Judicial Appointments in the Crime and Courts Bill 2012 |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Other academic audiences (collaborators, peers etc.) |
| Results and Impact | Judicial Independence Project Briefing Paper Published to website and CU and UKCLG blogs and also circulated to HL Constitution Ctte and some peers. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2012 |
| URL | http://www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit/research/judicial-independence/JI_Project_-_Appointments_and_... |
| Description | Conference at British Academy |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Talk by Prof Kate Malleson on Judicial Independence and Accountability in the UK |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2018 |
| URL | https://www.britac.ac.uk/events/challenges-judicial-independence-times-crisis |
| Description | Conference: The Paradox of Judicial Independence |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | Regional |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | conference to mark the publication by Graham Gee, Robert Hazell, Kate Malleson and Patrick O'Brien of a book on The Politics of Judicial Independence in the UK's Changing Constitution which was the primary output of an AHRC-funded project. The conference was also funded by the AHRC. Those participating in the conference had a professional interest in the issue, with contributions from current and retired judges, civil servants, journalists and others. The conference opened with a lecture by the Lord Chief Justice on "Judicial Leadership", and was followed by panels on: (i) judicial engagement with the executive, (ii) judicial engagement with Parliament and (iii) the challenges for the judiciary and the court system over the next five years. The conference was conducted under the Chatham House Rule. This note is intended to offer an impression of the main themes discussed. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2015 |
| URL | https://www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit/research/judiciary-human-rights/judicial-independence/parado... |
| Description | Councils are showing us the money, but who's looking? |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Media (as a channel to the public) |
| Results and Impact | Article for Local Government Chronicle Local government chronicle |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2012 |
| URL | http://www.lgcplus.com/topics/transparency/councils-are-showing-us-the-money-but-whos-looking/503375... |
| Description | Evidence to parliamentary committee |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | Evidence by Dr Patrick O'Brien on the Judicial Appointments Commission Bill to Joint Committee on Justice and Equality of the Irish Parliament in September 2017 |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2017 |
| Description | Expert Seminar |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | This panel discussion was chaired by Kate Malleson, Professor of Law, Queen Mary University of London, and featured the Rt Hon Lord Falconer of Thoroton PC QC, former Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice, Professor Graham Gee, University of Sheffield and Policy Exchange's Judicial Power Project, the Hon Dyson Heydon AC QC, former Justice of the High Court of Australia, and the Rt Hon Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd PC QC, former Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2018 |
| URL | https://policyexchange.org.uk/pxevents/what-are-the-limits-of-judicial-independence/ |
| Description | Have we forgotten the spirit of the act? |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Media (as a channel to the public) |
| Results and Impact | Article for Local Government Chronicle Local government chronicle |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2012 |
| URL | http://www.lgcplus.com/briefings/corporate-core/comms/have-we-forgotten-the-spirit-of-the-act/502386... |
| Description | If not now for a woman Chief Justice, then when? |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A press release, press conference or response to a media enquiry/interview |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Media (as a channel to the public) |
| Results and Impact | The Times - Kate Malleson Newspaper article |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2012 |
| URL | http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/law/article3817832.ece |
| Description | Judicial Appearances before Select Committees 2003-2012 |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Other academic audiences (collaborators, peers etc.) |
| Results and Impact | Patrick O'Brien Presentation at IPSA CR09 conference in Dublin Presentation at IPSA CR09 conference in Dublin |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2013 |
| Description | Judicial Diversity |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | Local |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | Constitution Unit Public Seminar Q&A |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2012 |
| Description | Judicial Independence Blog |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | public blog Stimulate discussion |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2011,2012,2013,2014 |
| URL | http://constitution-unit.com/category/judicial-independence/ |
| Description | Judicial Independence and Accountability and the Supreme Court |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | Regional |
| Primary Audience | Other academic audiences (collaborators, peers etc.) |
| Results and Impact | 'Project launch lecture, Lord Phillips Media impact: Guardian: Kenneth Clarke rejects claim of threat to Supreme Court independence Telegraph: Supreme Court independence "at threat" over funding BBC: Supreme Court independence "threatened" by funding Radio 4's Today programme: Ken Clarke Supreme Court "cannot decide its own budget" UK Press Association: Supreme Court independence warning |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2011 |
| URL | http://www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit/events/judicial-independence-events/lord-phillips-transcript.... |
| Description | Judicial Independence and Judicial Appointments |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Project seminar in University College London - Seminar 4 http://www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit/research/judicial-independence/Seminar_Note_-_Judicial_Independence_and_Judicial_Appointments.pdf |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2012 |
| URL | http://www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit/research/judicial-independence/Seminar_Note_-_Judicial_Indepe... |
| Description | Judicial Independence and the Executive |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Paper given at SLS Conference 2011 n/a |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2013 |
| Description | Judicial Independence and the Executive |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Seminar held at Queen Mary, University of London - Seminar 7 Q&A |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2012 |
| Description | Judicial Independence and the Separation of Powers |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | Regional |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Project: Note of seminar 1 http://www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit/research/judicial-independence/seminar_note_may_11 |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2011 |
| URL | http://www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit/research/judicial-independence/seminar_note_may_11 |
| Description | Judicial Independence and the Supreme Court |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Seminar held at the Supreme Court - Seminar 5 Q&A |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2012 |
| Description | Judicial Independence in Northern Ireland |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | Regional |
| Primary Audience | Other academic audiences (collaborators, peers etc.) |
| Results and Impact | Seminar held in Belfast - Seminar 6 Disussion and Q&A |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2012 |
| Description | Judicial Independence in an Age of Austerity |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Other academic audiences (collaborators, peers etc.) |
| Results and Impact | Presentation at IPSA CR09 conference in Dublin |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2013 |
| Description | Judicial Independence, Accountability and Parliament |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | Seminar in Parliament buildings - Seminar 3 n/a |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2011 |
| URL | http://www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit/research/judicial-independence/parliament-seminar-note-decemb... |
| Description | Judicial Independence, Judicial Accountability and the Media |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Seminar at Queen Mary, University of London - Seminar 2 n/a |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2011 |
| URL | http://www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit/research/judicial-independence/Seminar_Note_-_Judicial_Indepe... |
| Description | Lord Judge: Constitutional Change: Unfinished Business |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | Project closing lecture Media The Guardian: European court is not superior to UK supreme court, says Lord Judge The Times: Former chief judge supports right to defy ECHR on jail votes The Huffington Post: Lord Judge 'Astounded' By Theresa May's Comments On Human Rights The Telegraph: Strasbourg not superior to British courts' says former senior judge The Independent: "Thomas Jefferson would have strongly advised us against it" Daily Mail: Top judge demands sweeping reforms to Human Rights Act and says UK courts should not have to bow to Europe The Week: Lord Judge: Strasbourg doesn't trump the UK Supreme Court BBC Radio 4's today programme: The former Lord Chief Justice, Lord Judge, says the human rights act should be changed to make it clear that British courts do not have to follow the rulings of the European Court of Human Rights. Nick Herbert, former police minister, and Hugh Tomlinson QC, a member of the Matrix Chambers, discuss. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2013 |
| URL | http://www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit/constitution-unit-news/181213 |
| Description | Presentation: Constitutional Reform Act 2005 and its Consequences |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | Regional |
| Primary Audience | Other academic audiences (collaborators, peers etc.) |
| Results and Impact | Robert Hazell Presentation at Statute Law Society Conference Presentation at Statute Law Society Conference |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2013 |
| Description | Report on 'Constitutional Role of the Judiciary if there were a Written Constitution |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | HC Political and Constitutional Reform Committee Report on 'Constitutional Role of the Judiciary if there were a Written Constitution [cites from evidence of RH and POB] |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2014 |
| Description | Submission to HC PCRC Committee inquiry on the role of judges under a codified constitution |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | Patrick O'Brien Submission to HC PCRC Committee inquiry on the role of judges under a codified constitution Patrick O'Brien Submission to HC PCRC Committee inquiry on the role of judges under a codified constitution |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2013 |
| Description | Submission to HC PCRC Committee inquiry on the role of judges under a codified constitution |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | Robert Hazell Submission to HC PCRC Committee inquiry on the role of judges under a codified constitution Submission to HC PCRC Committee inquiry on the role of judges under a codified constitution |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2013 |
| Description | Submission to JAC consultation on use of s.159 Equality Act in Judicial Appointments |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | Submission to JAC consultation on use of s.159 Equality Act in Judicial Appointments |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2013 |
| Description | Submission to Lords Constitution Committee inquiry on 'The Judicial Appointments Process |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | Submission to Lords Constitution Committee inquiry http://www.parliament.uk/documents/lords-committees/constitution/JAP/Compiled%20written%20evidence131011.doc.pdf |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2011 |
| URL | http://www.parliament.uk/documents/lords-committees/constitution/JAP/Compiled%20written%20evidence13... |
| Description | Submission to MoJ/JAC Triennial Review 2014 |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | Submission to MoJ/JAC Triennial Review 2014 |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2013 |
| Description | Talk to University College London by the Rt Hon Dominic Grieve QC MP 'Why Human Rights should matter to Conservatives. |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | Local |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | Talk to University College London by the Rt Hon Dominic Grieve QC MP 'Why Human Rights should matter to Conservatives. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2015 |
| URL | https://www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit/constitution-unit-news/031214a |
| Description | The Impeachment of the Chief Justice of Sri Lanka |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Panel presentation at Bar Human Rights Committee event Q&A |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2013 |
| Description | The Rule of Law or the Rule of Judges? |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | Local |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Worcestershire Magistrates Association AGM Open discussion |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2012 |
| Description | UK Constitutional Law Association Blog: Do Lord Chancellors Defend Judicial Independence?, Graham Gee |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | Online Discussion |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2012,2014 |
| URL | http://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2014/08/18/graham-gee-do-lord-chancellors-defend-judicial-independenc... |
| Description | UK Constitutional Law Association Blog: Judicial Appointments, Diversity and Equal Merit Provision, Graham gee & kate Malleson |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | Online Discussion |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2012,2014 |
| URL | http://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2014/05/06/graham-gee-and-kate-malleson-judicial-appointments-diversi... |
| Description | UK Constitutional Law Association Blog: The Lord Chief Justice and Section 5 of the Constitutional Reform Act, Graham Gee |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | Online Discussion |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2014 |
| URL | http://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2014/04/14/graham-gee-the-lord-chief-justice-and-section-5-of-the-con... |
| Description | UK Constitutional Law Group Blog: Are Executive-Judicial Relations Strained? Graham Gee |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | Online Discussion |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2011 |
| URL | http://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2011/04/06/graham-gee-are-executive-judicial-relations-strained/ |
| Description | UK Constitutional Law Group Blog: Does the Lord Chancellor really exist? Patrick O'Brien |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | Online Discussion |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2013 |
| URL | http://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2013/06/26/patrick-obrien-does-the-lord-chancellor-really-exist/ |
| Description | UK Constitutional Law Group Blog: Increasing democratic accountability in the appointment of senior judges, Robert Hazell & Kate Malleson |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | Online Discussion |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2011 |
| URL | http://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2011/07/15/robert-hazell-and-kate-malleson-increasing-democratic-acco... |
| Description | UK Constitutional Law Group Blog: Is the UK the only OECD country that doesn't have excellent women lawyers fit for our highest courts? Kate Malleson |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | Online Discussion |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2013 |
| URL | http://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2013/04/11/kate-malleson-and-erica-rackley-is-the-uk-the-only-oecd-co... |
| Description | UK Constitutional Law Group Blog: Judicial Independence and the Irish Referendum on Judicial Pay, Patrick O'Brien |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | Online Discussion |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2011 |
| URL | http://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2011/09/16/patrick-obrien-judicial-independence-and-the-irish-referen... |
| Description | UK Constitutional Law Group Blog: Rights, Independence of Mind and Conservatives; Graham Gee |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | Online discussion |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2011 |
| URL | http://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2011/05/02/rights_courts/#comments |
| Description | UK Constitutional Law Group Blog: Taking the politics out of judicial appointments, Kate Malleson |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | Online Discussion |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2012 |
| URL | http://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2012/02/21/kate-malleson-taking-the-politics-out-of-judicial-appointm... |
| Description | UK Constitutional Law Group Blog: The Crime and Courts Bill and the JAC, Graham Gee |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | Online Discussion |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2012 |
| URL | http://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2012/11/01/graham-gee-the-crime-and-courts-bill-and-the-jac/ |
| Description | UK Constitutional Law Group Blog: The European Fiscal Treaty: Constitutionalising 'The Road to Serfdom'?, Patrick O'brien |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | Online Discussion |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2012 |
| URL | http://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2012/02/24/patrick-obrien-the-european-fiscal-treaty-constitutionalis... |
| Description | UK Constitutional Law Group Blog: The member for the Australian Jungle, Nadine Dorries MP, Patrick O'Brien |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | Online Discussion |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2012 |
| URL | http://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2012/11/15/patrick-obrien-the-member-for-the-australian-jungle-nadine... |
| Description | UK Constitutional Law Group Blog: Three Thoughts about the Crime and Courts Bill and Judicial Appointments, Patrick O'brien |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | Online Discussion |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2012 |
| URL | http://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2012/07/02/patrick-obrien-three-thoughts-about-the-crime-and-courts-b... |
| Description | UK Constitutional Law Group Blog: When Judges Misbehave: The Strange Case of Jonah Barrington, Patrick O'Brien |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | Online Discussion |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2013 |
| URL | http://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2013/03/07/patrick-obrien-when-judges-misbehave-the-strange-case-of-j... |
| Description | UK Constitutional Law Group Blog: Who should have the final say in lower level judicial appointments?, Kate Malleson & Graham Gee |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | Online Discussion |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2013 |
| URL | http://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2013/01/30/kate-malleson-and-graham-gee-who-should-have-the-final-say... |
| Description | What price freedom? |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Media (as a channel to the public) |
| Results and Impact | Article for Local Government Lawyer Local Government Lawyer |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2012 |
| URL | http://www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3825%3Awhat-pric... |
| Description | When the supreme court won't hear |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A press release, press conference or response to a media enquiry/interview |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | Article in the Guardian http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2011/nov/02/when-the-supreme-court-says-no |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2011 |
| URL | http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2011/nov/02/when-the-supreme-court-says-no |
| Description | humanrights.ie: Shadow Constitutional Convention #8: O'Brien on the Judiciary |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | Online Discussion |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2012 |
| URL | http://www.humanrights.ie/index.php/2012/07/06/shadow-constitutional-convention-8-obrien-on-the-judi... |