In recent times, a number of senior judges have made interventions in the ongoing debate on the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg which enforces it. They include Lord Sumption and Lord Reed of the Supreme Court, the recently retired Lord Chief Justice Lord Judge, Lord Justice Laws of the Court of Appeal and Judge Paul Mahoney of the Strasbourg Court.
book reviews cases Church of England citizenship conservatism constitutional conventions constitutional principles constitutional reform Crown dependencies devolution electoral reform European Convention on Human Rights European Union executive history House of Commons House of Lords human rights judiciary monarchy Northern Ireland old documents Parliament parliamentary sovereignty prime minister Privy Council referendums Reform Acts religion royal prerogative statutes Wales
Sunday, 22 December 2013
Friday, 26 October 2012
The numerous inquiries, reports, white papers and parliamentary votes on Lords reform since the House of Lords Act 1999 (listed here) have produced a consensus on quite a number of points:
Tuesday, 9 October 2012
England used to have a blasphemy law - or, more precisely, it used to recognise the twin offences of blasphemy and blasphemous libel. Yet it is rarely remembered that the purpose of the blasphemy law was as much political as religious. It was aimed against perceived subversion of the law, society and the state rather than at preventing individuals from committing sin in the eyes of God.
Tuesday, 2 October 2012
In a previous post, I examined the recurring theme of the mixed and balanced constitution in English constitutional writings. In this post, I want to look at some of the ancient sources of this theme.
Late last year and early this year, two distinguished jurists, Lord Sumption and Sir Stephen Sedley, conducted an informal debate about the extent to which judicial decisions on public law matters have become politicised.