|
Improving the legal system and, in particular, access to justice, has always been an integral part of JUSTICE's policy work.
|
||
|
A
British Bill of Rights: Informing the debate In recent months all three major political parties have come to agree on one thing - that it is time for a major national debate on the desirability of a British bill of rights. A bill of rights would be a momentous constitutional development. It would shape our legal and political culture for years to come. The issues are complex and contentious. Only with thorough analysis and debate can we decide if a bill of rights is good for Britain. A British Bill of Rights: Informing the debate deliberately avoids setting out a particular vision. Instead, it clearly lays out the issues that will need to be addressed in a proper public consideration of the subject:
A British Bill of Rights: Informing the debate is the final report of the JUSTICE constitution committee - a group of eminent experts on constitutional issues. The report draws on a wealth of experience of countries that have already enacted bills of rights - from Europe, North America, Australasia and Africa. CONTENTS A British Bill
of Rights: Informing the debate is the report of the JUSTICE constitution
committee *Lord Lester retired from the committee on his appointment as constitutional advisor to the Secretary of State for Justice A British Bill of Rights: Informing the debate
For more information and an order form click here 'The rules have changed', the Prime Minister famously stated as he announced a package of measures to deal with terrorism in the wake of the London bombings in July 2005. In bringing into focus the balance to be struck between the civil liberties we are all entitled to enjoy and the need to prioritise national security considerations, the Prime Minister's words fuelled a debate over the nature of human rights protection in the UK and the appropriate balance of power between the judiciary, executive and legislature within a democracy committed to international standards of human rights. JUSTICE produced a discussion paper in September 2005 as a prelude to a longer examination and highlighted issues that were taken up in the JUSTICE / Tom Sargant annual memorial debate in October 2005. Our objective was to chart the changing balance of power between the judiciary, executive and legislature and to articulate a re-balancing of powers within the constitution to meet contemporary pressures. Due in part to recent political developments, our focus has narrowed to the question whether the UK should give greater constitutional protection to human rights in the form of a UK bill of rights. Publicly funded and pro bono legal services In a human rights audit and in a briefing JUSTICE has commented on the Community Legal Service, in particular the need for quality and independence. JUSTICE first argued for the establishment of a Contingency Legal Aid Fund in 1966. We developed our case in our responses to the 1998 government consultation paper Access to justice with conditional fees and the Access to Justice Bill. JUSTICE's director is a member of the Public Interest Advisory Panel that advises the Legal Services Commission on funding cases that raise important public interest points. JUSTICE's director, Roger Smith, has written papers during 2002 on the Community Legal Service, pro bono legal services in England and Wales and models of legal aid organisation. He wrote a paper in 2003 on Test case strategies; public interest litigation; the Human Rights Act; the experience in England and Wales. In October 2003 Roger
Smith wrote a paper on Criminal
Legal Aid: International Law and Practice for a roundtable discussion
in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan. JUSTICE has signed up to the Access to Justice Alliance, a campaign supported by community groups, national charities, lawyers, advisers and others who feel that justice should remain accessible to all. For further information click here to see the leaflet with details of a public meeting on Saturday 9 April 2005 JUSTICE responsed to the consultation paper Best Value Tendering of Criminal Defence Services issued by the Legal Services Commission. Click here to read our response and here to read the press release from February 2008. We carried out research in the USA to inform our new report, Public Defenders: learning from the US experience, on the commencement of public defender pilot schemes in England and Wales. We have contributed to debates and inquires into changes to the jury trial system. Our work has focused on the disadvantages of trial in the magistrates' courts. We argued that court fees should recognise the public function of particular legislation and remission set at levels that would avoid increasing the 'poverty trap' of those with incomes just above qualification for means-tested benefits in a submission to the Department for Constitutional Affairs (July 2004). We also responded to the Department for Constitutional Affairs consultation on effective inquiries (July 2004). We supported the idea of a new statutory framework for enquiries. JUSTICE discussion paper on the legality of debt enforcement (November 2003) JUSTICE's 1961 report played a key role in the establishment of the Ombudsman system, and we have continued to monitor the effectiveness of the system. In 1999, we called for reforms to the scope and powers of public sector Ombudsmen in England, in response to a government consultation paper. In 1992, a JUSTICE report, The Judiciary in England and Wales called for reforms in the appointment and training of judges, including an independent advisory appointments commission. We continue to highlight the need for reforms, most recently in evidence to the Parliamentary Home Affairs Select Committee. In November 2003, we responded to the government consultation: Constitutional Reform: a new way of appointing judges. In February 2005 we responded to a questionnaire from the Department for Constitutional Affairs on increasing diversity in the judiciary. The judicial role of the House of Lords In evidence to the Royal Commission on reform of the House of Lords in 1999, JUSTICE called for the removal of the Lord Chancellor's judicial role, and the Law Lords' legislative role. We repeated this in a policy paper on a supreme court agreed by Council in the summer of 2002. In November 2003, we responded to the government consultation Constitutional Reform: a supreme court for the United Kingdom. Department for Constitutional Affairs JUSTICE welcomes the creation of a Department for Constitutional Affairs, ending the anomalous position of the Lord Chancellor in the UK Constitution. Court
Proceedings |