England and Wales’ most senior judge has written to Starmer over PMQs. Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr says she was “deeply troubled to learn of the exchanges” between Keir and Badenoch over the ruling which allowed Palestinian family to right to stay in UK after they applied through the scheme designed for Ukrainian refugees. Carr went on:
“I think it started from a question from the Opposition suggesting that the decision in a certain case was wrong, and obviously the Prime Minister’s response to that. Both question and the answer were unacceptable. It is for the Government visibly to respect and protect the independence of the judiciary. Where parties, including the Government, disagree with their findings, they should do so through the appellate process.”
Will the lawyer-in-chief be able to withstand complaints from judges or will he buckle? There is a correct approach…
UPDATE: Richard Ekins KC, Head of the Judicial Power Project at Policy Exchange, gives his thoughts on the comments:
“This is a very ill-advised intervention by the Lady Chief Justice. There was nothing in the least constitutionally improper in the recent exchange between the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition. Parliamentarians, including Ministers, are free to disagree with judgments and to say as much. Neither judicial independence nor the rule of law entitle judges to be free from criticism and the Lady Chief Justice is wrong to attempt to suppress criticism.”
Sarah Pochin at Reform Scotland’s manifesto launch event: “I really wanted to come on in a Reform tartan burka, but apparently I wasn’t allowed… One day let’s do one of these events not live-streamed. We’ll do all the naughty stuff…”