 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
Probably not the best place to put this but I am revising it at the moment and am curious of others views. My question is whether or not you think that the constitutional reform Act 2005 enhanced the independence of the judiciary and tgerefore led to a better Seperation of powers? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Probably not the best place to put this but I am revising it at the moment and am curious of others views. My question is whether or not you think that the constitutional reform Act 2005 enhanced the independence of the judiciary and tgerefore led to a better Seperation of powers?"
That was the intention although I suspect that there has been little practical effect.
By the way, if you are studying it, you really should learn how to spell "separation." |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *aitinkCouple
over a year ago
York |
The Judiciary ware already effectively separate - we are taught that in BC classes since way back when. The whole exercise was a PR stunt aimed mostly at those who don't understand the Law and Politics continuing the tendency to legislate by opinion poll rather than well thought out logic. And it is cocking a snoot at the Lords. We have got to the point where further HoL reform will inevitably lead to some HoC privileges reverting back to the Lords so they are really not going to be very keen - giving the Lords the finger, en expensive finger too - is one way the HoC can continue to primp and preen themselves. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
Id say they were already seperate however, through the CRA 2005, law lords could no longer sit in the house of commons and debate a bill which may have impact on their daily case matters. However, there was a convention that they would not discuss matters that would directly affect their work as a judge. Nevertheless, this could of created confusion as to where to draw a boundry on what they could have a say on. This was defined fully in the CRA. By the way, thanks for the response as that was quite a useful insight into the CRA as most of what I have read seems to only justify it rather than taking into account the other side  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
Mr ddc