Liz Truss had to defend the judiciary – it was that or resign as justice secretary
![Justice Secretary Liz Truss: Is she all smiles now, I wonder? [Image: Getty.]](https://voxpoliticalonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/161105-Liz-Truss.png)
Justice Secretary Liz Truss: Is she all smiles now, I wonder? [Image: Getty.]
Under the Constitutional Reform Act 2005, the Justice Secretary, who is also the Lord Chancellor, you see, must uphold the independence of the judiciary, must defend that independence, must not seek to influence judicial decisions, must provide support to allow the judiciary to exercise their functions, and must give the public interest proper regard in matters relating to the administration of justice.
Here is the relevant part of the legislation (Part One, s.3):
In short, when the newspapers scream that judges are “enemies of the people” for upholding the law of the United Kingdom, Liz Truss must – as Justice Secretary – publicly rebuke them.
She would be breaking her Lord Chancellor’s oath if she failed to do so.
Curiously, it is hard to find a reference to any enforcement/penalty clause. Perhaps somebody in the judiciary or the Labour Government of 2001-2005 could help out?
I think her resignation would have been forced out of her if she had not obeyed the letter of the law.
That’s all she did though – the bare minimum. Odd, considering she’s a Remainer.
Is she afraid of the press? Probably? Of the public reaction? Almost certainly. So it was probably too much to ask for passion from her.
At least she can still get het up about cheese:
It might be a disgrace but so was her hesitation over the Brexit ruling.
The Lord Chancellor has backed the independence of the UK’s judiciary but stopped short of condemning attacks on senior judges over the Brexit ruling.
The Bar Council had demanded Liz Truss respond to criticism from some MPs and newspapers over the decision that MPs should vote on triggering Article 50.
The Daily Mail branded judges “Enemies of the people”; the Daily Express said it was “the day democracy died”.
Ms Truss said the “impartiality” of the courts was “respected the world over”.
Source: Brexit ruling: Lord Chancellor backs judiciary amid row – BBC News
Do you want Vox Political to cover a story? Use this form to tell us about it (but NOT to comment on the article above, please):
Join the Vox Political Facebook page.
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:
Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.
The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:
Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:
The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:
There is a higher court than courts of justice and that is the court of conscience. It supercedes all other courts. Mahatma Gandhi
I think Burgon got it right and Grieve especially the shared history of the Fail (and the Nazis of Hitler’s Germany, if memory serves me right), the Fail was lovey dovey with the Nazis. Tim Farron was spot on with his remark.
As this is still very much a battle for the heart and soul (if it has one) of the Nasty Tory Party, these superficial politicians are still being very careful as to who they fall out of favour with. The long-term interests of the nation still comes second to their own personal ambitions – which has been the case since the day Cameron called the referendum.
The Lord Chancellor has backed the independence of the UK’s judiciary well thats a lie just look at the miners strike the tories run the judiciary and get the results they want