How Judges Took Control of Britain

Trust in Britain’s legal system is at a low ebb. Two thirds of the public believe that the criminal justice system has become politicised, and that judges make some decisions in line with their personal views rather than the law, according to a survey by pollsters Merlin Strategy. The constant flow of boats across the Channel, meanwhile, appears increasingly to be fuelled by a judicial system which actively works to undermine attempts to remove those arriving from Britain.

It is perhaps a measure of the heat of public feeling that Sir Keir Starmer – former Director of Public Prosecutions, Left-wing human rights lawyer – became, briefly, the public face of revolt against the courts. When Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch raised the case of the Palestinian family granted the right to live in the UK even after applying for a scheme designed for Ukrainians, Sir Keir Starmer agreed that the decision was “wrong”, adding that “it should be Parliament that makes the rules on immigration; it should be the Government who make the policy”.

This is an uncontroversial statement of the United Kingdom’s constitutional settlement, or at least it should be. To Lady Chief Justice Sue Carr, however, it looked like a challenge. She said that “both the question and the answer were unacceptable”, and that it was “for the Government visibly to respect and protect the independence of the judiciary”.

Had Sir Keir been in the mood for a real row, he might have answered in turn that it was for the judiciary to visibly respect and protect the sovereignty of Parliament, and the executive authority of the Government. And if he had really wanted to set the cat among the pigeons, he could have answered with a question: who, actually, is running the country?...<<<Read More>>>...