The Judiciary & Civil Liberties
- Created by: Nazia
- Created on: 21-03-13 14:55
View mindmap
- The Judiciary & Civil Liberties
- Judicial Independence
- Independent body from Parliament
- Senior Judges
- Judges ARE independent
- Security of Tenure
- Judges cannot be removed from their position even if the decision made offends or is disagreed by gov.
- Training and experience as lawyers
- Taught them to only judge cases on the basis of Laws.
- Taught them the importance of independence
- Appointment system reformed in 2005
- Judges now appointed by special commitees/ appointments commission (not gov.)
- Contempt of court for any servant of gov to interferre with a result of a case, interferrance could result in legal action taken against the individual.
- Security of Tenure
- Judges NOT independent
- Prime Minister has the final veto (say) over the appointment's of senior judges
- Judges now appointed by special commitees/ appointments commission (not gov.)
- Gov. has some control over the legal system
- Not direct control but a good deal of interferrance
- Open dialogue between Judges and politicians
- Could result in indirect political pressure
- Prime Minister has the final veto (say) over the appointment's of senior judges
- Judicial Neutrality
- Cannot allow political & personal views influence decisions
- Judges ARE neutral
- Hard evidence of neutrality because high court decisions made mostly oppose gov.
- Increase in liberal thinkers who are quick to criticize gov for attacks on civil liberties
- Human Rights Act given judges more oppurtunity to challenge gov. in favour of Human Rights
- Judges are NOT neutral
- Supreme court is not balanced in its social sense
- Judges are middle-aged, upper/middle class and white background.
- Considered conservatives
- Senior Judges previous seats in HOL means conserv. influence
- Supreme court is not balanced in its social sense
- Judiciary
- Judicial Review
- May set aside decisions where citizen rights have been abused
- Ridge V Baldwin (1964)
- Citizens can appeal against gov. decisions
- "Natural justice"
- Suggests citizens have not been treated fairly
- Ridge V Baldwin (1964)
- Review decisions made by the state/public bodies
- May set aside decisions where citizen rights have been abused
- Case Law
- Judicial precedent
- Judge made laws
- Common laws
- When decision is made and a similar case arises, should be dealt in the same way
- Judge made laws
- Judicial precedent
- Judicial Review
- Civil Liberties
- Rights & freedom citizens enjoy in relation to the state and its laws
- Right to a fair trial
- Magna Carta (1215) - traditional rights and freedoms
- Freedom of info and open gov.
- During 1970's there was increasing concern the UK gov. was too secretive.
- Rights to vote
- Threat to Civil Liberties
- Increase in police power e.g. Public Order Act 1994
- Growth in crime rate called for even more powers granted to law enforcement agencies
- Increase in police power e.g. Public Order Act 1994
- Rights & freedom citizens enjoy in relation to the state and its laws
- Judicial Independence
Similar Government & Politics resources:
Teacher recommended
Comments
No comments have yet been made