Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Supreme Court / Executive Relationship - Coggle Diagram
Supreme Court / Executive Relationship
Context
Until the 1970s, the judiciary was a mostly conservative body, favouring power of the state. Judges were not expected to challenge authority in any way
Why the relationship changed
Growth of judicial review since the 60s
Rise of liberal ideology from the 60s onwards
Appointment of liberal, senior judges in 19990s
Human Rights Act 1998. giving judges a codified statement of human rights
Constitutional Reform Act 2005, increasing independence of the judiciary
Authority
Government has a claim to greater authority than the judiciary
Some argue that judged, by law, must enforce the will of the government
Role of the judiciary
The judiciary is responsible for interpreting the laws that Parliament creates, as the precise meaning is not always clear
Judges get to establish case law, as in, how the law is applied in that case. This sets a precedent for other judges
The judiciary get to establish common law, but this is subordinate to statue law
Conducting judicial reviews, where the court reviews decisions by the state or a public body in relation to the citizens
Judicial reviews have been expanded to work out whether the government had acted outside the law, and to make room for the HRA 1998.
Holding public inquiries, when a judge is called upon to conduct an inquiry into matters of widespread public concern, e.g. Leveson Inquiry
Judges
Lord Chancellor (justice secretary) makes the final decision on Supreme Court judges, recommended from a Selection Commission
Judges can only be removed for misconduct, not for their decisions