Letter: When ministers are in contempt
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: The Law Lords' decision on the Baker case ('Law Lords assert authority over Government in landmark ruling', 28 July) is indeed, as Michael Beloff QC argued, of immense constitutional importance. Ministers of the Crown must indeed be subject to the rule of law. It is therefore legitimate that injunctions should be placed upon the exercise of executive power - this is especially important now that such power is exercised in an increasingly cavalier fashion.
We have inherited the separation of powers from our unwritten constitution. Now the Law Lords are steering this towards a more contemporary balance in which separate powers are also a check upon each other.
This welcome development raises legitimate concerns, however. If the law is not to be politicised, it must be 'constitutionalised'. Only a written constitution, grounded in popular assent, can bestow legitimacy on the courts sitting in judgment upon alleged abuses of power by our politicians.
The Rees-Mogg action on the Maastricht decision is a further example of a conflict between the law and Parliament, and if the courts are to rule on this, they must be vested with the proper authority.
Yours faithfully,
ANTHONY BARNETT
Co-ordinator
Charter 88
London, EC1
28 July
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments