Relations between the branches

• Judiciary independence


  • POSITIVES:
  • Ministers have little influence over which judges are appointed
  • The Supreme Court is separate from Parliament and its decisions cannot be challenged
  • NEGATIVES:
  • Ministers can have some influence over the final appointment of judges
  • Ministers are more and more prepared to criticise the Judges' decisions
  • Johnson recently suggested the idea of having political judicial appointments
• Supreme Court power


  • POSITIVES:
  • The Supreme Court can stop executive action
  • The Human Rights Act has given the court more power to intervene
  • Since leaving the EU, the Supreme Court is now the highest court
  • NEGATIVES:
  • Parliament is sovereign, if the Supreme Court rules against the Government, they can simply create a new law
  • The Supreme Court must wait for cases to be brought to them
  • They cannot make judgement beyond the law and must make judgements that simply follow the existing laws
• Judiciary neutrality


  • POSITIVES:
  • There is a trend towards having more diverse judiciary
  • The Judicial Appointments Committee ensures that there is neutrality from political interference
  • NEGATIVES:
  • Judges are democratically very unrepresentative
  • The proportion of women judges is below one in ten
  • Judges are seen as 'the establishment', in this situation it is difficult for judges to be completely neutral in all cases
• Locations of Sovereignty in the UK

  • Parliamentary sovereignty - Parliament has the ability to make or unmake any law, any parliament cannot bind future parliaments
  • Devolved institutions - Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales have own parliaments with specific powers, with Scotland being most powerful, powers continue to be transferred from Westminster to these institutions
  • European Union - EU laws take primary over UK laws and in areas such as farming and fisheries, decisions are made at an EU level
  • The people - The Brexit referendum has shown that where there is a conflict between Parliament and the people, there is a widely held view that the people's decision must be respected. It seems very unlikely that despite the UK being a representative democracy, the government would go against any referendum result
• How the executive controls Parliament

  • In order to form the Government, a party must have a majority in Parliament and so therefore should be able to control Parliament
  • Use of Whip system and PM patronage keeps backbenchers loyal to the executive
  • Salisbury convention takes precedence over the House of Lords and if the executive has a large majority it can push through laws fairly easily
  • The Government dominates the timetable of the House of Commons so it is difficult for the opposition to be heard
  • Parliamentary scrutiny can be weak at best, with the executive enjoying the fact of full use of the machinery of Government to dominate the media landscape
• How Parliament controls the executive

  • When the government has a small or no majority, Parliament can become much more assertive
  • May lost 3 votes on EU withdrawal bill + Johnson lost first 6 votes as PM
  • Backbenchers even took control over business of the House of Commons for 1 day in order to vote on alternatives to May's withdrawal bill
  • Parliamentary scrutiny has become more significant in recent years, e.g. Chairs of Select Committees are elected by backbenchers not appointed by the government
  • The power to go to war is an example of a prerogative power that has shifted from the executive to Parliament
• Supreme Court Cases


  • Miller v Secretary of State for Exiting the EU (2017) - The Government argued it could trigger Article 50. This was challenged by Gina Miller who argued that this wasn't a prerogative power so Article 50 could only be triggered by a vote in Parliament. The Supreme Court agreed.
  • Miller v the Prime Minister (2019) - The Government prorogued Parliament for 5 weeks in order to have a new session of Parliament. This was challenged as being too long at a time where Parliament was scrutinising the Government's Brexit plan. The Supreme Court ruled that the PM had not acted lawfully in shutting down of parliament as it stopped Parliament from carrying out scrutiny of the Government.
• How Brexit has affected Sovereignty

  • EU law will no longer apply to the UK
  • Britain won't have to pay into EU budget
  • Parliament will once again control policies such as trade and agricultural policy
  • If UK wants to trade in EU market it'll have to follow EU standards
  • It's unlikely that EU will agree to any trade deal which allows UK to undercut it on things like workers rights or taxation
  • The European Court of Human Rights will still have jurisdiction over the UK while we remain in the European Convention on Human Rights as this is independent from the European Union
• Parliament can be said to have given up some of its Sovereignty when it joined the European Economic Community in 1973 as it meant that UK courts had to apply EU law
• The European Court of Justice interprets EU law to make sure it is applied in all EU countries in the same way. Member states are also required to comply with the Court's rulings