Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
4.1 Supreme Court SC & Executive and Parliament - Coggle Diagram
4.1
Supreme Court
SC & Executive and Parliament
SC has various ways to check the power of both UK Parliament and government
= prevents abuses of power
and
asserts the rights of citizens against the state
Key terms:
Ultra vires:
literally ‘beyond power’ - a case where it is claimed that a public body has exceeded its legal powers
Court's methods:
SC enforces ECHR when
interpreting executive actions
and
in cases of judicial review
SC cannot set aside a piece of parliamentary legislation, but can declare a law incompatible w/ the ECHR - puts pressure on government to amend the law accordingly
SIMILARLY (to above): SC declares common law - often when asserting the rights of citizens
SC imposes rule of law - ensures all citizens are treated equally
usually occurs as a result of judicial review
in cases of ultra vires
: courts decide whether a public body has exceeded its legal powers
(also the case when justices rule that the government has exceeded its constitutional powers)
SC makes
final rulings on areas of conflict
within the political system
e.g: between Parliament and devolved bodies
OR between Parliament and the executive
judicial-government conflicts
sentencing in criminal cases
justices wish to have a free hand in determining sentences on a case-by-case basis
government - responsible for law and order - insists it needs to impose minimum sentences for some crimes (through legislation), e.g: possession of weapons
rights
justices have a duty to preserve human rights
these may hinder government's attempts to maintain national security (particularly over terrorism)
freedom of expression
government seeks to control spread of religious extremism by prosecuting extreme preachers, etc.
justices have a duty to preserve freedom of expression
judicial review
justices have become more open to hearing appeals by citizens against public bodies that may have:
acted unlawfully
acted beyond their powers
been negligent
discriminated against certain people
government claims too many judicial reviews hinder its ability to govern (notably over issues, e.g: introduction of fracking, airport expansion, new high-speed railways, new road systems)
freedom of information
government believes some information should be secret in the national interest
justices are sympathetic to appeals under Freedom of Information Act