Boris Johnson’s ‘planning reforms will allow ministers to overturn judicial decisions’

[ad_1]

Boris Johnson wants to weaken the courts’ power to overturn ministers’ decisions through the judicial review process, according to reports.

The Times reports that the prime minister wants to allow ministers to reject any legal provisions with which they do not agree.

It comes after a number of clashes with judges, such as the ruling that Johnson’s 2019 decision to divide Parliament by five weeks was illegal.

According to the newspaper, Justice Minister Dominic Raab has been tasked with toughening plans to reform judges’ powers to adjudicate the legality of the minister’s decisions. British government sources were quoted as saying that the move would strengthen Parliament’s supremacy over the unelected judiciary.

An option crafted by Mr. Raab and the attorney general, Soila Praverman, is for MPs to pass an annual “interpretation bill” in which ministers delete the results of judicial reviews that the government has not approved. The plan reportedly won No. 10 approval.

The move drew a backlash from the legal establishment, with a senior quality control official quoted as saying that the prime minister was seeking a “more compliant judiciary”.

“It’s the only rule for everyone else, there are no rules for them, the idea of ​​this government is a fine thing,” said Labor MP Stella Creasy.

Mr Johnson is reportedly unhappy with judicial review and the Courts Bill currently passing through Parliament – which focuses on subtle remedies such as pending rulings to give ministers time to tackle problems – because it “doesn’t go far enough”, according to The Times’ sources.

This is the latest attack on the legal framework by the government.

On Sunday, Raab said he wanted to “correct” the drift toward free speech overshadowed by the protection of privacy.

The justice minister’s intervention comes just days after Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex, won an appeals court battle over the Mail on Sunday to publish excerpts from a letter to her father.

Appeals court judges ruled that the duchess had a “reasonable expectation of privacy” in the contents of the letter that were “personal, private and not matters of legitimate public interest”.

Speaking to Radio Times on Sunday, Raab did not directly refer to the duchess’ case, but made it clear that he believes the balance has slipped too much in favor of wealthy individuals’ ability to protect their secrets.

He said, “In the politics of this country, we have had a greater focus on freedom of expression, transparency, and accountability of politicians and people in positions of influence. We don’t have Continental-style privacy law protections.”

“If we were going to go down this path, it had to be decided by the elected politicians.”

He added: “I think the drift toward Continental-style privacy laws, which were devised in the courtroom rather than by elected lawmakers in the House of Commons, is something we can and must correct.”

[ad_2]