Proceeding contribution from Baroness Harman (Labour) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 10 October 2006. It occurred during Adjournment debate on Independence of the Judiciary.
Independence of the Judiciary
I congratulate the hon. Member for North Southwark and Bermondsey (Simon Hughes) on his choice of subject for the debate, and I welcome the comments of his colleague the hon. Member for Sheffield, Hallam (Mr. Clegg) and those of the hon. Member for North-East Hertfordshire (Mr. Heald). In order for there to be a right relationship between democratic accountability, through Members of Parliament holding the Executive to account, and the independence of the judiciary, these issues must be the focus of attention. There are no easy answers, and we must keep the focus on these issues and keep the principles clear. This important subject sits against a background in which people now expect much more that institutions will be challenged. That is a welcome trend; the idea that we have to accept what somebody says because they are a Government Minister is no longer the spirit of the times, and rightly so. That is why we introduced the Freedom of Information Act 2000—so that people can see what Governments are doing in the name of the public. We also introduced the Human Rights Act 1998, so that Ministers and legislation can be held to account regarding their compliance with the European convention on human rights. We must recognise that people expect to be able to challenge such people and laws and hold them to account. That does not threaten people’s deep commitment, across all political parties, or the strong public opinion that it is the responsibility of Parliament to make the law through elected Members of Parliament, who are accountable to their constituents and can be chucked out at an election. It is therefore our responsibility to make the law, and it is judges’ responsibility to interpret individual cases on a case-by-case basis. Although members of the public and the press often criticise judges, they strongly believe that having an independent, robust judiciary is the best system that we can have. However much people want the press to rail against judges, they do not want the independence of the judiciary to be interfered with.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 450 c38-9WH
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- Westminster Hall
- Subjects
- Administration of justice Constitutions Human rights Judiciary Media Political impartiality Sentencing Reform
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-05 22:02:10 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_352007
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_352007
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_352007